Greta Tankberg countdown: countdown

Edit: 170 comments doggirl-gloom

  • TheDoctor [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    14 days ago

    there haven’t been any successful revolutions without some connections to those in power

    Gonna need some examples of what you’re talking about here

    • EllenKelly [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      14 days ago

      Sankara was appointed Minister of Information in Saye Zerbo’s military government in September 1981.

      After a coup (7 November 1982) brought to power Major-Doctor Jean-Baptiste Ouédraogo, Sankara became Prime Minister in January 1983. But he was dismissed a few months later, on 17 May.

      A coup d’état organized by Blaise Compaoré made Sankara President on 4 August 1983 at the age of 33

      See? There are many examples!

    • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      That’s now how that works. Please show me some examples of successful revolutions that had 0 ties to those in power.

      • TheDoctor [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        14 days ago

        You’re clearly the one familiar with the literature. I’m not making a claim. I’m asking for clarification. Surely you can give a single example.

      • Belly_Beanis [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        If I remember right, Lenin and Trotsky were both lawyers (but didn’t hold office and Lenin was in exile before returning to Russia) and Stalin was a career criminal (he robbed banks on behalf of the revolution) and soldier. Kropotkin didn’t partake in the October revolution nor Russian Civil War and was living in exile in France.

        My soviet history isn’t very good, so others feel free to correct me and call me a dumbass for making shit up. I’d say a significant number of revolutions didn’t include anyone with a title or office. The major figures that created the USSR were public employees at best in a place where noblemen still held vast amounts of land and wealth.

        I think Mao was from the nobility and renounced his title, but maybe I’m wrong there. I know Che’s Castro family owned a plantation.

        Edit: brainfart

        • newacctidk [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          14 days ago

          Che’s family was Argentinian, you are thinking of Fidel. Mao was from a minor landlord family.

          However none of these figures had any connections to people in political power. Being born rich is less important in this sense than being a social climber who is friends with some politicians. Fidel for instance had long since alienated all his former ties

      • iByteABit [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        14 days ago

        lmao classic lib move, pull something straight outta your ass and then expect a detailed response to your baseless argument

        I’m sure the Bolsheviks asked a lot of politicians for permission before occupying all strategic points in one night right?

      • REgon [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        13 days ago

        No buddy that is how that works. You’re the one who made the claim, the burden of proof is on you.
        Or did you mean “not how that works” in that people don’t get to push back on the obvious bullshit you’ve uncritically ingested from the front page of statedeptalkingpoints.com? go back to your echo chamber on reddit-logo