/social/ - Socialism

Prof. Jodi Dean.webp
[Hide] (5.7KB, 250x250)

The recent podcast episode from Eyes Left looks into a study of the class composition of the US army, and their potential for radicalization.
https://soundcloud.com/eyesleft/classcomposition

The episode emphasizes that there is a conscious effort by think-tanks post-9/11 to create a myth of the military being elite and 'middle-class', rather than primarily 'the working-class fighting the wars while the rich stay at home'. The hosts cover a study with statistics given by the DoD, explaining how it fails to substantiate its own narratives. The hosts also justify their perspective that dismissing the military as having no potential for class consciousness is a harmful ultra-left idea.
It's a good listen and has some insight. I also found one of the study's arguments to be interesting, even though it failed to substantiate the thesis. The argument is that the modern military is increasingly technical, such as roles in advanced imaging/comms systems. You can't just throw anyone in there, they require recruits who have proven themselves academically. I infer that the education system has an increasingly necessary role in the military. This is also the case on the industrial side, with weapons manufacturers grooming in universities and even schools, and we're seeing many of their ties exposed through the pro-Palestine movements on university campuses: dozens of protests internationally have specifically demanded their university divest or cut ties from weapons manufacturers.
So in many ways, the education system becomes one more dependency in the supply chain of a modern military, a piece of infrastructure woefully underdeveloped in places like the US, and furthermore one it's easy to get their rightoids to attack because of le commie infiltration by teachers.

BUF leader Oswald Mosley in east London.webp
[Hide] (239.8KB, 1536x1250)

>How about counter-examples like the 43 Group?
The 43 Group was a special case since they were Jewish ex-servicemen returning from WWII to find the British Union of Fascists had grown, spreading antisemitism at home. They became anti-fascist volunteers because the fascists were a sizable movement in the streets threatening their lives.
In the West, I don't know how many groups are affected so directly by a sizable movement on the group, beyond trans people (obviously not a large demographic in the armies) and maybe Chinese, Islamic and queer people to some degree, although I suspect their persecution will grow as tensions rise and scapegoats are needed. This obviously varies by area, maybe some places could have an environment where Black ex-military members see clear threats to them in the streets and are compelled to organize.
But the point to keep in mind is the 43 Group formed out of concern for a blatant visible threat of persecution at home mirroring what they just saw in Nazi Germany, it was not out of ideological leaning like those joining fascist or anti-capitalist organizations.

Here's an documentary of the 43 Group.
https://archive.org/details/a-rage-in-dalston-2008-04-19

As revolutionaries, we have to face a basic question: who fights against the revolution, and can we stop them or flip them?
I constantly see people saying, unconditionally, that oh liberals are a lost cause, neo-Nazis are a lost cause, police are a lost cause, soldiers are a lost cause. And often, yes, it's not worth the effort to engage them and doubly so if you're a single regular unskilled outsider.
However, those assumptions are factually false. There are many well-known examples of people from all those groups becoming antifascists, communists and anarchists. It's obviously a transition which can happen. The question becomes, can it be done reliably enough that it becomes worthwhile to target these groups? That will inevitably depend on current conditions, there's no abstract ultimate answer.
OP made it clear that the military are one of the high-value groups. Every military member we convert is a skilled insider (an espionage dream come true) who won't try to kill our comrades later, one more asset detracting from the imperial machine, and one more who won't get picked up by neo-fascists who want to harass us. The armies are filled with people economically oppressed by the state, only joining for mediocre benefits. I believe if there is an effective way to radicalize military members to socialism, it's a very worthwhile endeavour. Of course, that's a very big 'if'!
>>434 mentioned Eyes Left which is useful for understanding this question. They openly share the perspective of anti-capitalist ex-military personnel, interview people to discover their paths away from the military and towards radicalization, what help they received on their journey (civilian therapists are a noteworthy theme) and other great information. Plus, they're in-network, they can talk to other veterans with sympathy. Other 'unpopular wars' should be a useful case study, like understanding how soldiers in the Vietnam War were able to foster such discontent in the military (e.g. circulating zines, radio).

>>433 (OP) 
>pdf
>mentions anarchism many times but no marxist ideologies
Not sure how to feel about this. Are we not doing enough in there, or are we just tactful enough not to get caught and labeled as violent extremists.

>>433 (OP) 
>>their members are often well-trained in skills useful for militant and revolutionary activities
I listened to an interview with Evan Brown, former Green Beret (USA Special Forces) and some of them are trained to do classic CIA ops, like sabotage and building up forces within other countries.
While there are very few, maybe only 3 in total, on record as having left the army in political protest, they seem like they would be invaluable. They're explicitly trained with the skills to build a revolution.

>>453
Yeah, special forces and CIA-type agents are literally professional revolutionaries. I'm sure a lot of their skills would transfer over to building a revolution which doesn't suck.

>>462
It's interesting how many CIA (etc.) agents have been whistleblowers too.

>>466
Seriously. I'm actually surprised they don't just have a policy of kidnapping or assassinating them.

>>436
Not much I can say about this one, but even if one can't shift another's politics (for whatever reason), there's still benefit in finding mutual goals in unlikely allies. Obviously doesn't have to be some 'trust them with your life' stuff, but a classic liberal (lolbert) will often side with an anarchist over a nazi.
Here's a documentary report with a section of the US antifascist Redneck Revolt networking with the lolbert militia American Pit Vipers, who were shocked :0 :0 :0  to see neo-Nazis and other racist neofash filling the Unite the Right rally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8klHKVfL8Q&t=23m33s
And I personally think that's an opportunity well-taken. They've clearly shattered the mass media propaganda myth presented to the right-wing crowd through direct exposure, and that's one less militant group going to be marching against them or spreading garbage uncritically whenever they hear about le ebil antifa terrorists. Incremental gains, sure, but useful and more useful if scaled.

>>523
<vid
>y'know, most media wouldn't cover this because we're not here to shoot each other
heh, I gotta say I think they're right. That's an Australian reporting crew, not even US media.
With a quick search, I could only find one other mention of the Pit Vipers alongside Redneck Revolt, which was a joint work by (what I assume are) indie journalists: https://indyweek.com/news/hate-racists-love-assault-rifles-meet-redneck-revolt/

Snippets I found interesting:
>Carolina Mountain’s engagement with the American Pit Vipers heightened during the four weeks leading up to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. To demonstrate good faith, Carolina Mountain members showed up to support a pro-veterans rally organized by the Pit Vipers’ Tom Horne. The gesture paid off when Chance Allen, another Pit Viper, drafted a statement that disavowed the white-supremacist ideology of marquee speakers like Matthew Heimbach and Richard Spencer.

>Whether through [American Pit Vipers] or other sources, Redneck Revolt’s plans to show up in Charlottesville were well known within the patriot movement days before the event.
>Francis Marion, who is active with the militia American Freedom Keepers, broadcast a Facebook Live video on August 9, directed to Redneck Revolt, antifa, and Black Lives Matter, as well as to right-wing militia allies. Without explicitly disavowing white nationalism, Marion staked a neutral position while recognizing the legitimacy of the antiracist groups on the left.
>“We’ve been told that Redneck Revolt has reported that they are taking the same stance,” Marion said. “They’re providing First Amendment security for folks on that side that are holding the event, that are holding their event in the parks. So if antifa’s holding an event and Redneck Revolt is providing security, their position is the same as ours as far as protecting free speech without violence. And that is our intent.”
>While Redneck Revolt’s armed presence and dialogue with patriot militias likely prevented further violence, the armed antiracist group was not welcomed by official Charlottesville. The city, along with neighborhood associations and local businesses, filed suit against Redneck Revolt, along with a collection of white nationalist and patriot militia groups. The suit charges that “private military forces transformed an idyllic college town into a virtual combat zone.”
>Despite its tactical differences with Redneck Revolt, SURJ condemned the lawsuit, charging that it echoes the “both sides” argument infamously voiced by President Trump.

>Carolina Mountain has discontinued the counter-recruitment work initiated with American Pit Vipers after concluding that it required too much time and energy, and that ultimately the chapter’s first priority was building strong relationships with marginalized communities on the left. Members view the work with the Pit Vipers as valuable in the context of preparing for Charlottesville, but the circumstances of the relationship were so unique that it would be impossible to use as a model for future organizing.

>>523
>but a classic liberal (lolbert) will often side with an anarchist over a nazi
>>526
>"[...] So if antifa’s holding an event and Redneck Revolt is providing security, their position is the same as ours as far as protecting free speech without violence. And that is our intent.”

It can be a gamble, although it's... well... refreshing when people slot an unexpected event logically into their ideological framework (however idealistic or broken that framework is) instead of flipping out over muh leftrights. Contrast that reaction against, say, the NRA endorsing the Mulford Act (state bill prohibiting the open carry of loaded firearms) while Reagan was the governor of California, in response to the Black Panthers pro-gun demonstrations.

>>466
Even the CIA has a lot of people who just drank the patriotic kool-aid. I think that third worldism and the like has really poisoned the well on talking about this sort of thing. Sure, westerners tend to live a lot better off than the global south or third world or however you want to put it. But it's an oversimplification to think that people's political alignment and revolutionary potential is solely determined by their economic conditions. It's vulgar economism essentially. Some dumb kid who joins the CIA because they saw Jack Reacher or whatever and thinks the CIA are the world-historical good guys is likely to end up getting a rude awakening when they actually start doing work there. And by that time they are probably in too deep to just remove themselves from that situation. Even with organizations like that, there's probably a lot of mileage to get out of propaganda similar to what Vietnam used on US soldiers, encouraging them to defect.