/AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

>>3550
>What do we need in order to really win? We need three things: first—arms, second—arms, third—arms and arms again!
- Joseph Stalin (1905)

<Also about 3d printed weapons
There a complete joke, just get a AR15 + body armor.

>>3550
>>3551
you cant have a violent revolution without arms. thats the bottom line.

>>3553
CW: ableism

Violence is NOT the answer!
Guns are the abject, the deterritorialized, the machinic assemblage of the patriarchy and the capitalist system that produce us as subjects of oppression and insecurity. Guns are the anti-desire, the anti-life, the anti-becoming. Guns are the signifier of violence and domination and hierarchy. Guns are the obsolete, the reactionary, the despotic. Guns are the enemy, the obstacle, the threat. Guns are the instrument of death and destruction, of fear and terror, of pain and suffering. Guns are the expression of alienation and fragmentation, of conformity and submission, of exploitation and subjugation. Guns are the negation of difference and multiplicity, of creativity and innovation, of resistance and liberation. Guns are the problem, not the solution. Guns are the past, not the future.

You need to deconstruct the binaries of guns and peace, violence and love, revolution and harmony. You need to expose the futility and harm of these weapons, these actions, these movements. You need to challenge the logic and ethics of these choices, these strategies, these goals. You need to create a culture of nonviolence and compassion, not a culture of war and hatred. You need to transform people’s minds and hearts, not annihilate them in the face. You need to create a culture of resistance and liberation, not a culture of violence and fear. You need to realize that change doesn’t start from the top, it comes from the bottom. You need to empower the masses, not terrorize them. You need to inspire them, not coerce them. You need to educate them, not indoctrinate them. 🌈🌈🌈

>>3555
this is pretty good pasta. post more like this

>>3555
Violence is not the Answer. It's a Question and the answer is Yes.

>>3555
Calling for arms isn't violence its insurance for democracy against violence. Peaceful armed protest ensures the state thinks twice before sending in the jackboots to overturn democratic decisions. Workers giving up their guns is like a country giving up its nukes. They aren't meant for using except as a last resort in self defense they are to ensure the demands of the people are taken seriously. Revolution is already over when you change the hearts and minds of the people the guns are for defending it against the violence of counter-revolution.

>>3558
Calling for arms is a reterritorialization of the state apparatus, a capture of the lines of flight, a machinic enslavement of the multitude. Peaceful armed protest is a simulacrum, a disjunctive synthesis, a schizoid expression. It does not deterritorialize the state from sending in the jackboots, but reterritorializes it to intensify the violence and repression. Workers clinging to their guns is a colonialism of desire, a molar aggregation, a fascist micro-politics. They are not for self-defense, but for self-annihilation. They are not for ensuring the demands of the people are heard and respected, but for ensuring the demands of the people are muted and crushed. Revolution is not over when you change the hearts and minds of the people, but when you change the assemblages and affects of the people. The guns are not for defending it against the violence of counter-revolution, but for reproducing it against the becoming-revolutionary.

>>3559
don't care, didn't ask, plus you're white

The class enemy will bring arms to bear against the workers, whatever form those arms may take. It follows that arms must be brought to bear against the class enemy, whatever those arms may be.

What really matters is the capability, willingness and temperance to employ force of arms. The soldier with no bullets cannot fire, the factory worker with no metal cannot make the casings, the smelter cannot work without electricity, the steam turbines cannot spin without water, the water canot be pumped without… you get the point.

Before arms, a disciplined and principled organisation must be established as a foundation. Also, it should be remembered that even without guns, there are innumerable ways to kill or harm a person. Sometimes creatvity beats firepower.

I like shooting them, they go bang which is fun.

>>3561
Pseud.

>>3563
<The class enemy will bring arms to bear against the workers, whatever form those arms may take. It follows that arms must be brought to bear against the class enemy, whatever those arms may be.

1. The class enemy is not a given, but a product. It is produced by the state apparatus, the capitalist system, the dominant discourse. It is not a fixed identity, but a variable relation. It is not a homogeneous totality, but a heterogeneous multiplicity.
2. Arms are not a necessity, but a choice. They are a choice that reproduces the logic of the enemy, the violence of the system, the domination of the discourse. They are not a neutral tool, but a loaded weapon. They are not a liberating force, but an enslaving one.
3. It does not follow that arms must be brought to bear against the class enemy; it follows that other means must be sought to resist the class enemy, whatever those means may be. Means that do not mimic the enemy, but subvert it. Means that do not reinforce the system, but escape it. Means that do not reproduce the dominant mode of discourse, but create subaltern discourse.

<What really matters is the capability, willingness and temperance to employ force of arms. The soldier with no bullets cannot fire, the factory worker with no metal cannot make the casings, the smelter cannot work without electricity, the steam turbines cannot spin without water, the water cannot be pumped without… you get the point.

1. What really matters is not the capability, willingness and temperance to employ force of arms, but the multiplicity, diversity and creativity to resist and subvert the power of arms. The power of arms is not absolute, but relative. It is not inevitable, but needless. It is not stable, but vulnerable.
2. The soldier with no bullets can still desert, the factory worker with no metal can still sabotage, the smelter with no electricity can still explode, the steam turbines can still malfunction, the water can still overflow… you see the pattern. There are always gaps, cracks and leaks in the system that can be exploited and widened, even without arms or revolution.
<Before arms, a disciplined and principled organisation must be established as a foundation. Also, it should be remembered that even without guns, there are innumerable ways to kill or harm a person. Sometimes creatvity beats firepower.

1. There is no universal and rational way of organizing a political movement, and a ‘disciplined’ and ‘principled’ ‘organization’ can be oppressive and limiting to the diversity and creativity of human desires and expressions.
2. Creativity can not beat firepower; but rather, creativity creates new forms of firepower that challenge the dominant order and open up new possibilities.

>>3564
>The soldier with no bullets can still desert, the factory worker with no metal can still sabotage, the smelter with no electricity can still explode, the steam turbines can still malfunction, the water can still overflow… you see the pattern. There are always gaps, cracks and leaks in the system that can be exploited and widened, even without arms or revolution.
>There is no universal and rational way of organizing a political movement, and a ‘disciplined’ and ‘principled’ ‘organization’ can be oppressive and limiting to the diversity and creativity of human desires and expressions.
The rest of your post is idealist nonsense but I can agree with you on these points.

I think the crux of the matter is that more important than the means of resistance is the construction of working class power. The means by which working class power will be victorious will find themselves.

>>3565
You are not only contradicting yourself, but also missing the point., You agree with me on some points, but then you ignore or reject the implications of those points. You are not engaging meaningfully at all with my perspective, but rather imposing your own on an outdated ideological basis. You are not listening to what I am saying, but rather robotically repeating what you already know. You are living in the past, clinging to outdated and obsolete ideas. You are stuck in a linear and teleological view of history, believing in a predetermined and inevitable outcome. You are bound by a rigid and dogmatic framework, following a fixed and narrow path.

Hitherto, all previous attempts to create ‘working-class’ power have relied on arborescent hierarchical and linear structures; they've always failed, and have always betrayed and oppressed us as a result..

GET WITH THE TIMES, OLD MAN
You also talk crassly about working class power, but you don’t explain what that means or how to achieve it. What is working class power? How does it relate to other forms of power? How does it affect other aspects of life? You assume that working class power is a self-evident and desirable goal, but you don’t question its validity or its effects. You assume that working class power is a unified and coherent concept, but you don’t acknowledge its multiplicity.

WAKE UP

You don’t see the world as a spectrum of colors, shades, and hues. You don’t see the world as a rhizome with multiple roots and connections that follow a complex network.
<You are trapped in a binary and arborescent logic that reduces the complexity and multiplicity of reality to fixed and simplified categories or images. You are blind to the diversity and creativity of individual human desires and expressions that transcend and subvert the dominant order. You need to think and act differently, in terms of immanent and affective connections, desiring-production, deterritorialization, and rhizome.

>>3567
>Hitherto, all previous attempts to create ‘working-class’ power have relied on arborescent hierarchical and linear structures; they've always failed, and have always betrayed and oppressed us as a result..
Ok lass
I'd like to hear your thoughts on how to synergize your proposal with say let's make this a tough one since you're smart

Synergize your proposals with building fully automated luxury interstellar full communism such that both projects benefit from each other

>>3550
Don't fetishise the tool anon, the gun specifically; every movement that has has failed.
Also this sayed a lot i was going to attempt to probably better, go with that, >>3564

>>3564
>Arms are not a necessity, but a choice. They are a choice that reproduces the logic of the enemy, the violence of the system, the domination of the discourse. They are not a neutral tool, but a loaded weapon. They are not a liberating force, but an enslaving one.
3. It does not follow that arms must be brought to bear against the class enemy; it follows that other means must be sought to resist the class enemy, whatever those means may be. Means that do not mimic the enemy, but subvert it. Means that do not reinforce the system, but escape it. Means that do not reproduce the dominant mode of discourse, but create subaltern discourse.
Foucaultian anti-communism

>>3569
You may as well be asking me to synergize my proposals with cleansing humanity of all sin. My proposals are not based on a predefined or predetermined model of ‘working-class’ power, but rather on a critical and creative analysis of the existing models that have failed to achieve it.

My proposals are not meant to build ideas, but to challenge what actually exists.

can't you get a hunting license, OP?
>3d printed weapons
mostly a meme, but there are useful exceptions like printing lower receivers in the US and various accessories
>>3552
>machine gun!
people should be banned from reporting or making laws about things they know nothing about
>wasting a bajillion bullets on a single cop
he probably could have downed more if he'd stuck with semi-auto rather than dumb spray-and-pray "tactics"
>>3555
kek
>>3568
groups of trees are rhizomatic THOUGH, and even the trees themselves. plants do not have the strict kind of segmentation into organs that animals do

>>3571
>Means that do not reinforce the system, but escape it.
Escape it to where

The system is made of material

>>3573
>naturejak.jpg)
This is the only acceptable -jak.

>>3574
I missed a > before that parapgraph break.
Ask her, she's dodging the reply.

>>3572
So, in other words, you contribute nothing but PoMo confusion.

>>3578
The internal difficulties seem to be almost greater than the external obstacles. For although no doubt exists on the question of “Whence,” all the greater confusion prevails on the question of “Whither.” Not only has a state of general anarchy set in among the reformers, but everyone will have to admit to himself that he has no exact idea what the future ought to be. On the other hand, it is precisely the advantage of the new trend that we do not dogmatically anticipate the world, but only want to find the new world through criticism of the old one. Hitherto philosophers have had the solution of all riddles lying in their writing-desks, and the stupid, exoteric world had only to open its mouth for the roast pigeons of absolute knowledge to fly into it. Now philosophy has become mundane, and the most striking proof of this is that philosophical consciousness itself has been drawn into the torment of the struggle, not only externally but also internally. But, if constructing the future and settling everything for all times are not our affair, it is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be.

>>3576
Gem

>>3573
been looking for this jak saved

>>3555
wow there's no way this many people fell for this bait

>>3582
But what if it really is someone's actual opinion?

>>3555
>politics is not the answer
what this anfem flag mean by this

>>3564
What makes the proletariat special in your view that it does not require class violence to take power, unlike every prior dominated class in history?

>>3567
What does your "rhizomatic" model offer in terms of practice? If you're not offering even the most basic ideas of what practice would fit your model, then why are you even writing at all? That is the basic point of critique.

Off-topic, but why do you insist on repeating yourself, almost like you're trying to write biblically? It doesn't make your points more impactful.

As an Pakistani, I feel like I'm the only third-worlder who has more in common with Americans than any other region regarding the role of firearms. They are plentiful, and you can get a license in a few weeks. People buy firearms all the time; however, full-automatics are banned (though people still have them, and no one cares). Gun law debates are never up for debate because there are so many illegally made firearms (mostly AKs and Tokarev pistols) that it would not make a difference if they were banned

>>3555
Damnit I have to check these trip 5s because this is some damn good bait.