Assata Shakur is in Cuba and i doubt has any publication or ownership of any of Tupac's songs. But Afeni Shakur does. But research before you speak and see what she is doing with the proceeds.

This may be true, but it does not reverse the conclusions made by the work, which are generally applicable to revolutions which have occured in every underdeveloped capitalist environment.

i think that the revolution should start in large cities so people will be inspired by seeing major infastructures fall.

other than theorising... what are you all doing to prepare for the revolution?
stocking arms? building bombs? training? building camps? anything?

this is a god damn web site... only people who dont do that shit would advertise that they did... no body is looking to get locked up

I disagree with this notion that revokutions should not take place in 'underdeveloped' countries. To explain myself, let us first look at 'developed' capitalist nations. Lt us look at Europe and the USA, where socialism and communism are now as badly spoken of as fascism (except in a few European nations which are not completely against using the word socialism in a nearly positive light). But still, the revolutionary situation in these nations is in a terrible state. We far leftist theorists on this site are in the heavy minority in the USA, as the general public now accepts capitalism not as one possible economic choice out of many, but rather as the economic choice. Most in the USA have this odd notion in their heads that capitalism has already defeated communism! If anything, revolution in developed nations, if successful (which isn't likely due to massive faith in capitalism), will likely lead us down a road that in fact would never get us to communism.

Instead, let us go and have this revolution where 'revolutionising' society would prove to be the most beneficial. Let us not turn to developed nations which experience such premiums in life as minimum wage, organized labor, and atleast some sort of welfare system. Instead, let's go where these things are nonexistent. I suggest a large area, like Latin America, as a place where communism could potentially take material shape, given the array of resources availble. Also, in Latin America, where few premiums in life exist, the proletariat will likely be much more supportive of a revolution, and fight for it, than in a place like the USA, where the so-called proletariat already enjoy mostly cozy lives. We have seen revolutions in underdeveloped nations fail in the past yes, but now we know why they failed. If we repeat those failures, than we will truly deserve our fate. But have faith in the movement, comrades, that we will not repeat such failures.

I'm disappointed, although certainly not suprised, that so many underestimate or miss entirely the revolutionary potential of the proletariat in the advanced Western countries.

Take a look at the relevant polls and statistics (or talk to the average person in the street) and you'll find that the population is increasingly hostile to corporate power, militarism, religious fundamentalism, as well as cuts and eliminations of the social safety net.

It may be true that many are deeply suspicious of anything to do with "socialism" or "communism" but that is almost always because they have no knowledge of what is, just the propaganda they are relentlessly subjected to. There have been 'Red Scares' and witch hunts in the past but they have been unable to destroy our ideas and our movement.

US economic power in the world is in decline which forces the ruling class to start imperialist wars as it's foreign policy and attack people's civil liberties and social programs domestically. This will inevitably lead to a sharper class divide and an anti-war opposition. Once people realize that the source of war and poverty is capitalism they will aim their fury at it.

The United States and West European countries have seen mass upheavals in the past and they will again in the future, sooner rather than later.

Regardless of where socialist revolution starts, it will need to spread to other countries and eventually all over the world.

Everyone says that revolution in European states is impossible.

This is very innacurate. As said above, the people hate the bourgeouis but they dont know the means of how to get justice.

The main reason why i see revolution as possible is because the cappies dont expect it. They cant see it coming their way so theyll invest billions into south america and the middle east to keep order there but they will fail to notice disorder at home. We are on their doorstep and can force them out once we're organised enough.

Having all the Third world countries in S.A and Africa as communists or socialists then that will provide a strong firebase in to Europe and US, starting the revolution as a rural one in the third will will bulid support and strength but we need to move it to a urban style for the revolution in industrialised nations

Your method would take many years. Time, that we do not have. I will not leave this issue to lie with my children as many have done in history.

overthrowing every government in the world would take a VERY long time to do.

I do not think we need to overthrow 'every' government in the world, in fact not even most of them, to create communism. The only thing I see as neccesary for communism to arise is self-sufficiency, and my earlier predictions that no area can be self sufficiency were wrong. If we look at Latin America, and even just SA, we see that the potential for self sufficiency, and thus a uited communist Latin America, is evident. Internal trade with all areas of Latin America would prove to create a communist society that could be self sufficient for a very long time, and certainly enough time to survive on its own until revolution spread to the next likely candidates for communist revolution, which include Africa, Asia, and parts of Europe. The USA will neccesarily be the last place for communism to take shape. Therefore, until then, we can expect much monotony from the US in its support for capitalism, so I suggest that we revolutionaries get out of this country as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Why
We have all the time in the universe and we must be strong and bold not rash a hasty

We've already seen so much time pass by with capitalism, though! Capitalism has already been with us for over 400 years! Revolutionary conditions are beginning to present themselves all over the world. In light of this, any revolutionary move by us would not be 'rash and hasty' but rather would be quite timely.

i think your right if the revolution would be imposiable to begin in an imperialist country. but i could be wrong a revolution could start in a imperialist nation and come out to inspier the third countrys to rise up.

Exactly. That is what I think and I would like to tell you why.

If there are third world revolutions the death toll would be catastrophic and there would have to be many revolutions across the globe.

If there is a revolution in the first world then the Imperialist backed third world nations would crumble. The new first world states would be able to finance and even give military aid to third world countries in need.

Another less obvious point is that the western governments and people are ont expecting revolution. When it comes they will be drawn to it to end the oppression that will exist. The governments will have no nearby armies and the administration would fall.

But slim, a much larger force is required to fight a revolution in the first world than in the third world. Where will you get such a force?

From the Thrid World that is my point

hmm... im sticking with urban areas

A revolution will only be fought in the third world. A revolution in the first world will be useless to wait for.

1. The workers in the first world have more comfort than the ones in the third world. Thus the motive for revolution is distilled.

2. The first-world is more ready to settle for social-democrats. A revolution cannot be fought through elections.


3. The third-world is the one who is expoited nakedly.

4. The media in the third-world is not as advanced as the first-world.

5. People are actually dying due to capitalism and sanctions in the third world.