If we do not wait for the seizure of state power, how does revolution begin now?

For more than a century, revolutionary politics has been paralysed by a single assumption: that meaningful transformation can only begin after power is taken. Before that moment, movements are expected to agitate, protest, mobilise, and endure — but not to build.

This assumption has proven catastrophic.

Waiting for “victory” before construction produces three recurring failures:

• Movements exhaust themselves in permanent opposition

• Populations are asked to sacrifice without seeing tangible improvement

• Power, once captured, lacks prepared democratic infrastructure

The result is familiar: either defeat, or substitution of one elite for another.

This essay rejects that logic entirely. Revolution does not begin after power is taken — it begins before, through the construction of alternative capacities inside the existing system.

Protest is indispensable, but insufficient.

Resistance interrupts harm; it does not automatically generate new forms of life. Movements that remain trapped in protest mode remain dependent on the very systems they oppose — for employment, food, infrastructure, and legitimacy.

The transition from protest to production marks a qualitative shift:

• From demanding rights to exercising them

• From symbolic opposition to material autonomy

• From reactive politics to prefigurative construction

This is not retreat from conflict. It is escalation onto terrain where domination is weakest.

A post-vanguard movement does not compete with existing emancipatory struggles. It amplifies and interconnects them.

Revolutionary construction begins by supporting all movements that expand human agency and dignity, including:

• Network freedom and digital rights

• Neural sovereignty and cognitive liberty

• Electoral rights and procedural democracy

• Freedom of speech, association, and assembly

• Environmental protection and climate justice

• Gender equality and bodily autonomy

• Cooperative and mutual aid movements

• Human rights monitoring and defence

• Labour struggles over wages, hours, and safety

• Education equality and knowledge access

• Pension justice and intergenerational equity

Each of these struggles addresses a distinct dimension of domination. None is secondary. None must wait for a “primary contradiction” to be resolved.

Revolutionary politics in the present is the art of convergence without hierarchy.

Electoral participation is a tool — not a doctrine.

Elections can:

• Block openly authoritarian forces

• Create temporary space for organising

• Redirect resources toward public needs

They cannot, by themselves, democratise economic power.

Treating elections as salvation breeds passivity. Rejecting them entirely abandons terrain to reaction.

A post-stageist approach treats elections pragmatically: use them where useful, abandon illusions where they fail, and never suspend independent organisation in their name.

Civil disobedience remains one of the most effective methods of delegitimising unjust authority — when it is disciplined.

Effective disobedience:

• Targets specific injustices

• Is publicly intelligible

• Maintains moral asymmetry

But disobedience without limits collapses into spectacle or repression bait.

Boundaries are therefore essential:

• No coercion of non-participants

• No substitution of symbolic disruption for material gain

• No sacrifice of vulnerable populations for visibility

Civil disobedience is a lever, not an identity.

The general strike is often imagined as a final weapon. In practice, it is a coordination test.

Its power lies not in stoppage alone, but in demonstrating that:

• Social life is collectively produced

• Economic normality depends on consent

• Workers can organise beyond sectoral silos

Strikes that do not prefigure mutual support systems risk collapse. Strikes that integrate food distribution, childcare, healthcare, and communication become rehearsals for democratic coordination.

Markets respond to collective behaviour.

Consumer boycotts, when strategically coordinated, can:

• Impose costs on abusive practices

• Force transparency

• Shift production standards

But individualised ethical consumption is insufficient.

Boycotts must be:

• Collective

• Time-bound

• Linked to concrete demands

Otherwise they dissolve into moral signalling.

The most decisive step from protest to production is ownership transformation.

Cooperative buyouts, employee ownership transitions, and socialisation of failing enterprises achieve what no manifesto can:

• They transfer decision-making power

• They stabilise livelihoods

• They generate institutional learning

This process does not require revolutionary authority. It requires organisation, financing, and legal strategy.

Each cooperative enterprise becomes a school of economic democracy — imperfect, contested, but real.

The central error of revolutionary stage theory is postponement.

By deferring construction, it ensures that when moments of rupture arrive, society lacks democratic capacity. Power rushes into the vacuum — and does not leave.

A different principle applies:

Revolution is not the moment power changes hands. It is the long process by which people stop needing domination to coordinate their lives.

This process must begin before any formal seizure of authority.

From protest to production is not a retreat from struggle. It is the refusal to let struggle be the only form of politics.

By building economic, social, and organisational capacity now, movements reduce dependence on hostile institutions and prefigure the forms of life they seek to generalise.

This is a direct rupture with revolutionary stage theory.

Revolution does not begin after power is taken. It begins when people start governing parts of their lives together — here and now.

Everything else is delay.

If we do not wait for the seizure of state power, how does revolution begin now?

For more than a century, revolutionary politics has been paralysed by a single assumption: that meaningful transformation can only begin after power is taken. Before that moment, movements are expected to agitate, protest, mobilise, and endure — but not to build.

This assumption has proven catastrophic.

Waiting for “victory” before construction produces three recurring failures:

• Movements exhaust themselves in permanent opposition

• Populations are asked to sacrifice without seeing tangible improvement

• Power, once captured, lacks prepared democratic infrastructure

The result is familiar: either defeat, or substitution of one elite for another.

This essay rejects that logic entirely. Revolution does not begin after power is taken — it begins before, through the construction of alternative capacities inside the existing system.

Protest is indispensable, but insufficient.

Resistance interrupts harm; it does not automatically generate new forms of life. Movements that remain trapped in protest mode remain dependent on the very systems they oppose — for employment, food, infrastructure, and legitimacy.

The transition from protest to production marks a qualitative shift:

• From demanding rights to exercising them

• From symbolic opposition to material autonomy

• From reactive politics to prefigurative construction

This is not retreat from conflict. It is escalation onto terrain where domination is weakest.

A post-vanguard movement does not compete with existing emancipatory struggles. It amplifies and interconnects them.

Revolutionary construction begins by supporting all movements that expand human agency and dignity, including:

• Network freedom and digital rights

• Neural sovereignty and cognitive liberty

• Electoral rights and procedural democracy

• Freedom of speech, association, and assembly

• Environmental protection and climate justice

• Gender equality and bodily autonomy

• Cooperative and mutual aid movements

• Human rights monitoring and defence

• Labour struggles over wages, hours, and safety

• Education equality and knowledge access

• Pension justice and intergenerational equity

Each of these struggles addresses a distinct dimension of domination. None is secondary. None must wait for a “primary contradiction” to be resolved.

Revolutionary politics in the present is the art of convergence without hierarchy.

Electoral participation is a tool — not a doctrine.

Elections can:

• Block openly authoritarian forces

• Create temporary space for organising

• Redirect resources toward public needs

They cannot, by themselves, democratise economic power.

Treating elections as salvation breeds passivity. Rejecting them entirely abandons terrain to reaction.

A post-stageist approach treats elections pragmatically: use them where useful, abandon illusions where they fail, and never suspend independent organisation in their name.

Civil disobedience remains one of the most effective methods of delegitimising unjust authority — when it is disciplined.

Effective disobedience:

• Targets specific injustices

• Is publicly intelligible

• Maintains moral asymmetry

But disobedience without limits collapses into spectacle or repression bait.

Boundaries are therefore essential:

• No coercion of non-participants

• No substitution of symbolic disruption for material gain

• No sacrifice of vulnerable populations for visibility

Civil disobedience is a lever, not an identity.

The general strike is often imagined as a final weapon. In practice, it is a coordination test.

Its power lies not in stoppage alone, but in demonstrating that:

• Social life is collectively produced

• Economic normality depends on consent

• Workers can organise beyond sectoral silos

Strikes that do not prefigure mutual support systems risk collapse. Strikes that integrate food distribution, childcare, healthcare, and communication become rehearsals for democratic coordination.

Markets respond to collective behaviour.

Consumer boycotts, when strategically coordinated, can:

• Impose costs on abusive practices

• Force transparency

• Shift production standards

But individualised ethical consumption is insufficient.

Boycotts must be:

• Collective

• Time-bound

• Linked to concrete demands

Otherwise they dissolve into moral signalling.

The most decisive step from protest to production is ownership transformation.

Cooperative buyouts, employee ownership transitions, and socialisation of failing enterprises achieve what no manifesto can:

• They transfer decision-making power

• They stabilise livelihoods

• They generate institutional learning

This process does not require revolutionary authority. It requires organisation, financing, and legal strategy.

Each cooperative enterprise becomes a school of economic democracy — imperfect, contested, but real.

The central error of revolutionary stage theory is postponement.

By deferring construction, it ensures that when moments of rupture arrive, society lacks democratic capacity. Power rushes into the vacuum — and does not leave.

A different principle applies:

Revolution is not the moment power changes hands. It is the long process by which people stop needing domination to coordinate their lives.

This process must begin before any formal seizure of authority.

From protest to production is not a retreat from struggle. It is the refusal to let struggle be the only form of politics.

By building economic, social, and organisational capacity now, movements reduce dependence on hostile institutions and prefigure the forms of life they seek to generalise.

This is a direct rupture with revolutionary stage theory.

Revolution does not begin after power is taken. It begins when people start governing parts of their lives together — here and now.

Everything else is delay.