Veterans are by and large reactionary as fuck they’re proud of what they did back in Iraq Afghanistan etc we don’t need to appeal to these mass murderers the veterans that join us will probably realize that they fought for the wrong side but they will be few in number
It’s a fact Ive learned by talking to vets, seen online content creators and generally by looking at the community as a whole and also the by looking at the recent ADF report in Afghanistan
Oh, you’re talking about Australian veterans? (That’s what I can find that ADF refers to.) I assumed USian based on the subject of the OP.
Edit: Also, “content creators” is very vague and doesn’t tell much. It’s not as if such people are elected representatives of a given classification of people.
The talking to vets part is the most concrete here.
Edit2: Good thing posting history is a thing. Apparently you’re someone who has lots of anger and bitterness at the status quo (which is understandable), but forgets the “caring about other people” part of why we believe in what we do (which could lead you to reactionary behavior). Communism is a lot more than being angry at what colonialism and imperialism have done to the world and you sure as hell aren’t going to build an alternative world through spite alone.
Theres no difference between adf vets and us vets other than their nationality Ive only mentioned the report because the similarity in how the adf and the us operated in Afghanistan is staggering
Content creators im referring to are YouTubers twitch streamers etc
Why are you so keen on trying to recruit veterans? Unless their specialised they have nothing to offer
Similar does not mean identical. Accounting for distinctions is an important part of contending with people, as individuals or as groups.
I more meant vague in the sense that it doesn’t say much about veterans as a whole. These days, if you have a smartphone and an internet connection, you can be a “content creator”. Doesn’t inherently mean you speak for anyone other than yourself. Unless you are talking specifically about people who speak for orgs and are elected by members of those orgs.
This is some “if you’re not with me, you’re against me” shit. My original question was just asking if you had sourcing for your sweeping claim about an entire classification of people. I did not even advocate for trying to recruit veterans. I do, however, take issue with being reductionist in dealing with millions of people. Even if you have -100 desire to ally with veterans, it’s still important to understand the distinctions of where they are actually at, politically. Minority veterans, for example, are probably going to be closer to something politically that could be an ally, or at least not getting in the way. And if it’s all but assured they’re going to end up as opposition and reaction, then you need to contend with in what way that’s going to manifest and how to deal with it; another time when distinctions matter.
They’ve worked together in both Afghanistan and Iraq it’s identical
Doesn’t matter what you mean I was very specifically referring to content creators who were veterans and made content appealing to other veterans the fact that all of these people happen to be douchebags and scum doesn’t bode well to the politics to the veteran community
I am being reductionist in regards to their politics because thats their politics look at their voting habits and look at the shit they’re spewing every time they open their mouth
Also let’s examine your point here
Minority veterans, for example, are probably going to be closer to something politically that could be an ally, or at least not getting in the way
Do you really want to ally with someone who had a very good chance of having committed atrocities during their services regardless of if they felt bad about it?
And even if they committed no war crimes why should we recruit them?
I would hope one is not basing their organization with others on probabilities of whether someone committed atrocities, rather than concrete information on whether they did and whether they have turned around as a person.
That said, plenty of veterans won’t have been direct combatants but could still have logistical skills or advice, or knowledge from basic training that they can help others get on track with. The bulk of revolutionary efforts are not direct combat. I don’t know that I would personally trust imperial core combat veterans as combatants in a revolutionary context, but it’s possible they could still provide advice and training under the right kind of supervision.
But this feels a bit navel-gazing out of context of an actual revolutionary vanguard party. There does not appear to be that much of a “left” in the US for example and in the current climate, a civil war between constitutional loyalists and Trumpian fascists seems more likely than a “left” revolution.
I would hope one is not basing their organization with others on probabilities of whether someone committed atrocities, rather than concrete information on whether they did and whether they have turned around as a person.
Already talked about this
Do you really want to ally with someone who had a very good chance of having committed atrocities during their services regardless of if they felt bad about it? And even if they committed no war crimes why should we recruit them?
I don’t know that I would personally trust imperial core combat veterans as combatants in a revolutionary context, but it’s possible they could still provide advice and training under the right kind of supervision.
Most of these frontline infantry men have served in Iraq or Afghanistan any advice they give is going to be useless for whatever type of war you think you’ll be fighting 1) tactics and habits learned in counter insurgency doesn’t translate to running and operating an actual insurgency 2) the type of war they’re involved in is outdated 3) literally just train
That said, plenty of veterans won’t have been direct combatants but could still have logistical skills or advice, or knowledge from basic training that they can help others get on track with.
Again
Unless their specialised they have nothing to offer
But this feels a bit navel-gazing out of context of an actual revolutionary vanguard party. There does not appear to be that much of a “left” in the US for example and in the current climate, a civil war between constitutional loyalists and Trumpian fascists seems more likely than a “left” revolution.
I agree which makes me wonder what the point if all this arguing is
No offense but that sounds a bit leftcommy. I believe we need to recognize the material conditions are so deeply against us that in order for a revolution to have any chance of success in this jingoist country we will almost certainly need to make active inroads in splitting the military ideologically and pushing them left utilizing their experience in combat to serve as cadres. I wont disagree that veterans are overwhelmingly reactionary, I’m not even saying I like them, however I cannot think of a single revolution that succeeded without an organized effort deployed to incorporate military experience into the revolution itself. Without that I can’t imagine a revolution progressing further than the Paris Commune.
You could appeal to people serving in the national guard maybe or alternatively you could yourself gain combat experience by joining up with other leftist militias currently in combat
This is idealistic and idealist. You can’t learn how to handle the adrenaline given off in the face of imminent death from a book. Sensory experience cannot be invalidated for it serves as memory for future similar stimuli. Furthermore tales of combat heroism are essential to the morale of an army, the CPVF utilized this brilliantly by listening to soldier feedback and creating a newspaper acknowledging accomplishments by and distributed to the CPVF forces on the Korean front soon into their early campaigns.
you’d be surprised to learn how much experience actually matters in combat and how much of what your describing is actually from training not from combat
Veterans are by and large reactionary as fuck they’re proud of what they did back in Iraq Afghanistan etc we don’t need to appeal to these mass murderers the veterans that join us will probably realize that they fought for the wrong side but they will be few in number
A lot of that may be PTSD.
Well whatever it is it’s clearly impacted their politics
Are you basing this on talking to many veterans (beyond internet interactions)? Or just vibes?
It’s a fact Ive learned by talking to vets, seen online content creators and generally by looking at the community as a whole and also the by looking at the recent ADF report in Afghanistan
Oh, you’re talking about Australian veterans? (That’s what I can find that ADF refers to.) I assumed USian based on the subject of the OP.
Edit: Also, “content creators” is very vague and doesn’t tell much. It’s not as if such people are elected representatives of a given classification of people.
The talking to vets part is the most concrete here.
Edit2: Good thing posting history is a thing. Apparently you’re someone who has lots of anger and bitterness at the status quo (which is understandable), but forgets the “caring about other people” part of why we believe in what we do (which could lead you to reactionary behavior). Communism is a lot more than being angry at what colonialism and imperialism have done to the world and you sure as hell aren’t going to build an alternative world through spite alone.
Theres no difference between adf vets and us vets other than their nationality Ive only mentioned the report because the similarity in how the adf and the us operated in Afghanistan is staggering
Content creators im referring to are YouTubers twitch streamers etc
Why are you so keen on trying to recruit veterans? Unless their specialised they have nothing to offer
Similar does not mean identical. Accounting for distinctions is an important part of contending with people, as individuals or as groups.
I more meant vague in the sense that it doesn’t say much about veterans as a whole. These days, if you have a smartphone and an internet connection, you can be a “content creator”. Doesn’t inherently mean you speak for anyone other than yourself. Unless you are talking specifically about people who speak for orgs and are elected by members of those orgs.
This is some “if you’re not with me, you’re against me” shit. My original question was just asking if you had sourcing for your sweeping claim about an entire classification of people. I did not even advocate for trying to recruit veterans. I do, however, take issue with being reductionist in dealing with millions of people. Even if you have -100 desire to ally with veterans, it’s still important to understand the distinctions of where they are actually at, politically. Minority veterans, for example, are probably going to be closer to something politically that could be an ally, or at least not getting in the way. And if it’s all but assured they’re going to end up as opposition and reaction, then you need to contend with in what way that’s going to manifest and how to deal with it; another time when distinctions matter.
They’ve worked together in both Afghanistan and Iraq it’s identical
Doesn’t matter what you mean I was very specifically referring to content creators who were veterans and made content appealing to other veterans the fact that all of these people happen to be douchebags and scum doesn’t bode well to the politics to the veteran community
I am being reductionist in regards to their politics because thats their politics look at their voting habits and look at the shit they’re spewing every time they open their mouth
Also let’s examine your point here
Do you really want to ally with someone who had a very good chance of having committed atrocities during their services regardless of if they felt bad about it? And even if they committed no war crimes why should we recruit them?
I would hope one is not basing their organization with others on probabilities of whether someone committed atrocities, rather than concrete information on whether they did and whether they have turned around as a person.
That said, plenty of veterans won’t have been direct combatants but could still have logistical skills or advice, or knowledge from basic training that they can help others get on track with. The bulk of revolutionary efforts are not direct combat. I don’t know that I would personally trust imperial core combat veterans as combatants in a revolutionary context, but it’s possible they could still provide advice and training under the right kind of supervision.
But this feels a bit navel-gazing out of context of an actual revolutionary vanguard party. There does not appear to be that much of a “left” in the US for example and in the current climate, a civil war between constitutional loyalists and Trumpian fascists seems more likely than a “left” revolution.
Already talked about this
Most of these frontline infantry men have served in Iraq or Afghanistan any advice they give is going to be useless for whatever type of war you think you’ll be fighting 1) tactics and habits learned in counter insurgency doesn’t translate to running and operating an actual insurgency 2) the type of war they’re involved in is outdated 3) literally just train
Again
I agree which makes me wonder what the point if all this arguing is
No offense but that sounds a bit leftcommy. I believe we need to recognize the material conditions are so deeply against us that in order for a revolution to have any chance of success in this jingoist country we will almost certainly need to make active inroads in splitting the military ideologically and pushing them left utilizing their experience in combat to serve as cadres. I wont disagree that veterans are overwhelmingly reactionary, I’m not even saying I like them, however I cannot think of a single revolution that succeeded without an organized effort deployed to incorporate military experience into the revolution itself. Without that I can’t imagine a revolution progressing further than the Paris Commune.
You could appeal to people serving in the national guard maybe or alternatively you could yourself gain combat experience by joining up with other leftist militias currently in combat
What leftist militias?
Venezuela is currently hiring I think
Forgot to mention you could also read books on insurgencies and train in their tactics being an insurgent is different from a common soldier
This is idealistic and idealist. You can’t learn how to handle the adrenaline given off in the face of imminent death from a book. Sensory experience cannot be invalidated for it serves as memory for future similar stimuli. Furthermore tales of combat heroism are essential to the morale of an army, the CPVF utilized this brilliantly by listening to soldier feedback and creating a newspaper acknowledging accomplishments by and distributed to the CPVF forces on the Korean front soon into their early campaigns.
you’d be surprised to learn how much experience actually matters in combat and how much of what your describing is actually from training not from combat