KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
As Dostoevsky said, Communism is Catholicism without the God.
Ah that explains so much.
As Dostoevsky said, Communism is Catholicism without the God.
Only kind of, and only some people. There was always a solid core of apologia for them. The holocaust and the American troops rescuing people and bringing back such stories made everyone at every level of society have knowledge of Nazi evil. There was none of that for communism.
Ukraine didn't lose its ability to stand up to the leftists within their own country. Why else did that mass burning took place in Odessa on May 2, 2014?For a good long while, we kind of did, though. We saw the Soviets and Chinese as evil. We saw what the Khmer Rouge did. All the "intellectuals" will say is, "that wasn't real communism," all while they still use the symbols and celebrate it. If you ask me, we just got soft and lost our ability to stand up to those types.
Ok, now that we are done with the circlejerking, and it certainly was a lot of fun, let us take a closer look as to the reasons why the some people, particularly in the 3rd world and/or just moving into a more modern form of social organization.
I am going to focus on 3 particular places where some form of Communist power took control, those being China, Imperial Russia and Vietnam.
For the sake of shorthand, I will split the relevant people into 2 "classes", that being peasantry and aristocracy.
In all 3 cases the country in question was never a capitalist one, nor was it truly a sovereign nation at peace.
In all cases, there was a disconnected, aloof, inbred, mentally as well as physically, ruling elite that had no interest in whatever the people were doing and that was running on somewhat stale sociology-economical ideology, serfdom and tsarist autocracy and royal and church control over a large portion of the land with favorable tax statuses in the case of Imperial Russia, French colonial domination in the case of Vietnam, and a succession of Warlords, foreign invaders and a feckless and out of touch mandarin class in China.
In all 3 cases there was a huge amount of Crony Capitalism, rent seeking and favoritism on the part of the out of touch rulers, which could force peasants to sell them grains and rice at lower prices or outright expropriate it, could outright sell peasants as part of their lands(serfdom) within living memory, were massively corrupt and really didn't give a damn about those who they were ruling over, which included getting themselves into huge wars that damaged the peasantry.
INB4 reeing and flamewars.
Maybe because of either ethnic connections or because they or their relatives profited in some way from the situation.I don't think that was ever in question...? My question was always about why the people who should know better - namely, the academics and such - tend to idolize Communism.
Those who can do.I don't think that was ever in question...? My question was always about why the people who should know better - namely, the academics and such - tend to idolize Communism.
It's envyMaybe because of either ethnic connections or because they or their relatives profited in some way from the situation.
Or they are researchers of country/culture X, they found out that the previous regime was shit and they decided that maybe the commies were an improvement.
As per my previous post, you mean?It's envy
Seriously if you have been in academia you would understand that a lot even most professors are riddled with envy. They dispise people who are richer and more suçcessful then they are and want to tear them down.
They honestly think because they understand a singular subject well that they should have dominion over every one else. It's pure envy hidden under a vener if holier then thou bullshit.
It's really that simple.
Because for all the loftiness of their titles, academics are usually not any more sound of mind than the average worker behind the assembly line, only more sitzleder (patience to cram stuff in their head and write about it) and more hubris.My question was always about why the people who should know better - namely, the academics and such - tend to idolize Communism.
I am pretty sure that you need higher IQ for some academic stuff, engineering, biology, medicine, computer science, you know, the relevant academia stuff.Because for all the loftiness of their titles, academics are usually not any more sound of mind than the average worker behind the assembly line, only more sitzleder (patience to cram stuff in their head and write about it) and more hubris.
I am pretty sure that you need higher IQ for some academic stuff, engineering, biology, medicine, computer science, you know, the relevant academia stuff.
I think you misunderstand IQ.IQ however does not equate intelligence: what it measures is the potential.
Basically, think of a computer with 4 GB of RAM and a computer with 16 GB of RAM. Latter computer is much more intelligent in that it has more working memory and thus can complete more tasks in the same unit of time.
But do you really think that matters if the former computer is being used for simulating, calculus and design work while the latter computer is used for nothing but porn games?
That is basically the case here: academics may be intelligent, but since their brains had been infected by Marxism, they are nevertheless incapable of producing things of value.
I see ADHD less as "slow" than as unfocused.@Agent23 Theoretically speaking, someone can be slow and yet have a high IQ. For instance, someone with ADHD. I feel like I need to clarify this part since being slow does not necessarily equal being dull.
I'm not sure about that - some of them are pretty blatant about their malice.More importantly their followers are pretty much unconscious or in self-denial of their own malice.