No. That’s not what happened. I rejected the idea that having a violent revolution makes a regime violent by definition. This whole time I’ve been talking about regimes and you’ve been talking about revolutions. It’s really that simple of a miscommunication.
I’ve been talking about both revolutions and states, which you call “regimes” to sound scary. States are itself tools by which one class dominates the rest, this is inherently violent.
You don’t get to tell me what I mean when I speak. Regimes, revolutions, and states are all different things and I would never use one of those terms to mean another.
I have never once said states and revolutions are the same thing, only that the only way to create a leftist state is revolution, and that states themselves are inherently violent towards the non-dominant class. Regimes are just scary words for states in common lingo, so please explain what a regime is.
No. That’s not what happened. I rejected the idea that having a violent revolution makes a regime violent by definition. This whole time I’ve been talking about regimes and you’ve been talking about revolutions. It’s really that simple of a miscommunication.
I’ve been talking about both revolutions and states, which you call “regimes” to sound scary. States are itself tools by which one class dominates the rest, this is inherently violent.
You don’t get to tell me what I mean when I speak. Regimes, revolutions, and states are all different things and I would never use one of those terms to mean another.
I have never once said states and revolutions are the same thing, only that the only way to create a leftist state is revolution, and that states themselves are inherently violent towards the non-dominant class. Regimes are just scary words for states in common lingo, so please explain what a regime is.