It's mostly academic, capitalist/liberal pseudo reflection and philosophy. And more than half of the people on that list are the dullest, most conservative and anything but revolutionary. The leftist literature has far more explosive, pin-point, HOWTO material.
Instead, read Gramsci, Camus, Marcuse, and Arendt for the philosophy. Then see Battle of Algiers and read the revolutionary struggles and biographies of Che, Trotsky, Mao.
Just studying Marxism is an individual act of revolution. The mental impact on one's mind, when you finally get it, is irreversible. "Class Consciousness" is a revolutionary virus of the mind.
Hm, maybe, but I would actually be most interested in how to overthrow communist regimes. Almost all dictatorships in recent times I am aware of started out with communism or socialism.
Also, how much philosophy is really needed? I wonder how to overthrow a regime with a huge police force and secret police everywhere. Are there even any example where this happened without external forces? Maybe Rumania? In any case, it seems to be more a practical problem than a philosophical one.
Just studying Marxism is an individual act of revolution. The mental impact on one's mind, when you finally get it, is irreversible. "Class Consciousness" is a revolutionary virus of the mind.
Thank goodness for a healthy mental immune system, then. Proponents of Marxist thought seem to believe that because they've found there's a different way of looking at the world that explains some things better than their default view, it must thus be correct in all respects. Pointing out that one has simply swapped one kind of tunnel vision for another tends to be poorly received. This is not to say the study of Marx is without value, but I'm being a lot kinder to Marxism here than Marxists are towards their perceived 'class enemies'.
Anyway yes, the reading list is underwhelming. 4 works about Mao, but nothing by Mao himself, or by Che Guevara? Disqualifying fail.
On Guerilla Warfare by Mao Tse-Tung
Guerilla Warfare by Ernesto Che Guevara
Coup d'etat: a practical handbook by Edward Luttwak
The Authoritarian Specter by Robert Altermeyer
On the psychology of military incompetence by Norman F Dixon
That should see you through the practical end of things.
48 Laws of Power and other books by Robert Greene are good introductions to political strategy, along with Machiavelli's classic The Prince. A look at the aftermath of the French revolution is probably good idea as well if you intend to retire peacefully.
I would read even more recent stuff. I agree on Che. How about reading about Kevin Kelly and Louis Rossetto? Bob Hunter created Greenpeace out of nothing. Petraeus revolutionized the most powerful military in the history of the world. It's through a mix of ancient literature, philosophy and political economics that one gains perspective on human nature. And human nature does not, has not, and will not change. But the structure of the world evolves, making modern revolutionaries much more interesting. When I know what Kolakowski had to say about Marxism, I'm going to go move past Marx and spend more time on Popper who hasn't really been rebutted (to my knowledge) yet.
The true revolution changes social relations, changing people in power is quite superficial and it is foolish to blindly believe in it.
Revolutions is the usual sense happen when current structures are so rotten that something else is needed, then some other form of social organisation prevails, often not really what was expected at the beginning (think russia in 1917 vs. russia after the civil war in 1921).
But it is our role as humans to modify the world at our scale, to modify our ways of interacting with others and doing things to make the world a little better. Think of the changes between the middle age and now... there's so much room to do much better... At a bigger scale, for me, the next point is introducing more participative democracy in companies, especially big companies (they are truly the most prominent fascist-like organisations there...)
This past year, senior year of high school, my history teacher based his curriculum on teaching us how to stage a revolution. He asked us to plan a revolution of the school, consider what/who needs to be revolted against, and how. It was entertaining at first and it made learning the Russian Revolution, the revolution in Argentina, and others more relevant but my teacher seemed to be bent on the fact that we should actually revolt against our government as soon as possible. I consider(ed) it nonsense.
I'll try to stay away from a political debate and focus on the psychological argument. That Political revolution in the United States can be done within its current system, through election and democracy, and as bad as things are, there is no need for a cataclysmic shift. As I see it, democracy is evolutionary, it continuously evolves, checks and balances are self correcting just like natural selection. I'm all about learning practical stuff and I just don't see where this fits beyond in establishing a critical mindset.
[+] [-] mahmud|16 years ago|reply
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/History/21H-001Fall-2007/Readings/...
It's mostly academic, capitalist/liberal pseudo reflection and philosophy. And more than half of the people on that list are the dullest, most conservative and anything but revolutionary. The leftist literature has far more explosive, pin-point, HOWTO material.
Instead, read Gramsci, Camus, Marcuse, and Arendt for the philosophy. Then see Battle of Algiers and read the revolutionary struggles and biographies of Che, Trotsky, Mao.
Just studying Marxism is an individual act of revolution. The mental impact on one's mind, when you finally get it, is irreversible. "Class Consciousness" is a revolutionary virus of the mind.
[+] [-] Tichy|16 years ago|reply
Also, how much philosophy is really needed? I wonder how to overthrow a regime with a huge police force and secret police everywhere. Are there even any example where this happened without external forces? Maybe Rumania? In any case, it seems to be more a practical problem than a philosophical one.
[+] [-] anigbrowl|16 years ago|reply
Thank goodness for a healthy mental immune system, then. Proponents of Marxist thought seem to believe that because they've found there's a different way of looking at the world that explains some things better than their default view, it must thus be correct in all respects. Pointing out that one has simply swapped one kind of tunnel vision for another tends to be poorly received. This is not to say the study of Marx is without value, but I'm being a lot kinder to Marxism here than Marxists are towards their perceived 'class enemies'.
Anyway yes, the reading list is underwhelming. 4 works about Mao, but nothing by Mao himself, or by Che Guevara? Disqualifying fail.
On Guerilla Warfare by Mao Tse-Tung
Guerilla Warfare by Ernesto Che Guevara
Coup d'etat: a practical handbook by Edward Luttwak
The Authoritarian Specter by Robert Altermeyer
On the psychology of military incompetence by Norman F Dixon
That should see you through the practical end of things.
48 Laws of Power and other books by Robert Greene are good introductions to political strategy, along with Machiavelli's classic The Prince. A look at the aftermath of the French revolution is probably good idea as well if you intend to retire peacefully.
[+] [-] colins_pride|16 years ago|reply
Kolakowski -> http://www.economist.com/obituary/displaystory.cfm?story_id=...
[+] [-] plesn|16 years ago|reply
Revolutions is the usual sense happen when current structures are so rotten that something else is needed, then some other form of social organisation prevails, often not really what was expected at the beginning (think russia in 1917 vs. russia after the civil war in 1921).
But it is our role as humans to modify the world at our scale, to modify our ways of interacting with others and doing things to make the world a little better. Think of the changes between the middle age and now... there's so much room to do much better... At a bigger scale, for me, the next point is introducing more participative democracy in companies, especially big companies (they are truly the most prominent fascist-like organisations there...)
[+] [-] quizbiz|16 years ago|reply
I'll try to stay away from a political debate and focus on the psychological argument. That Political revolution in the United States can be done within its current system, through election and democracy, and as bad as things are, there is no need for a cataclysmic shift. As I see it, democracy is evolutionary, it continuously evolves, checks and balances are self correcting just like natural selection. I'm all about learning practical stuff and I just don't see where this fits beyond in establishing a critical mindset.
Please broaden my mind.
[+] [-] andreyf|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jdale27|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ynniv|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]