Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Communist gun magazine - "The Socialist Gun Review"

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Dec 2012, 07:35
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 21 Mar 2014, 04:23
There's a zine called "The Socialist Gun Review" that just put out its second issue.
The zine is about revolutionary socialism and guns - guns not just as objects, but as a means of liberation from oppression.
Curious to see what you all thought about it. The first issue features an article by Alexandra Kollontai about Women fighters in the October Revolution.
First issue:
http://socialistgunreview.wordpress.com ... l-1-iss-1/

Second issue:
http://socialistgunreview.wordpress.com ... 1-issue-2/
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3844
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jun 2006, 02:14
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 21 Mar 2014, 07:13
Is this gun fetishism really needed?
They're only tools. This makes us look just like the Tea Party...


"Where Argentina goes, Latin America will go".
Leonid Brezhnev

Forum Rules
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4764
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 20 Jul 2007, 06:59
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Forum Commissar
Post 21 Mar 2014, 07:33
Quote:
WHAT WE ARE:
A revolutionary socialist zine dedicated to the arming and training of the working class and oppressed peoples for self defense and liberation. We promote gun safety, education, and ownership as a means of reducing gun violence, both from criminal activity and state repression.
This zine examines guns not as material property, but rather as tools of revolution, and the ideas they represent for liberation and empowerment. We op-
pose all “liberal” attempts to restrict and disarm the people, as well as the perpetuation of racist, sexist, homo and transphobic violence by reactionary “conservatives” such as the NRA.
We recognize that both are two sides to the same coin of capitalist oppression, and that only through vigilant self defense and revolutionary activity will
the oppressed become liberated.


Well, there's nothing that I don't disagree here.

Yes, we need guns, and yes, being on the "left" means that this issue is buried because of liberals fighting for gun restriction, which means surrendering this issue to the nuts on the right.

They aren't drooling over the guns, they are informing about their usage. This is a commendable effort, if it stays in this line.
Image

"You say you have no enemies? How is this so? Have you never spoken the truth, never loved justice?" - Santiago Ramón y Cajal
Forum Rules
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 589
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Dec 2013, 14:24
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Unperson
Post 22 May 2014, 13:09
I agree Che, surely the works of Marx are the only ammunition a socialist needs?
The days of violent revolution are long gone.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4764
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 20 Jul 2007, 06:59
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Forum Commissar
Post 24 May 2014, 09:10
That's an assessment you make based on your current circumstances.

I don't think it's licit to establish it as an ahistorical truth from now to the eternal future.

The state of law from which we derive this "peaceful" state and the disciplining instilled in people to "force them to be nice to each other" are violent processes carried out by the bourgeois state in order to maintain market conditions. We have to be aware of this to avoid falling into the trap of only viewing things from within this capitalist perspective, to become conditioned by its discourse.

I'm not necessarily advocating for violence, and Im certainly not saying that peace is a bourgeois concept or construction, only that its current facade of "nonviolence" and "tolerance" IS a bourgeois construction, which has to be overcome into a socialist, more integral concept of peace and of coexistence.

How we go from A to B is up from debate, because it means tearing away from current definitions of civics and of the body politic. Of space as something linear and congealed from above, being something neutral which we just inhabit (conforming ourselves to it), into something dynamic and forged from our multiple perspectives, hence needs and impositions (conforming it to ourselves).

What I'm saying is that you have to be careful with what you mean with "violent".


EDIT
To bring it back to topic, let's say that we have a "peaceful" revolution, understood in the sense of a civil and bloodless takeover of power (har, supposedly violent revolutions started as relatively bloodless takeovers of power), through a recognized and "undisputed" political process.

Now what? You are government, you supposedly hold monopoly over violence, which means guns, police, army and so on.

But do you really hold the state, or have you just taken over its political functions? Do the police act as you tell them? Do the army? This is a different question every time there's a revolution. What about the bourgeoisie? What of their economic power, their money and the violence this money allows them to buy, the minds their ideology allows them to sway? Doesn't that pose the threat of a confrontation? Even if they are excluded from the sanctioned use of violence, it doesn't mean they won't use it, just like many of us won't decline to do something because it is forbidden by the current bourgeois state.

What you have to do then is preserve peace, defend your state, not different from the supposedly role of current government. Just like they act to stop crime, or a riot or siimilar. So you have to intervene, using violence if needed.

But again, what if the army or the police are not loyal? Wouldn't you need to form brigades or replace disloyal members? That necessarily leads to knowledge of guns by those willing to defend the revolution.
Image

"You say you have no enemies? How is this so? Have you never spoken the truth, never loved justice?" - Santiago Ramón y Cajal
Forum Rules
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 04 Jun 2014, 05:31
In light of events in Ukraine, I don't think this is such a good idea. Guns can be useful for things like preventing massacres like Odessa, but jerking off about gun culture is not so good. Of course it's probably useful to have skills like knowing how to take apart and put back together [an assault rifle that is most common in your area,] and how to shoot, but what really makes an impact, as you can see in Syria or Ukraine, is military command.

For example, Bezler in DPR, who has a long military record, was able to do a very destructive ambush on an army column with basically about 20-30 men and a couple of armored vans that a bank used. Meanwhile, Ukrainian pro-government "battalions" basically get destroyed because they have inexperienced leadership who lead their men into obvious traps. It should be noted that banderaites apparently have training camps in the Carpathian Mountains, yet this still only prepared them to be shitty punitive operation troops who are good at killing unarmed civilians, but still get their asses kicked by people with military gear.

Same thing in Syria, IF and al-Nusra cavemen basically had to rely on ISIS, - which has over 10 years' experience fighting Americans, Iraqis and Sunni tribal militias set up by US Special Forces, - to fight the government and now they lost all their influence and are basically getting slaughtered by ISIS, which has much more extensive experience with ambushes, suicide bombs, clearing out checkpoints and all that good stuff.

This is just paramilitary comparisons, when it comes to fighting the regular army, just having a gun won't help at all. The war in Chechnya proved that if you want to be successful against a regular army, you need to have pretty much the same percentage of riflemen as them or less (in terms of force), and make up for heavy equipment with rocket launchers and machine guns. Not to mention stuff like explosives. Start putting out zines about how to make IEDs in your garage and you're looking at some serious time behind bars.

So in conclusion, this is a bad idea. Though the zine is pretty crap too, a lot of polemical and historical articles and two-page features about the SKS and Mosin, with relatively little useful information. The SKS feature is slightly better (and seems to be primarily original content and not reprints of other articles like the Mosin one) but still doesn't tell you how it can be useful to you in terms of any sort of war preparedness.
Image

"Bleh, i don't even know what i'm arguing for. What a stupid rant. Disregard what i wrote." - Loz
"Every time is gyros time" - Stalinista
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Dec 2012, 07:35
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 08 Jun 2014, 15:20
The third issue just came out on the topic of Indigenous Peoples Liberation: http://socialistgunreview.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/the-socialist-gun-review-vol-1-iss-3/
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.