Let the ruling classes tremble – an Interactive Revolutionary AAR

[naggy]

Irony is that the committee Anarchists were the ones talking the possibility of revolt, yet it was Blanqui that had the history of heavy-handedness and was ignored. A lesson for us all.

[Derdiedas]

More like example of Blanqui's brutality and hypocracy. I'm willing to bet quite a few Marxists are just as appalled as we and Marx are by his actions. The Centralists must be disbanded.

..yet it will be Anarchist who will have to prove - again and again - that they are not a monolithic bloc eager to kill and murder.

[Tommy4ever]

Don't act like the Anarchists were totally innocent here either. Not only did they break into a jail to free a convicted criminal but they deliberately provoked Blanqui into action.

However as they ended up being the ones on the workers' side of the barricades they do come out of this smelling like roses. However they are just as responsible as Blanqui for the outbreak of hostilities.

[Enewald]

Don't act like the Anarchists were totally innocent here either. Not only did they break into a jail to free a convicted criminal but they deliberately provoked Blanqui into action.

However as they ended up being the ones on the workers' side of the barricades they do come out of this smelling like roses. However they are just as responsible as Blanqui for the outbreak of hostilities.

Sounds innocent enough for me.
If the masses do not hold it unjust, then it is not to be blamed.

We will be responsible for the creation of our utopia.

Blanqui must die.

[winsingtonIII]

Don't act like the Anarchists were totally innocent here either. Not only did they break into a jail to free a convicted criminal but they deliberately provoked Blanqui into action.

However as they ended up being the ones on the workers' side of the barricades they do come out of this smelling like roses. However they are just as responsible as Blanqui for the outbreak of hostilities.

A very good point, though I fear it will be completely overlooked by some. At this point I don't think I can trust either side, given what's happened.

[Lenin Cat]

I call for a new faction! One that wants radical social change AND a radical increase in political freedom!

[Enewald]

I call for a new faction! One that wants radical social change AND a radical increase in political freedom!

Anarchists?
We destroy the society in name of freedom.

[naggy]

We should do a spoof of Fan of the Week: Anarchist of the Week!

[Seek75]

Tommy, have the Militants appeared yet? :O

[Tommy4ever]

Tommy, have the Militants appeared yet? :O

No.

Fascism is yet to be unlocked.

I set them to appear from 1860 and have now played until 1870. They're still yet to appear. However IIRC they can only appear at random from the date they get activated. Normally this would see them appear from 1900 (or is it 1905?) so mabye they will come in later. Or mabye my editing broke them.

[Derdiedas]

Don't act like the Anarchists were totally innocent here either. Not only did they break into a jail to free a convicted criminal but they deliberately provoked Blanqui into action.

However as they ended up being the ones on the workers' side of the barricades they do come out of this smelling like roses. However they are just as responsible as Blanqui for the outbreak of hostilities.

This isn't what i'm saying. I've never denied the Anarchist part in this mess, not the violence of Young Anarchist.

I would just like to point out this: Before (Even after!) the election, the Anarchist were deliberately painted as the faction that is going to rip the republic apart, because they are all murderous villians at heart that screams for killing their opponents. When a voice was raised that not every Anarchist is the same and the militant Young Anarchist are just a part of the platform, it was trampled down with poiting to the few violent anarchist and repeating the same accusations ad nauseum. (Anarchist were not exact and fair in their anti-marxist agitation too, but it wasn't Marxist who faced a united front of hate speech.)

But when the Blanqui revolution comes, voices on defence of Marxist comes rushing, saying that we should not blame the whole Marxist party for the Blanqui and we should distinguish betwenn marxist who was in favor of the coup (The minority) and the marxist who were agaist ( the majority).

That's right. I support this.

But we should also distinguish between Anarchist that are for violence and the who are aganist.

Just a lesson for future.

[scholar]

Just wondering here, but if you want a free press why exactly are you banning criticism of yourselves under threat of violence? I realise the imbalance of rhetoric from the UC does seem to have been against the Anarchists , but that was because you were frequently in second or first place, while the Marxists trailed behind. Oversensetivity to criticism won't get you far once comrade Engels has freed the presses and ALL can have their voices heard. I personally have tried to criticise the Blanquists just as much, but when you are debating mostly Anarchists it is difficult. There was a poor showing in the debating hall as in the election for the Blanquists.[[And anyway, you here in the thread have no control over whether there's a civil war or not ]]

I'm not demanding censorship, I'm simply stating some facts. If you continue to berate and insult the Anarchists, the Anarchists will get fed up and start fighting back. As of yet, cooler heads have prevailed, with minor setbacks. No one is above fault, no one is above error, but this has nothing to do with oversensitivity. You'd have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to not know the current Anarchist plight. We have not compromised on our ideals and our beliefs. [[Maybe, but that doesn't stop anyone from attempting to influence things]]

[winsingtonIII]

But we should also distinguish between Anarchist that are for violence and the who are aganist.

Yes, this is a lesson for both sides about generalizing your enemies. Unfortunately, I think the problem is that some very vocal anarchists have come out on these forums calling for violence (or at least talking about how it's justified) and that has lead to a tarnishing of the Anarchist name in some eyes. But yes, we should all strive not to generalize.

[Tanzhang (譚張)]

Great update as always Tommy, I like how you didn't make either the anarchists or the Marxists completely innocent.

But we should also distinguish between Anarchist that are for violence and the who are aganist.

IIRC, the moderate anarchists are now part of the UC whereas the Young Anarchists are part of the CA. (or at least most of them are)

[Dyranum]

And now we have a loosing french in this AAR.
Because Blanqui is french right?

[Enewald]

We should do a spoof of Fan of the Week: Anarchist of the Week!

Sounds fine.
It seems I cannot be awarded Fan of the week-award because there are so many good deserving candidates excluding Enewald.
But wouldn't the best anarchist undo that award instead of accepting it?

[KomodoWaran]

Außerordentliche Kommission zur Vereinigung der Deutschen Arbeiter? I'd say.

Sounds good, but then it should be AKVDA.

[Enewald]

Sounds good, but then it should be AKVDA.

But since we are so international about this revolution, maybe Außerordentliche Kommission zur Vereinigung der Völker would be more grandiose?
Oberkommando der Weltvereinigung-Armee?

[KomodoWaran]

But since we are so international about this revolution, maybe Außerordentliche Kommission zur Vereinigung der Völker would be more grandiose?

That would work.
Though, after the recent events I think the victors will declare that AKVD always stood for "Attentäter, Konterrevolutionäre, Volksverhetzer und Drogenhändler".

[keynes2.0]

This probably amounts to good news for moderation in the elections. With the Communist faction discredited, the moderate Liberals and Socialists are the most obvious parties to benefit.