The world is in a state of flux at the moment with the working man coming under more pressure from the establishment to give up more of his wage and people being sidelined as the cogs of the capitalist machine roll on and on. The use of clichés can be forgiven as this is not a metaphor but in a lot of cases this is the actual situation that is taking place. Through years to come and in time that has passed , the more the working man is thrust into the mud, the angrier he becomes but how is this anger to be channelled directly?
Currently the energy is, rightly or wrongly directed at the state through marches and protests with the most notable being the Occupy Dame Street while garnering a lot of attention did not really achieve much bar a footnote in the Indo and pictures of protestors rolling out the same old clichés when questioned by journalists what they are about (it was akin to them having a book of stock answers that they would answer out of, heaven forbid they should think for themselves in a hive entity). Most weeks Richie Boyd Barrett can be seen marching in the name of something or other and Ming can be seen tending to the needs of the bog cutters but is this revolution? Are these going to make a difference? From memory the only marches that stand out as being successful in Ireland is the march the pensioners took for medical cards. These marches only work when a whole community gets together (as did the African American community in America to fight for rights ). On the other flip side of the coin is those whom call for a “bloody revolution”, a revolution of guns and for the blood of others to be spilled all in the name of achieving a goal of a socialist state. There must be a happy medium surely between these two?
Marching can only achieve so much, the net effect of marching as can be seen from the Occupy Dame St is that people are only tolerant of so much and the malaise of indifference can settle so much so , that really in the end no one cares. On the other hand a bloody revolution effects change quick but inflicts so much suffering and torture on the innocent, we have to question, is it really worth it? Is it worth spilling the blood of those whom we are intending to protect? This begs the question, how is a modern revolution going to work and if so how can it be done?
Rosa Luxembourg discussed the issue years ago and called for a revolution lead by the people with no leadership but that it must be a proletarian revolution. This revolution must be led by the people and assume a role of spontenaiety , catch the bourgoise and the capitalists by surprise. This can be explained in a modern context through the use of the internet. The internet acts as a tool in real time allowing people to work, in a lot of cases anonymously and in other cases not, to organise and create everything from a flash mob to hooligans and everything on the spectrum in between. The internet provides a powerful tool for creating a revolution by which we can effect change in this country. A mass movement by people to change the indifference that is suffered by others could very well move the proletariat forward. The government sees how unpopular they are and they themselves lose confidence and therefore lose the will to govern and call an election. Strikes can be called nationwide in order to get better working conditions for workers whom are struggling after numerous attacks on them by the current government.
A revolution is needed but it needs to be modern, it needs to effect change and will only work with the people on board.