But honestly, I feel a more base, emotionally driving hatred towards the more immediate capitalists in my life. I hate my landlord, I hate my district manager, I hate my uncle who makes 250k a year sending emails. These are more the people I want to rip out of their homes kicking and screaming to the guillotines.

Pretty much every successful communist revolution didn't direct their fury towards just the richest of the richest, they recognized there were people down the hierarchy who were still exploiters who deserved the wrath of the proletariat. Calling for the liquidation of American Kulaks would do more for socialism in America than trying to get people to strike against Bezos.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] came_apart_at_Kmart@hexbear.net 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

i think this is a uncharitable interpretation of what i said. armed police don't need to disarm. the police force doesn't need to be demobilized. they would be formally declared no-longer-responsible for protecting landlordism, potentially with something as simple as a ban on evictions, but possibly a more explicit right to shelter-in-place.

that was effectively what happened under the proletarian revolution in china: those employed in public safety were no longer charged with securing and protecting the rights of landlords through evictions or court collections of rents. additionally, they would they no longer be charged protect landlords from the broader public if they tried to evict people themselves, using hired goons.

under capitalism, renters always outnumber landlords and they will never be able to afford enough goons to out number their tenants. the landlord's position is precarious, numerically. it is propped up by the extension of public safety to include their so-called "rights". once that "positive right" become illegitimate in the eyes of a community, landlordism would be crushed.

anything short of a broad, communal reorienting of tenant rights is just individualistic/stochastic adventurism and revenge killing that goes nowhere, because there will always be someone waiting behind the dead landlord.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

i think this is a uncharitable interpretation of what i said. armed police don’t need to disarm. the police force doesn’t need to be demobilized. they would be formally declared no-longer-responsible for protecting landlordism, potentially with something as simple as a ban on evictions, but possibly a more explicit right to shelter-in-place.

I think that depends on which police you're talking about.

US police, which are armed with surplus military hardware and are reliable reactionaries, absolutely do need to be disarmed.