Random Thoughts on the Revolution

Alright, comrades - I've been writing down some random thoughts in my first three blog entries about how I'm new to revleft, and I think it's time to plug away and make my fourth

So, my last entry was about the possibility of a non-violent revolution. I mean, I'm all for a gradualist approach (as long as it's bold and forceful enough that it won't end up with some social democratic proletarian complacency, and has the energy to actually move from capitalism to socialism), but I'm starting to lean a bit more towards the necessity of a revolution to get to socialism, rather than doing so via democratic reform.

I'd love a non-violent capitalist-to-socialist evolution, but I'm starting to think that it might not be possible to get to socialism that way. I mean, I think that democratic socialism is viable as long as the socialist organization / party that's helping lead the system-wide reform doesn't loose sight of its socialist goal and ends up sitting in some social democratic limbo phase forever.

I don't want to end up with some vaguely Nordic, social democratic, Keynesian welfare state - but I'd much rather take an extra couple years and slowly float through it on the way to full socialism than have a blood-red revolution that might accidentally end up with some weird authoritarianism.

I feel like there might actually be a need for a revolution ... I know, I know. I've been pretty skeptical about the need for an actual revolution, but I'm starting to think that the democratic process shouldn't be the means through which we go about establishing socialism - oh sure, keep going for it, but don't invest all of our energy in it. We can't just depend on democracy to get us to socialism, we need to make it a multi-front action: we should encourage democratic reform, sure, because raising political awareness, getting people involved, etc may raise some proletarian consciousness, but we should also encourage the revolution as well.

So I'm thinking of instead of pursuing a purely democratic approach, we should approach both a democratic one and a revolutionary one.

This may not be a huge epiphany for you all haha but it's a significant step Leftward for me. I don't want to say that I'm "anti-revolutionary" .... I'm much more "anti-violence" and pacifistic, so I'm just opposed to a violent revolution, I guess. But I'm starting to see the folly in thinking that an entire system-wide reform might not be entirely possible through the democratic process and might involve a little bit of revolution here and there.

I'd rather have a peaceful revolution, but I can't really see capitalism being overthrown without a little bit of damage here and there. I'd like to keep that damage to a minimum, but there might be a bit of a need to have it once in a while.

Although, I think that I should point out that I'm not really a fan of a vanguard party surgically inserting itself into the historical process and instigating a revolution ... maybe I'm not up-to-date on my Leninist theory, but I feel like a Communist Party (or whatever the group wants to call itself) that tries to rush the historical process by making us jump from capitalism to socialism/communism. I feel like the revolution needs to come on its own, and we should support it when it does, rather than try and make one when we're not ready.

Again, random thoughts here. I'm not going to pretend that I know everything about everything .... I'm just writing this in a stream-of-consciousness style.

Thoughts?