GRADUALISM AND REVOLUTION:
The previous post brought one of my major themes to mind. The degenerate state of Cuba today is not, in my opinion, just because the change in government was the accession of a new managerial ruling class to power- as Marxist "revolutions" always are. The fact is that the managers have come to power through most of the world by "peaceful" (let's leave their wars aside) means. They rule in western/developed countries today under social democratic and corporate forms, and their rule is much more benign than that of the rulers of Cuba. Why the difference ? Can I suggest that the role of 'revolution" naturally leads to a repressive regime if it succeeds ? Can I also suggest that such a path to anarchism would lead to a similar regime, no matter how the defenders of anarchism might like to deny it ? The history of the Spanish Revolution is instructive in this matter, though the Spanish anarchists never degenerated to the level of the average(every?) communist. But degenerate they did, and they carried the seeds of managerial rule in their syndicates.
So why do I propose a gradual approach to anarchism ? One of the main reasons is the historical record of 'revolutions". The recruitment of 'revolutionaries" in the historical record is actually quite "cleaner" than what many modern-day anarchists propose, being as it basically consists of a core of "failed intellectuals" who think they should have the power to direct the people that they look down upon. The horrifying thing about the pseudo-revolutionaries who often affect the anarchist name-particularly in the USA- is that they abandon even this mendacious goal. They go directly to the so-called "heart of the matter" in their Bakunist illusion that what has traditionally been called the "lumpen-proletariat" is some sort of "revolutionary constituency' or-worse- some bizarre sort of "revolutionary leadership". The whole idea that criminals that undergo a "jail house conversion" to anarchism in the hope of getting letters and donations is exactly as absurd as the far more common jail house conversion to Jesus in hope of getting parole(there is no more solid concentration of "born again Christians" than in maximum security). The intellectual level of the average convicted criminal is slightly below that of a newt, and it is indeed possible that some of these slugs may be under the delusion that there will be an anarchist "revolution" in the next few years that will free them to be predators once more. Can my anarchist comrades wake up ? Not likely !
What can I say about "revolution" ? One of the main things that I can say is that the sort of -people that are necessary to carry a revolution to success (something quite different than what my deluded comrades think today, aside from the fact that more intelligent people would send the "jail-house intellectuals" on as many suicide missions as they could to get rid of them as fast as they could), are not exactly the most desirable people to build a libertarian society- or to live with period. The success of "revolution" depends upon a cadre of hardened psychopaths who will put the ideological goal beyond any mere personal feelings such as "mercy". THAT is what revolution means. THAT is its reality beneath the romance. I personally want no part of it.
The end result of the regime that follows a 'revolution" depends very much upon the ability to kill the revolutionaries. Without such an extermination the regime that would result would be horrific for the population. Who would you trust to carry out such a purge ? The Spanish anarchists did indeed get control of their nuts with only a few executions- yes they happened, no matter how much some might like to deny it; the Spaniards had our own problem in a minor way-.Personally I prefer no executions. Quite frankly I have met no leftist, anarchist or otherwise, in my over 40 years of this game that I would trust to have any better judgement than myself of how to solve this problem. Give me the power of life and death and I'd make some very good choices-I have none of the average leftist illusions-, but eventually I'd be corrupted as well and would have to be killed as well, after I'd made a very good job of cleaning the slate. Call me Robespierre. I'd be totally ruthless in defense of the revolution. I've met non-political people in my life who would be better judges, but I am sure that they would not sign up for such a dirty,filthy,brutal job.
Well, I have a better and more obvious solution.No "revolution". A gradual evolution towards anarchism whereby ordinary, people gradually collectively take control of their lives and eat away at statism and the corporate economy. THIS is Molly's anarchism !