What is adventurism and what isn't?
I feel like MLs like throwing this word around a lot but never give clear defintions.
Why do statists think it's okay for the state to commit mass violence daily, but when a indiviual commits violence against that apparatus somehow they are "adventurist" or in the wrong, like do you seriously expect the ruling class to just give up?
Even if the attacks further oppresion temporarily wouldn't that still make the social conditions for revolutions to increase? Even if it takes decades as it did in Russia.
>Even if the attacks further oppresion temporarily wouldn't that still make the social conditions for revolutions to increase? Even if it takes decades as it did in Russia.
Yes dude revolution was actually created by Narodism and not Bolshevism. lol
>>2598846>..? you think the critique of adventurism as impotent is a defense of bourgeois states?When you sit in your chair all day doing nothing but calling people adventurist then yes
>What is adventurism and what isn't?
I'd say it's adventurism when individuals or groups to carry out violence which the social basis of their movement is not willing to accept. More specifically its action for action's sake with no possibility of success. If conducting violent action is more likely to alienate your desired support base, intensify repression against you, and cause no meaningful damage to your enemy, then it's adventurism.
>Even if the attacks further oppresion temporarily wouldn't that still make the social conditions for revolutions to increase?
Not necessarily. If your social base is not sufficiently radicalized, then they may actually applaud an increase in repression against revolutionaries as a legitimate effort to contain dangerous radicals.
The braindead would rather bomb a building than actually build class power.
>>2598850The Narodniks walked so the Bolsheviks could run
>>2598840Charlie Kirk was adventurism, UHC guy was not. Nobody gave a fuck about the UHC but some of the weirdos still had emotionally attachment to the Kirk twat.
>>2598840Marxism is about building a mass political movement. “Adventurism” is shirking that duty and instead just assassinating some porky who will be replaced by another porky while the assassins and their friends sit in jail. It is essentially wasting resources (motivated cadre) due to the adventurers need for immediate self-satisfaction.
>>2598854Hi, I an involved in union work, communist network building, volunteering for a communist party, public propaganda and other real life activities.
Adventurism, being a focus on extreme individualist actions rather than actions that can build mass support, is stupid and counterproductive.
In fact, there's an ongoing public discussion in my country after some idiots in bloc threw stones at cops, escalating violence and leading left-wing protesters to start hating the black bloc movement and alienating the working class. Even anarchists defending black bloc violence are saying it was pointless, tactless and done without consent of the collective.
>>2598840>>2598975You also seem to be conflating the critique of adventurism with condemnation of the individual acts. No ML is condemning whoever killed that health insurance CEO. It’s just not a tactic that will bring about revolution.
Was October 7th adventurism?
>>2599004In some ways yes and in others no. Hamas was clearly not some Weather Underground tier collection of retards but a serious military force and actual government. Their attack against the Zionists didn't in any way alienate them from their support base or exceed the level of militancy they were willing to accept. However at the same time I think it was a strategic blunder that didn't meaningfully advance their broader goals. Frankly I still struggle to understand what their aims were. I wouldn't call it adventurism in the sense that Lenin spoke of and criticized, but it had some adventurist elements.
>>2599004Nope. Hamas works hand in hand with Israel.
>>2599075October 7th was fucking stupid. Hamas attacked knowing Israel would fucking obliterate Gaza and kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians yet they attacked anyway. No idea how people can claim killing kibbutzniks and some stupid ravers at a music festival counts as a "military victory" like their supporters like to claim. I've also read the claim that Hamas was giving meth to its fighters before the attack that day to turn them into super soldiers.
As far as I understand. Adventurism is essentially just individual acts of sporadic violence divorced from broader popular struggle. Something like the assassinations of Charlie Kirk and Brian Thompson would be classified as adventurism. Yeah shooting porkies and their propagandists is based on a libidinal cathartic level. But in the absence of a genuine mass movement poised to take down the capitalist system it won't do a lot of damage and may do more harm than good to us in the short to long term.
>>2598840It's not morally wrong it's tactically wrong. It's adventurist when it has no chance of winning, usually when a small force of communists attempts to fight the state without support from the masses/community, and when it's not defensive violence (which might be justified in fighting a losing battle if it has any chance of saving people).
Adventurism is wrong because it's a waste of human material to throw small weak forces against big strong forces in an unfriendly territory. We need to throw big forces against their small forces in a territory friendly to us. That requires the work of creating that situation (winning the people and growing/organizing cadre).
>>2599205>I've also read the claim that Hamas was giving meth to its fighters before the attack that day to turn them into super soldiers.Eh, people who don't like them say that stuff to make them seem crazier, but battlefield junkie juice is pretty common among soldiers.
>>2599075>Frankly I still struggle to understand what their aims were.I think a lot of people were baffled but I take them as a religious organization. Deeply so. I don't mean that in a moralfagging away to say "they're bad mmm'kay. It's just that ideology matters and such groups have a different strategic vocabulary or ethos or "habitus" compared to what you or I have (secular Western people posting on leftypol). It's like maintaining the purity of the struggle and the faith as a testament to the truth of their belief and their cause. And it's that which makes stuff happen in the world because God is real to them. Look at HTS in Syria, they pulled a surprise attack on Assad's forces and overran the country in a week. That's wild shit but for them it's proof of their belief and also their patience and willingness to make sacrifices. Also, paradoxically, maybe they're right (not that I really believe this but I'm just saying) because the 10/7 attack may have actually contributed to that victory.
>>2598865Was 9/11 adventurism
Also as far as the rational-strategic side Hamas could've concluded that Israel was divided (it was politically quite divided) and that their own side was united (this is the part that doesn't strike me as adventuristic), and would further unite on a broader scale if they carried out a successful military operation, which gave them a real shot at threatening to bring the house down on Israel. There were flaws in this strategy though.
>>2599325Arguably no, since it had an actual plan that it accomplished which was to force US involvement in the middle east to eventually destabilize those countries which, according to if you believe in was a false-flag or not, was to either weaken the US geopolitically (Al-Qaeda perspective) or create friendly client states in the region that would act in the US and Israels interests (False-flag perspective).
>>2599486I've read a little bit of Bin Laden and the theory of sucking in the U.S. seemed like a retroactive justification after the U.S. invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. There's no evidence (that I've seen?) that suggests he had that plan before 9/11. Before then the strategy seemed more that the U.S. was a decadent paper tiger, and he said as much in the 1990s iirc. The U.S. turned tail in Somalia in 1993 and also withdrew troops from Lebanon in the 80s after proto-Hezbollah drove a truck bomb into a Marine barracks.
People tend to make the mistake of thinking the outcomes of wars are the result of the original intentions when often that is not the case. Rather people can frequently go into them with a mindset shaped by historical analogies and prior examples and then the new chaotic events blow their assumptions up so they revise their strategy and try to smooth over the contradictions by making up some story.
>>2599516I suppose that could make it be considered an adventurist action if the intention originally was to show other groups and countries not to worry about US intervention even if they were targeted directly. But I guess it depends on how adventurism is being defined.
>>2599604But I didn't say that though.
>>2599516Yeah, there were letters from AQ leadership that showed that they were genuinely caught with their pants down when Amerikkka invaded Afghanistan. AQ genuinely believed that cuz American society is so decadent they'd just keel over and die.
It's kinda ironic for Bin Laden to believe this tbh. Because the Arab Caliphates at least in the latter stages was precisely like America today, where there were decadent higher class and a largely demoralized underclass, but the Abbasid was able to crush everyone left and right because they relied on a professional military class separate from the civilians much like the US today
>>2599205We need to understand that before Oct 7 happened Israel was on the verge of normalization of Saudi Arabia who planned to make a trade route with Israel and circumventing Gaza. This is why they were constantly making noises even before Oct 7, to draw attention back and get Hamas a seat in the table of the regional power dealing.
And you know what, they won this shit. Palestine is now an inseparable fact from Middle Eastern geopolitical reality. And even if Iran and Hezbollah collapses tomorrow Hamas can now just ask for patronage from Turkey because now every Muslim president can get immense prestige and piety points just from donating to Hamas. While conversely Israeli donors now cant afford to donate to the Zionists without getting shame in their face. This is a complete strategic win for Hamas
Was january 6th adventurist
>>2599004No. That was an attack on another state by a nationalist militia. Even if you think strategically it was a blunder it did actually change the military and political status quo in the region.
Adventurism would be that guy who shot the Zionist diplos. They were replaced before even their funeral. There was no impact on the Zionist operation, and someone who could have been useful cadre will spend their life in prison.
Unique IPs: 18