I am not denying that organization is what allows revolutionary actions to be successful. But they don’t have to be part of organized action to be revolutionary actions. Likewise, the organization itself, though necessary is not revolutionary in itself.
Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary practice. Random assassinations aren’t revolutionary. Organizing in a revolutionary party is revolutionary because it advances the revolutionary position.
If a revolutionary party starts a series of actions designed to topple the system and a person with no theory knowledge and unorganized carries out the same type of action, then it is not a revolutionary action?
Let’s put an extreme example. There is a regime that is very top heavy. The assassination of that person will destroy the regime and change it by something else. That would be a revolutionary act, since it would topple a whole political system and replace it by something else. Now let’s assume a single person carried it out.
Similar things have happened, although I don’t know if any by a single person but it is not unthinkable that they might, so the hypothetical remains valid.
Throughout history, magnicides by individuals have happened. The US alone has had a couple with some extra tries. On the other hand magnicides leading to a regime change are less common, but Trujillo’s assasination is one example, even with the failed follow through.
there have been several assassinations of heads of state by individual people and several assassinations that have led to regime changes, so it is valid.
I am not denying that organization is what allows revolutionary actions to be successful. But they don’t have to be part of organized action to be revolutionary actions. Likewise, the organization itself, though necessary is not revolutionary in itself.
Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary practice. Random assassinations aren’t revolutionary. Organizing in a revolutionary party is revolutionary because it advances the revolutionary position.
If a revolutionary party starts a series of actions designed to topple the system and a person with no theory knowledge and unorganized carries out the same type of action, then it is not a revolutionary action?
How can one person carry out revolutionary action? One person cannot create a revolution.
Let’s put an extreme example. There is a regime that is very top heavy. The assassination of that person will destroy the regime and change it by something else. That would be a revolutionary act, since it would topple a whole political system and replace it by something else. Now let’s assume a single person carried it out.
This example is a fantasy, though, and isn’t how society works. This is why theory is necessary, not just vibes.
Similar things have happened, although I don’t know if any by a single person but it is not unthinkable that they might, so the hypothetical remains valid.
When did these ‘similar things’ happen?
Throughout history, magnicides by individuals have happened. The US alone has had a couple with some extra tries. On the other hand magnicides leading to a regime change are less common, but Trujillo’s assasination is one example, even with the failed follow through.
No they have not. The hypothetical is invalid because it doesn’t accurately portray reality.
there have been several assassinations of heads of state by individual people and several assassinations that have led to regime changes, so it is valid.