Quote:

After all the "petitions", the "demonstrations" in the company of all the ruling class' "concerned people", the "progressive" priests, the show-biz stars and such like "lovers of (...capitalist) peace", what can there be left in the minds of those who thought that this would be a means of opposing the war, if not a feeling of sterility and impotence? Pacifism has never prevented capitalism wars. It has always prepared and accompanied them.

Quote:

The bourgeoisie had to send professional armies into the massacres. Why? Because the balance of forces between the classes was not the same. The ruling class knows that the workers are not ready, yet again, to pay the blood tax.

Quote:

The second lesson concerns the relation between the proletariat's struggle in the workplace and the struggle of soldiers in the barracks and at the front. However important the soldiers' struggle, and the fraternisation of German and Russian soldiers in the trenches during World War I, they were not at the heart of the revolution which put an end to the war, but a moment within it. These actions were preceded by a whole fermentation in the factories, whether in the form of strikes, or of demonstrations against the effects of the war. Soldiers' desertions, and actions against officers only be came truly massive and determining once they became part of the proletarian movement which shook the bourgeoisie's power in its economic and political centres. Without the massive political and revolutionary struggle of the working class, there is no real struggle against capitalist war. The proletariat unable to prevent World War II

and what now? social (fucking) democracy :-/