Revolutions as a Method of Social Change

Revolutions are the largest organized form of social change. Revolutions therefore do not focus on one small thing, but rather the whole system. A social change movement is considered a revolution if the movement changes the funadmental basis of the power structure so that a new power structure takes its place.
Revolutions are the opposite of Weapons of the Weak. Weapons of the Weak occurs without any hope of any change in the power system. Revolutions are aimed at chaning the whole system. That is the absolute goal. The revolution will only end in two situations: 1. the system of power is overthrown completely and the revolutionaries take power; 2. the current system is so dominant that every revolutionary or revolutionary attempt is crushed completely, therefore there is no more revolution.
In Weapons of the Weak, the power holders does not need to take action. So what if some peasant killed a cow or broke a window? In a revolution, if considerable amounts of enemies take up arms, that poses a physical threat to the system, therefore actions must me carried out to prevent the group from becoming an army.
Revolutions are in many cases the only method of social change. For example, the US occupation of Iraq. There are not other effective methods of evicting US troops from Iraq. The only method is to cause an armed revolution against the armed invader. The Iraqis can protest, can disrupt daily routines, and can do action research. But anybody publicably disagreeing with US policies will automatically be associated with terrorists and therefore shot on the spot. The Iraqis must use a revolution to take power back.
A strength of the revolution is the determination to create change. The majority of the revolutionaries are people who have been exploited by the system of power. Therefore the issue is directly affecting them. If the issue is directly affecting them, then they are willing to sacrifice their lives for the revolution to happen. There is a goal to fight to the end, which is not present in any other techniques of social change.
Weaknesses of revolutions are the amount people that have to die and the propaganda used against it. There have been no revolution (at least not that I know of) that succeeded without the death of less than 10 people. Revolutions often involve weapons used against the opposing side. With the methods of destruction being so advanced right now (a atom bomb can wipe out the entire city), casualties are definately going to happen. The casualties also determine the level of success of the revolution.
The system in power will always use the media to deface the revolutionaries as monsters that are trying to burn your home. To the world, you look like "terrorists", which will prevent people from supporting your cause. The revolutionaries will not have access to the media to justify themselves. In the US occupation of Iraq, the insurgents bombing US troops is seen all over the world, while the US bombing the insurgents are rarely seen. That is why the insurgents have to abduct Westerners to get the media to cover them.

Starting My Own Revolution
The most important part of any revolution is the control of the state's economy and the will of the people. These two things are the foundation that supports the superstructure.
Two thousand years ago, wars in China were in the format of seizing fortified cities. The attacking army will rush up against the city, and the defending army will try to prevent the invading army from getting in. This is similar to the fighting in J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Ring series. Usually, this encounter will result in numerous casualties. Therefore there are tactics that generals use to minize the amount of casualties. There is a Chinese saying that translates to "Attacking the city is low. Attacking the heart is smart." There are many battles where the invading army just surrounds the desired city. The defending army is forced to close its gates. Then a siege occurs. The invading army gets food and supplies, but the defending army is trapped in the city. Since the resources in a city is limited, and there is not an advance communications network to get help, the city will starve. The defending general, seeing his own people is dying, will usually surrender or let out a fight.
This is an example of how controling a state's economy and the will of the people can create a successful revolution. Once a city is trapped, commerce stops. The economy slows down. Then, the people in the city will run out of resources and demand a solution, which puts pressure on the power holders. This is similar to Maoism, which said, "In Maoism, deliberate organizing of massive military and economic power is necessary to defend the revolutionary area from outside threat..."(Wikipedia, Maoism, 2).
The success of a state depends mostly on the success of the state's economy. This lets in all the resources the state needs and exports the resources the state have in return. The will of the people are the foundation of a state. A state is not a state if there are not citizens. I have always believe that the people does not care about who rules them or what state they live in. As long as they have a stable home and a stable income, then they will be happy. War hurts not the power holders but the people. If you can get the people to be on your side ("revolutionary mass mobilization"), then half the war is won.
Comment on Max Lerner's Blog (cocomment wouldn't take it)
Hi Max. I liked the topic of removing the vending machines from the school. But I don't think a revolution is appropriate for the change you are trying to make.
The ideas you came up with that prevents people from consuming the junk in the vending machines are creative and effective, but I don't think they are considered as revolutionary. They are more like creative disruption. Those techniques disrupt the norms surrounding the machine.
To use revolution techniques in this issue, I will recommend a bonfire of the machines in front of Coca Cola/Snapple headquarters, then storming the place and attempt to remove the head of the headquarters by suprise. This will happen in many headquarters of the corporations, and that will eventually lead to storming the base of operations of the corporation.

Comment on Professor Schneider's Blog (Marx on Base and Superstructure) (I cannot post comment)
Hi Professor. It is interesting to think about how the ruling class is imposing these ideas in our heads without us realizing them. In class, we talked about how adults basically run our lives. Little kids have to be in school and seniors have to be in homes. Before the class, I thought that this idea is normal. Children should be in school because they have to learn whatever they need to learn. Seniors shouldn't be working or running wild in the street because they might get hit by a car.
Now, I see school as a mental institution where subliminal messages are programed into our heads. Once children qualifies as adults, they use their learning and do the same thing to the little kids. After their usefulness are fully exhausted, they are put away until they wither away.
I think it is important to be aware of what your mind is accepting. Like in Feed, people are not aware of what their feeds are picking up. This led to them being zombies. We should question everything that comes into our head, and make sure the ruling class is not ruling your mind too.
"It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being determines their consciousness." This is very true about our society. Whenever people meet each other, they always want to know what each other's jobs are. It seems that the job determines your worth. And being in that job influences your mentality, so that even you measure yourself using your job.
When applying these things to revolutions, they hinder the process. If a low wage worker is given a chance to rebell against the employer, the worker will have the ideas that the capitalist put in him, like "I am contributing to the good of the factory" or "my boss is a good man because he gives me money to feed my family". This will prevent the worker from rebelling against the employer and he is easier to exploit.
Since the low wage worker is viewed as so unimportant in our society, this mentality will also affect the worker's thinking. Even if the worker want to rebell, he will not have the determination to rebell because he will think that he is just a small guy. What can he do? All these techniques are the ruling class' attempt to stop a revolution.