Responding To Class Struggle Events
Marx and Lenin were experts in the field of revolution and the analysis of class society, and as such they identified that the working poor are the most likely to have a desire to flip the system or tear it down entirely. Who else will fight for a Technate when the middle class is focused on maintaining its own position at the expense of those under them, or the elites who are doing the same to everyone else? The ruling and middle class do engage in class struggle, but that just looks like oppression of the poor and benefit for their social class at the expense of working class rights, liberties, luxuries, and even livelihoods. For a Technocrat who seriously wants to create a scientific and expert-led society, the ones most likely to support them are intellectuals as well as those who would benefit from energy accounting. Many of the people who would be willing to fight and die a revolution for our ideas are the ones who have no life under the current system. As much as Technocracy and scientific government should be universally appreciated ideas, the interests of people living in a class society dictate that the law of class struggle applies to us.
When a healthcare CEO is assassinated or a warehouse full of toilet paper is burned down, the correct move is not to condemn anyone because these are actions that the people can plausibly take to resist the systemic and totalizing oppression put on them by the ruling class. I understand that some are uncomfortable with the idea of violence or destruction as tools for political change, but the revolution that would be necessary for a regime change in the US or any class society would be so violent and radical that it would make these incidents look like dinner parties. There is also an obvious lack of legitimate non-violent channels for reform or liberation in a class society which means condemning this form of class struggle only enforces the regime of the ruling class. Because of this, we should simply refer to any act of resistance against the class system as a class struggle event, and not differentiate between peaceful and violent ones. It is illogical to try and make our movement seem legitimate and peaceful to a government we want to destroy or usurp. A person who is disturbed or is not willing to continue supporting the people through a revolution or other class struggle events should reflect on which social class and systems their allegiance belongs to.
When a healthcare CEO is assassinated or a warehouse full of toilet paper is burned down, the correct move is not to condemn anyone because these are actions that the people can plausibly take to resist the systemic and totalizing oppression put on them by the ruling class. I understand that some are uncomfortable with the idea of violence or destruction as tools for political change, but the revolution that would be necessary for a regime change in the US or any class society would be so violent and radical that it would make these incidents look like dinner parties. There is also an obvious lack of legitimate non-violent channels for reform or liberation in a class society which means condemning this form of class struggle only enforces the regime of the ruling class. Because of this, we should simply refer to any act of resistance against the class system as a class struggle event, and not differentiate between peaceful and violent ones. It is illogical to try and make our movement seem legitimate and peaceful to a government we want to destroy or usurp. A person who is disturbed or is not willing to continue supporting the people through a revolution or other class struggle events should reflect on which social class and systems their allegiance belongs to.