COMMUNISM/SOCIALISM: NO EXCUSES

Standard

My greatest irritation is the extreme hypocrisy in society’s fussiness over perfect language, spelling, and grammar which always fails to include precision in terminology that opposes state dogma.

Do scholars ever write articles discussing “North-Korean variants of democracy” or “democracy with North-Korean characteristics”? Of course not.  It’s obvious to anybody that democracy is merely being abused and exploited by a regime that cares nothing about its people to maintain power.

Sinister regimes will always use something positive to mask the fact they have no intention of actually implementing such things.

Everyone can agree on that.

So why do people imply that Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot were genuinely interested in trying to implement real communism/socialism?  Just like North Korea declaring itself democratic or the phoney elections held by authoritarian states, there is only the desire to pretend one is implementing socialism on the people’s behalf.

The abuse of the terms “communism”/”socialism” by the West (and the authoritarian regimes) are some of the worst forms of human mind-control.  Educators who are using these terms to describe the USSR or Pol Pot’s Cambodia are genuinely brainwashing children, harming society, and engaging in Orwellian-style thought-control.

The first thing that pops up when I type “communism” into Google:

Communism is a socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and characterized by the absence of social classes, money, and the state; as well as a social, political and economic ideology and movement that aims to establish this social order.
via en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Does that at all sound like the USSR, China, North Vietnam etc.?

But despite the extreme need for precision in language, no scholars, academics or educators bother bringing up the fact that these authoritarian regimes inherently could not be communist by definition. It’s like saying “authoritarian democracy” or “democracy with authoritarian elements.”

There are no excuses for abusing terminology in this fashion. How could Hitler’s Nazi Party and the USSR both be examples of socialism? Just looking at the basic definition of socialism, one can tell that neither are socialist. Every educated man and woman wants to pretend that abuse of language will lead to the destruction of society, yet none are willing to sacrifice their position within their academic circle by pointing out the simple, basic truth that these terms have been exploited by the West and the Eastern regimes to justify control.

Is everyone too lazy to put their heads together and come up with new terminology that is actually accurate? When it came to quantum mechanics, everybody was willing to get together to sort out how the entire physics community should interpret the new scientific research/data. But nobody can put their heads together to figure out that people will say whatever it takes to get themselves into power.

One could call it: “Stalinism,” “authoritarian exploitation,” “intentional impoverishment,” “Stalinist classism,” “Maoist elitism,” “Pol Pot’s exploitation of socialist ideology,” “lying,” etc.

At the end of the day, anybody who thinks the USSR was an example of communism or socialism is either:
a) not intelligent enough to be discussing the issue on an academic/political level, or
b) using their intelligence to purposefully lie to the public.
Either way, people like that should have no place in academia, education or the political arena.

Advertisements

Thinking Challenge

Standard

Most American scientists would agree that there is a very slight probability a person could walk through a wall based on current quantum mechanical interpretations.

However, most American scientists have the tacit assumption that there is no chance whatsoever that the United States of America could possibly be anything less than a force for good and benevolence in this world.

Why is that?

Aside

When China moves, it will move the world.

-From the Soong Sisters film (2007) where the quote is attributed to Napolean (So many quotes are improperly attributed nowadays, I’m not sure if it’s actually true…)

China is a big country inhabited by many Chinese.

-These words of wisdom have been attributed to Charles de Gaulle

In that vein, I think China should arrange for a single national holiday where all Chinese people are coached to walk in perfect unison with one another just for the heck of it 🙂

Don’t act like you’re not just as curious as I am…

The Daily Servant of Power

Standard

Today’s servant of power is:

N. Bohr

Niels Bohr

Bohr’s hatred for breadth, intuition, and understanding alongside his mentality that only that which makes him look skilled and enabled is practical and important makes men like Bohr perfect servants of power.

This is because men like this – who solely worship reason, logic, and the intellect – can contribute to the creation of advanced weaponry with zero understanding of what the technology is actually going to be used for.

Men like Bohr do not care as long as it looks like they are doing something useful, in my opinion.

His need to stamp out higher realms of thought in order to maintain his own glow of expertism and enablement makes him a fitting choice for today’s servant of power.

Also see:  10 Misconceptions That Need to Die

The Daily Servant of Power

Standard

Today’s servant of power is:

Michio Kaku

Michio Kaku showed the type of person he is on his futurism discussion (which I watched on Youtube.)  He was discussing type 1, 2 and 3 civilizations.  He said we are transitioning from a type 0 to type 1 civilization which is by far the most difficult transition.  I don’t disagree with him on this point.

However, he stated that the largest barrier to our transition is terrorism stemming from Middle Easterners.  This to me is laughable.

Ann Coulter got it right (and it’s why Noam Chomsky states that US conservatives are often more perceptively consistent than US liberals) when she stated that compared to the Nazi war machine which the US had to face, the terrorists are nothing.  And she’s right.  These are scattered groups from second and third world nations with low-quality technology and training and these are humanity’s biggest threat?