• Calfpupa [she/her]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    The October Revolution has nothing to do with striking, what are you going on about? You are over here insinuating something but are too much of a coward to outright make a claim. Yes, there was a strike 7 years prior, you’re very astute there, and yes it was bloody because the conditions for it were not right. I am not claiming that all strikes are well thought out or planned, there needs to be a movement behind it or it will end bloody. That’s what you get when non-marxists strike. Now please refute my claim that it impacts the growth of capital or move on.

    • Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Now please refute my claim that it impacts the growth of capital or move on.

      Bud, the topic is whether a non-violent strike changes the status quo.

      Yes, strikes impact capital (I didn’t say they don’t) that’s why they’re powerful and also why they get a strong and violent reaction.

      Notice how after the kumbaya strike (that the Tzar didn’t even know was happening, he even travelled there thinking all was fine!) that a puppet government was installed which still oppressed the people for several years and eventually led to the actual revolution. That had violence. A lot of it.