If a party isn’t doing anything, then it’s a book club. Revolutionary parties focus on educational outreach, building up internal discipline, creating organs for logistics of protests, all of which serve as prerequisites for revolution. Random assassinations are not revolutionary.
But if it builds the structure and doesn’t carry out anything, you have the prerequisites, but not the action. So without tangible action outside of the group that actively opposes the existing regime, it is no more revolutionary than a sanctioned university course.
If you steer a group towards nothing actually visible but the outside world, then you should not be able to say that you carried out revolutionary action. The preparation might be necessary, the coordination, too. It might even be indispensable to profit from the action, but without it, it is nothing but wishing.
There have been many times in history where gathering or talking have been revolutionary actions by themselves, as they were expressly forbidden and acted upon, but nowadays it is, as a general rule, not in the western countries.
I didn’t say bad, I said not carry out any revolutionary act. For the second point I said that a specific assassination by a random person can be a revolutionary act.
Which actions?
Organizing and building up a revolutionary party is a revolutionary action. Random assassinations are not.
Even if the party does nothing ever but discuss theory?
If a party isn’t doing anything, then it’s a book club. Revolutionary parties focus on educational outreach, building up internal discipline, creating organs for logistics of protests, all of which serve as prerequisites for revolution. Random assassinations are not revolutionary.
But if it builds the structure and doesn’t carry out anything, you have the prerequisites, but not the action. So without tangible action outside of the group that actively opposes the existing regime, it is no more revolutionary than a sanctioned university course.
This is why you need to study theory. You don’t trigger a revolution, you steer one. Otherwise you separate yourself from the masses.
If you steer a group towards nothing actually visible but the outside world, then you should not be able to say that you carried out revolutionary action. The preparation might be necessary, the coordination, too. It might even be indispensable to profit from the action, but without it, it is nothing but wishing.
There have been many times in history where gathering or talking have been revolutionary actions by themselves, as they were expressly forbidden and acted upon, but nowadays it is, as a general rule, not in the western countries.
You’re talking about how a revolutionary org can be bad. This is not the same as saying random assassination is revolutionary.
I didn’t say bad, I said not carry out any revolutionary act. For the second point I said that a specific assassination by a random person can be a revolutionary act.