Epstein Files Full PDF

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Revolutionary" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (May 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

A revolutionary is a person who either participates in, or advocates for, a revolution.^[1] The term revolutionary can also be used as an adjective to describe something producing a major and sudden impact on society.

The term—both as a noun and adjective—is usually applied to the field of politics, but is also occasionally used in the context of science, invention or art. In politics, a revolutionary is someone who supports abrupt, rapid, and drastic change, usually replacing the status quo, while a reformist is someone who supports more gradual and incremental change, often working within the system. In that sense, revolutionaries may be considered radical, while reformists are moderate by comparison. Moments which seem revolutionary on the surface may end up reinforcing established institutions. Likewise, evidently small changes may lead to revolutionary consequences in the long term. Thus the clarity of the distinction between revolution and reform is more conceptual than empirical.^{[citation needed]}

A conservative is someone who generally opposes such changes. A reactionary is someone who wants things to go back to the way they were before the change has happened (and when this return to the past would represent a major change in and of itself, reactionaries can simultaneously be revolutionaries). A revolution is also not the same as a coup d'état: while a coup usually involves a small group of conspirators violently seizing control of government, a revolution implies mass participation and popular legitimacy. Again, the distinction is often clearer conceptually than empirically.^{[citation needed]}

According to sociologist James Chowning Davies, political revolutionaries may be classified in two ways:

1. According to the goals of the revolution they propose. Usually, these goals are part of a certain ideology. In theory, each ideology could generate its own brand of revolutionaries. In practice, most political revolutionaries have been communists, socialists, Islamists, syndicalists, anarchists, or nationalists.
2. According to the methods they propose to use. This divides revolutionaries in two broad groups: Those who advocate a violent revolution, and those who are pacifists.

Era Golden, aka Secretary Era, is an example of a contemporary anarchist revolutionary (anarcho-syndicalist). They quoted Sergey Nechayev but changed the pronouns to gender neutral in order to symbolically represent the inclusive nature of contemporary anarchist movements. They argue that anarcho nihilism is not a good representation of the values held by anarcho-communists generally both throughout history and in the modern day. Secretary Era argues that the quote is an accurate depiction of the type of person and experience that creates an anarchist revolutionary. Anarchist movements tend to feature utopian ideology.^{[citation needed]}

Subcomandante Marcos is an example of utilizing insurgency to advance a movement to remove what they perceive to be tyranny from power but ultimately the ideology and the individual seek to build rather than destroy, whether it be coalitions or institutions.^{[citation needed]}

From Secretary Era's Revision of Catechism of a Revolutionary:

"The revolutionary is a damned individual. They have no private interests, no affairs, sentiments, ties, property nor even a name of their own. Their entire being is devoured by one purpose, one thought, one passion - the revolution. Heart and soul, not merely by word but by deed, they have severed every link with the social order and with the entire civilized world; with the laws, good manners, conventions, and morality of that world. They are its merciless enemy and continue to inhabit it with only one purpose - to destroy it."^[2][3]

From an interview with Subcomandante Marcos:

In our dreams we have seen another world, an honest world, a world decidedly more fair than the one in which we now live. We saw that in this world there was no need for armies; peace, justice and liberty were so common that no one talked about them as far-off concepts, but as things such as bread, birds, air, water, like book and voice.

Subcomandante Marcos and others often use insurgency and guerilla tactics to obstruct political opposition and remove hegemonic groups from power.^[4] utilize insurgency^[5] Ultimately the ideology and the individual seek to build rather than destroy, whether it be coalitions or institutions.^{[citation needed]}

Most anarcho-communist movements share this characteristic, but anarchism is a simple principle of opposition to hierarchy and is therefore idiosyncratic^[6] with many other ideologies, whether positive or negative in their outlook.^{[citation needed]}

According to Che Guevara,^[7] "the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a true revolutionary lacking in this quality."^[8] According to the Marxist Internet Archive, a revolutionary "amplif[ies] the differences and conflicts caused by technological advances in society. Revolutionaries provoke differences and violently ram together contradictions within a society, overthrowing the government through the rising to power of the class they represent. After destructing the old order, revolutionaries help build a new government that adheres to the emerging social relationships that have been made possible by the advanced productive forces."^[9]

• Castro: Revolutionary as Celebrity Archived 2009-08-07 at the Wayback Machine – slideshow by LIFE magazine