Tell me of a class revolution that was started with a single assassination that directly grew from that assassination into a successful revolution that took power.
I’ll wait…
Why do people just think history “just happens” from the acts of individuals? That’s not how the world works. Life isn’t a marvel movie.
We have examples of real class revolutions that were successful. Cuba, Russia, China, etc. All of which were built upon the organized efforts of countless people working to bring about that change. And all of which wrote about the failures of “the propaganda of the deed”. It’s nothing more than anarchist wish casting and has never been successful in bringing the masses to revolution.
Seriously. Learn from the past and learn from history. Don’t just form your opinion on the “vibes” of enjoying some form of justice because it makes you feel good to see a CEO die. It only gives a short and meaningless form of justice that leads to nothing else. Actually learn from past failures and successes on what brings the masses to a revolutionary state.
Single combat… has the immediate effect of simply creating a short-lived sensation, while indirectly it even leads to apathy and passive waiting for the next bout.
He got shot in the head, and had a dictator take over the destroyed everything they were about even while wrapping himself in the image of the dead leader.
Are you talking about the assassination attempt on him he survived? Because he never got shot in the head. Shoulder and part of his neck.
Not sure what that has to do with anything “losing”.
The USSR literally went on to be the world’s second largest superpower only a short time. Even after losing the most people in WW2.
Without the USSR and the October revolution that formed it; we’d literally have a Nazi ruled Europe right now. There is no beating the Nazis in WW2 without the USSR.
But I guess some whiney cunt like you can call all of that “losing”.
Lol if you think the beginning of any of those began when you started hearing about them or they wrote in books about the very beginning of any class revolution. They all likely began with “the casting of the first stone” ww1 began over one Archdukes assassination by a guy.
That first sentence you wrote is so poorly worded that I’m not gonna make assumptions about what you’re even talking about.
WW1 literally didn’t start from the archdukes assassination. The assassination was used as a means to fuel already existing European expansion.
Holy shit, you actually used like the most cliche event a historian would point to as an example of how horribly simplified pre college history classes teach WW1.
It also has nothing to do with the potential of revolution in the working class. It’s quite literally the opposite. The assassination of the archduke was used as a means to fuel European expansion. Which, stay with me here, is the opposite of what I’m talking about as “the propaganda of the deed”. This phrase is specifically about an act (often violence) done by an individual in hopes it would fuel the working class to rise up to overthrow the ruling class.
The ruling class can absolutely use propaganda related to an assassination to fuel their interest. Why? Because they are already the ruling class. They have the power of the state. They command the military. They have the ear of the masses.
You have no idea what you’re talking about and you are talking about WW1 like you googled “what conflict was started from an assassination” and then read the first part of the AI response.
It has to start somewhere.
Tell me of a class revolution that was started with a single assassination that directly grew from that assassination into a successful revolution that took power.
I’ll wait…
Why do people just think history “just happens” from the acts of individuals? That’s not how the world works. Life isn’t a marvel movie.
We have examples of real class revolutions that were successful. Cuba, Russia, China, etc. All of which were built upon the organized efforts of countless people working to bring about that change. And all of which wrote about the failures of “the propaganda of the deed”. It’s nothing more than anarchist wish casting and has never been successful in bringing the masses to revolution.
Seriously. Learn from the past and learn from history. Don’t just form your opinion on the “vibes” of enjoying some form of justice because it makes you feel good to see a CEO die. It only gives a short and meaningless form of justice that leads to nothing else. Actually learn from past failures and successes on what brings the masses to a revolutionary state.
-Lenin
Lenin lost.
By having a successful revolution? Weird way for him to lose.
He got shot in the head, and had a dictator take over the destroyed everything they were about even while wrapping himself in the image of the dead leader.
Are you talking about the assassination attempt on him he survived? Because he never got shot in the head. Shoulder and part of his neck.
Not sure what that has to do with anything “losing”.
The USSR literally went on to be the world’s second largest superpower only a short time. Even after losing the most people in WW2.
Without the USSR and the October revolution that formed it; we’d literally have a Nazi ruled Europe right now. There is no beating the Nazis in WW2 without the USSR.
But I guess some whiney cunt like you can call all of that “losing”.
Lol if you think the beginning of any of those began when you started hearing about them or they wrote in books about the very beginning of any class revolution. They all likely began with “the casting of the first stone” ww1 began over one Archdukes assassination by a guy.
That first sentence you wrote is so poorly worded that I’m not gonna make assumptions about what you’re even talking about.
WW1 literally didn’t start from the archdukes assassination. The assassination was used as a means to fuel already existing European expansion.
Holy shit, you actually used like the most cliche event a historian would point to as an example of how horribly simplified pre college history classes teach WW1.
It also has nothing to do with the potential of revolution in the working class. It’s quite literally the opposite. The assassination of the archduke was used as a means to fuel European expansion. Which, stay with me here, is the opposite of what I’m talking about as “the propaganda of the deed”. This phrase is specifically about an act (often violence) done by an individual in hopes it would fuel the working class to rise up to overthrow the ruling class.
The ruling class can absolutely use propaganda related to an assassination to fuel their interest. Why? Because they are already the ruling class. They have the power of the state. They command the military. They have the ear of the masses.
You have no idea what you’re talking about and you are talking about WW1 like you googled “what conflict was started from an assassination” and then read the first part of the AI response.
That’s a lot of words to say “I’m a dumb-ass”
That’s a lot of words for you to say nothing at all.