Should Consistent Leftists Be Pro-Gun? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Should Consistent Leftists Be Pro-Gun?

1. Yes, Consistent Leftist Thought Requires A Strongly Pro-Gun Stance and Broad Interpretation of The U.S.'s Second Amendment Rights.
11
46%
2. No, Consistent Leftist Thought Does Not Require A Strongly Pro-Gun Stance and Broad Interpretation of The U.S.'s Second Amendment Rights.
6
25%
3. Other.
7
29%
#14953661
I was thinking on this issue as I was reading up on the history of communist revolutions throughout the world, and one strain I have seen as consistent throughout is the use of guns and weapons as a means of the proletariat working class to claim what they believe truly belongs to them.

[NOTE]: *I am addressing this to Leftists, Anarchists, Communists, and Socialists on the Forum Primarily. *

If the working classes are being exploited by the bourgeois class of factory owners, wall-street bankers, and politicians, it only makes sense that in taking what is rightfully theirs (the means of production, the state, etc.) that leftists ought to be pro-gun. Historically this seems hard to deny; the use of the private retention of fire arms was pivotal in the conflicts between the unions and the U.S. government; especially in the Homestead Strike and the Battle of Blair Mountain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike

Furthermore, every major communist revolution required the popular possession of firearms to achieve revolution and only a cursory examination of history reveals this fact.

I mean lets be honest, how can you take control of the means of production via a grass-roots revolution without firearms?

Image


Furthermore; several communists on PoFo have admitted that they are not opposed to gun ownership, they only oppose the working class in the U.S. being denied such. (I have heard remarks like this from the likes of The Immoral Goon and Decky and to a lesser degree from guys like PoD and Ingliz and I believe (if memory serves) people like Red Army and Potemkin (though my memory could be mistaken). So it seems communists and leftists should actually be pro-gun but tend to justify supporting anti-gun politics because they believe the working class would be deprived in a pro-gun environment (which doesn't make much sense, in the U.S. at least).

However, that is the kicker, the working class in the U.S. is able to acquire and possess firearms, so how isn't it grossly inconsistent on the part of leftists to support gun control (that would primarily deprive the working classes) and political parties that advocate such?

Indeed, the use of firearms was essential to every revolution and was a fundamental belief among the unions in the early 20th century.

Though bad-trade deals and republican policies in the U.S have weakened the unions, the mass exodus of union members from the Democrat party to the Republican party in 2016 was largely because of the gun issue (as well as other cultural issues).

So; for the poll, can we finally put this matter to rest?

Is it true that consistent communists and leftists SHOULD be pro-gun and support a broad (conservative) interpretation of the Second Amendment and even support the reversal of the automatic weapons ban that was implemented back in the 1980s? I think so. (This of course assuming that leftists are more than just lying and opportunistic statists) ;)

But Let me know what you think.
#14953669
No, because communists don't care about joe ordinary at all, joe ordinary is just a meat bag to be used and abused. Communists rarely come to power through popular uprisings mostly they come to power through coup d'etat, usually through just buying off sections of the military establishment. The rhetoric they use is at complete odds with the reality. Ultimately they aim to enslave all humanity, and armed people make for risky uppity slaves, ie: Mamluks. Thus for a communist "revolution" (really coup d'etat) to happen in the US the 2nd amendment is a problem.
#14953672
@SolarCross,

But my point is that if communists believe that their revolution comes by the working class taking control of the means of production, that they ought to be pro-gun and that this seems to makes sense given historical approach by communists. That the regimes they create often end up banning guns or hurting the workers is besides the point.

Obviously I do not think that communism can ever be consistent as any statism will lead to total statism and all total statism will lead to collapse; however, that is not what communists profess to believe and that is what I am analyzing. I am taking them at their word and seeing some inconsistencies in real life.

That is my point, given what communists, anarchists, and leftists claim to believe, they should be VERY pro-gun and oppose the Democrat party and other lefty parties in the west which are depriving the workers their means of revolution; which are guns.
#14953674
Other.

Most "leftists" that I know are for good gun controls and banning firearms completely isn't something that most are for.

The right argues dishonestly about this, claiming that everyone's taking their rights away. :roll:
#14953676
Victoribus Spolia wrote:@SolarCross,

But my point is that if communists believe that their revolution comes by the working class taking control of the means of production, that they ought to be pro-gun and that this seems to makes sense given historical approach by communists. That the regimes they create often end up banning guns or hurting the workers is besides the point.

Obviously I do not think that communism can ever be consistent as any statism will lead to total statism and all total statism will lead to collapse; however, that is not what communists profess to believe and that is what I am analyzing. I am taking them at their word and seeing some inconsistencies in real life.

That is my point, given what communists, anarchists, and leftists claim to believe, they should be VERY pro-gun and oppose the Democrat party and other lefty parties in the west which are depriving the workers their means of revolution; which are guns.


Yeah, they lie about everything, big revelation that.
#14953677
Godstud wrote:Most "leftists" that I know are for good gun controls and banning firearms


That is not my point, if you read the OP, it seems that given historic communist thought, that the far-left, (the real far-left that wants a revolution); should be in favor not only personal assault rifles but even full-automatics like some of the libertarian right.

Leftist thought does claim some common heritage in "revolutionary" ideas stemming back to the French and American Revolutions and given historical precedent of strategy, far-left unions and revolutions were all very pro-gun in their methodology.

This has changed and it does not seem consistent, for gun regulations disproportionately disenfranchise the workers who can't hire private security guards; thus limiting their ability to organized revolutionary forces to take over factories, towns, and the government.

The workers should be armed so that they can defend what rightfully belongs to them (their labor and thus the means of production) from bourgeoisie exploitation. Gun control is not consistent with this at all.
#14953678
With respect VS, I'm not really sure what this thread is supposed to be about. Democrats are not leftists. I know that's the kind of vocabulary used in US politics, but capitalist parties do not work to undermine the system of capitalism beyond tinkering with it for whoever their benefactors primarily are, and that's all; for that matter, Republicans aren't really that "Right" either, as they're just right-leaning centrists. Gun control or no control, whatever Democrats or Republicans think, it's not the same as what a communist thinks on the matter. Obviously, a communist would generally think the working class should have access to firearms until as such time as a revolution were established, in which case there would be no need for widespread gun ownership (but also no need to confiscate all weapons; in the USSR, there were many gun ranges, people could own rifles and shotguns, especially if they hunted or lived in rural areas, and some people could register for private handgun ownership, etc). You might have misinterpreted statements on the matter by people hypothesizing about the ideal society they'd like to live in (i.e. living in a society that is socialist and there isn't a plethora of mall commandos compensating with big guns, etc) or that they'd prefer stricter laws afterwards.

A minor aside, RA is not a communist or a socialist.

@SolarCross I don't really know what you're trying to say about how you think communism and communists are bad when you literally fetishize tin pot dictators who had women raped to death by police dogs. Doesn't make much sense, bud.
#14953681
Your idea of what left and right is, is inherently flawed, as you, and others constantly attribute the left to being Liberal.

Victoribus Spolia wrote:Leftist thought does claim some common heritage in "revolutionary" ideas stemming back to the French and American Revolutions and given historical precedent of strategy, far-left unions and revolutions were all very pro-gun in their methodology.
No. Revolution exists irrespective of ideology.

You are trying, incorrectly, to label gun views as either left or right.

Victoribus Spolia wrote:The workers should be armed so that they can defend what rightfully belongs to them (their labor and thus the means of production) from bourgeoisie exploitation. Gun control is not consistent with this at all.
I do not know ANYONE who advocates this, except you.

Missus V. Spolia wrote:Commies end up betraying the workers because they become the altar-whores of the government.
That's a cute view if you are from 1960s USA, but inaccurate, and flawed.
#14953682
Bulaba Jones wrote:I don't really know what you're trying to say about how you think communism and communists are bad when you literally fetishize tin pot dictators who had women raped to death by police dogs. Doesn't make much sense, bud.

It makes complete sense. For every marxist you kill you save the lives of thousands of people. Killing commies is a civic duty, like picking up litter.

#14953685
Bulaba Jones wrote:Democrats are not leftists.


Correct, so then why do people who claim to be socialists or communist end up voting for them anyway? America does not have viable leftist party like it doesn't have a viable libertarian party.

I made my point pretty clear so I don't know what the confusion is.

If you are a consistent leftist, someone who believes in a communist revolution and union takeover, shouldn't you favor and even support a broad interpretation of the U.S.'s second amendment and the gun rights in general?

That seems to be the case.

Bulaba Jones wrote:Obviously, a communist would generally think the working class should have access to firearms until as such time as a revolution were established, in which case there would be no need for widespread gun ownership (but also no need to confiscate all weapons; in the USSR, there were many gun ranges, people could own rifles and shotguns, especially if they hunted or lived in rural areas, and some people could register for private handgun ownership, etc). You might have misinterpreted statements on the matter by people hypothesizing about the ideal society they'd like to live in (i.e. living in a society that is socialist and there isn't a plethora of mall commandos compensating with big guns, etc) or that they'd prefer stricter laws afterwards.


^^^^^This is what I am getting at, though I am extrapolating this point to contemporary politics.

Should a consistent communist RIGHT NOW be PRO-GUN in manner commensurate to the libertarian right, in that access to military-grade firearms has historically been seen as a fundamental tool of accomplishing revolution?

Its a simple question in that regard.

I am a Christian and don't think we'll need guns in heaven, and (IF) you're a communist you don't necessarily think guns should be ubiquitous when the proletariat has been internationally liberated and we live in a post-scarcity world; however RIGHT NOW I am pro-gun and it seems communists and leftists in general should be as well (but for different reasons)

My interjection of modern politics is only to critique the support of modern parties by leftists as being counter-productive to revolution as such are NOT truly leftist.

Thus, we are in complete agreement, and given what you said, it seems that my suspicion is correct.

For American communists to support gun control and parties like the Democrats RIGHT NOW is inconsistent with their worldview.

How am I wrong?
#14953688
Godstud wrote:No. Revolution exists irrespective of ideology.


Not according to dialectal materialism, the root cause of all revolution is surpra-ideological, its economic.

Godstud wrote:You are trying, incorrectly, to label gun views as either left or right.


Quite the opposite actually. I am arguing that a the hard-left, if consistent, should be very pro-gun (in a broad sense) RIGHT NOW.

A very specific claim.

Godstud wrote:Your idea of what left and right is, is inherently flawed, as you, and others constantly attribute the left to being Liberal.


Please prove this claim, I know you would like to think this, but I assure you I know very well what I am talking about on this. I understand the distinction between classical liberalism , libertarianism, progressive liberalism, communism, social democracy, socialism, fascism, national-socialism, anarcho-captialism, anarchism, etc.

Godstud wrote:I do not know ANYONE who advocates this, except you.


TIG actually advocated this (I know this for a fact as we discussed it on this forum; though I would have to hunt it down), @Bulaba Jones more or less just conceded this to a degree when he stated this:

Bulaba Jones wrote: Obviously, a communist would generally think the working class should have access to firearms until as such time as a revolution were established,
#14953691
Arming citizens is the best protection against a communist takeover. Some might say the welfare state is the best protection but I think if you compare Europe with the US and Switzerland then an armed citizenry is clearly superiour over a welfare state.
#14953693
Godstud wrote:That's a cute view if you are from 1960s USA, but inaccurate, and flawed.


Its clear that they have. Thats why union voters now support the American right. They've been screwed over too much and are sick of that shit.

American politicians in the U.S. who "claim" to support the left have only ever supported a larger and more intrusive government that ends up oppressing the workers and farmers.

This has happened in other countries too. The workers are promised control of their nation and economy and end up having to smile and act happy in the bread line to get their rations or else the "dictator-for-life" will send them to Siberia.
#14953694
Leftists aren't consistent so... :excited: This reminds me of a thread I made about accelerationism. Basically the left imagines/doesn't care about whether the military will actually back them up or not and talks about revolution but implicitly doesn't want to fight. They just want to talk and LARP that they're the hero because they're really an... NPC.
#14953695
SolarCross wrote:Arming citizens is the best protection against a communist takeover. Some might say the welfare state is the best protection but I think if you compare Europe with the US and Switzerland then an armed citizenry is clearly superiour over a welfare state.
:roll: Yes, ignore places like Canada and Australia. :knife:

Communist take-over... How old ARE you? This is Cold War lingo.
#14953696
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Correct, so then why do people who claim to be socialists or communist end up voting for them anyway? America does not have viable leftist party like it doesn't have a viable libertarian party.

I made my point pretty clear so I don't know what the confusion is.

If you are a consistent leftist, someone who believes in a communist revolution and union takeover, shouldn't you favor and even support a broad interpretation of the U.S.'s second amendment and the gun rights in general?

That seems to be the case.


To clarify, I'm not insulting your choice in thread content nor saying I think you're stupid. What I mean is that I still don't really know what you're getting at. Communists with an ideological purpose wouldn't vote for Democrats nor support them (unless they also had power, it would be a temporary alliance, but in this case that's not a reality).

Not too long ago, I had dinner with friends and one of them brought up how she doesn't know much about politics, but thinks she's a socialist. I generally don't discuss politics in person even with friends, but I asked her what she meant, and she says she's a social democrat. I mentioned that a social democrat isn't a socialist, and then she said, "Oh, I think I mean a democratic socialist." There are a lot of people who think they're socialists because they're Democrats, or think that voting Democrat is going to support socialism in some way. That could be the case. CPUSA is basically the most Millennial upper middle class "Leftist" cosplay group in the United States, for example. There are a lot of socialist/communist organizations in the US which are similarly confused about who they are and what they want.

In other cases, it might simply be a grounding in reality: a revolution by Marxists isn't on the horizon in the US. I generally don't participate in voting, and I'm not even in the country anymore, but I wouldn't try to vote for someone I think is socialist (because in principle it isn't possible to vote in any sort of true socialist party) any more than @SolarCross can vote in candidates who include building massive rape centers as one of their platform points. I sometimes voted for laws in my community which would improve education, infrastructure, wages, etc, but not for people.

The point I'm making is I don't know why you're asking about why you think communist/socialists support the Democrats because they don't. If someone tells you they vote/support the Democrats, but that they're a Marxist, they're deeply confused and it's literally as simple as that.

As for gun ownership, in theory, I think people should have access to such weapons for the time being. Obviously I don't think there's any possibility of a revolution happening any time soon of course, so I'm only talking about what I think ought to be true for the time being. To be more accurate, I think people should have a great deal of access to firearms until there were a Marxist revolution, the establishment of a Red Army/People's Army, at which time most types of firearms should be restricted to such an institution. Other Marxists will disagree of course.
#14953699
Godstud wrote::roll: Yes, ignore places like Canada and Australia. :knife:

Meh, they follow the European model mostly.

Godstud wrote:Communist take-over... How old ARE you? This is Cold War lingo.

It was a legitimate threat in the 20th century. Arguably we should be safe now, but well the plague may be dormant not dead, why else do we still have a welfare state? Better safe than sorry.
#14953701
Communism has not been a legitimate threat since the 70's. Pretending otherwise is foolishness and fear-mongering.

Still, gun control isn't anti-gun. You can be pro-gun and be pro-gun control.
Last edited by Godstud on 15 Oct 2018 14:59, edited 1 time in total.
#14953702
SolarCross wrote:Arming citizens is the best protection against a communist takeover. Some might say the welfare state is the best protection but I think if you compare Europe with the US and Switzerland then an armed citizenry is clearly superiour over a welfare state.


Well, if I read @Bulaba Jones correctly, a consistent communist would want assault guns available to the workers NOW and may end up suppressing their ownership later after the revolution. But prior to a revolution happening, it seems commies should be pro-gun just as much as the libertarians.

@Godstud I like how you call talk of "revolution" "cold war lingo" when this whole thread is about the consistent doctrines of revolutionary socialists after the likes of Lenin, Stalin, etc.

If it sounds like cold-era lingo its because in that era we had REAL leftists doing REAL leftist things, like trying to organize unions en masse and throw-down capitalist-supporting governments in the third world.....

Are you sure i'm the one who is confused about terms like "left" and "right"? :eh:


Bulaba Jones wrote:The point I'm making is I don't know why you're asking about why you think communist/socialists support the Democrats because they don't. If someone tells you they vote/support the Democrats, but that they're a Marxist, they're deeply confused and it's literally as simple as that.


Well I would agree, but that is part of what I am getting at in this thread. If you claim to be a true leftist (marxist communism/socialism), you should never support the democrat party (or even the Labor party in the UK) and part of the reason that you shouldn't is because of their position on gun control.

Does that help to clarify my point on that?

Bulaba Jones wrote:As for gun ownership, in theory, I think people should have access to such weapons for the time being


So, you would agree that a consistent communist/socialist, after the marxian tradition, should support a broad interpretation of the U.S.'s second amendment commesurate with the libertarian interpretation (even though the reasons for this are wildly different?

I am not trying to be simplistic, but if we agree I want it to be clear.

It seems to me that for those who want a revolution in the future (communists/socialist), they should support a strong sense of gun rights and gun ownership RIGHT NOW including of assault rifles.

You seem to be agreeing with this, am I correct?

Bulaba Jones wrote: so I'm only talking about what I think ought to be true for the time being. To be more accurate, I think people should have a great deal of access to firearms until there were a Marxist revolution


So basically, given the poll, you would say a REAL communist should vote yes? That RIGHT NOW (pre-revolution); communists should be pro-gun?
Last edited by Victoribus Spolia on 15 Oct 2018 15:01, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 21

It is possible but Zelensky refuses to talk... no[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@skinster Hamas committed a terrorist attack(s)[…]

"Ukraine’s real losses should be counted i[…]

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]