Text:
It's wild how many people seem to think that winning a revolution would somehow be easier than winning an election.
This is what I'm saying!! People keep being like "we can't possibly solve things through voting! That would involve massive organizing, getting everyone on the same page, making compromises and settling for less than perfection, and it would be subject to the influence of mega-wealthy donors and an opposition-controlled media environment! We just have to have a revolution so we don't have to deal with any of those things!"
And it's like. I'd be less annoyed about what are obviously people who are hurt and frustrated lashing out if they didn't act like I was a fucking fascist for saying "I don't think massive amounts of death and violence will help this situation, actually"
It's so frustrating to read this because usually the revolution is what keeps the agitated masses (let alone the reactionary forces, well usually the reactionaries already had their bloodbath at that point) from creating a massive bloodbath. And people genuinely don't know that and it's really hard to convince anyone otherwise with how heavily they've been indoctrinated.
Is there an example of a bloodless left revolution that we can point to as an example? All I can think of are the USSR, China, DPRK, Cuba, and those all required bloodshed to fight off Capitalist resistance.
Never said bloodless. Just that the masses were (understandably) more out for blood than the revolutionary leadership.