Changed my opinion of Stalin’s communism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhi2icRXbHo

I do like how they explore the motives, they portray Stalin as not a simple-minded sadist, but as… an egotist who wanted to help the people in only his preferred way. And fought the people when they wanted to help themselves. (which meets all the criteria for a left) Such a valuable insight!

The right is characterized by its sacrificing of the people’s interests to big business; the left sacrifice them to their own petty pleasures. Therefore we’re better off without politicians.

Advertisements

A mildly hopeful tone

In the ancient Roman empire the people were kept calm with bread and games (gladiators, fighting other hgladiators, or wild animals from elsewhere in the empire)
In the contemporary political emipires, the peoples of the west are kept calm, by different forms of bread and games: welfare passes for bread today, and elections for games. Elections serve to give the people the illussion that they are able to exert any influence on their destinies.
Which is an improvement upon the #Roman approach of using mere, shallow entertainment and the fanning of bloodlust to keep the #plebs silent. Contemporary plebs are deceived and entertained, as much as the ancient lot, but the emphasis has shifted: Instead of merely having their attention diverted from #exploitation and #expropriation, they want actual influence on their own affairs, of course they do not get any, but the effort is made to let peoploids have the illussion that they do.
And that fills me with hope for the future (I’m not really filled to the brim, but it’s a start), for if this trend continues, it can only lead to democracy- for the first time in this planet’s history.

Opportunism (the outsider)

IMHO Hitler did not hate jews; they were no more than a simple tool to acquire power. Since all of politics revolves around setting people up against an outsider, (obvious examples: Jews, Gypsies, Russians, Arabs/muslims (the jews of our time) in order to rouse support for their politics (war) and put it in people’s minds that there is an enemy out there that only this politician can defend against.
Hitler simply had no qualms about sacrificing millions of jews/gypsies/inferior peoples (mentally handicapped) to his goal; achieving delicious power, dominion over wide swaths of Europe.

All of modern politics is socialism – hence bad

It is not just laughable that, more than one century since the Russian revolution, there are still people calling themselves socialists, (it is also frightening; the naive explanation may be that history repeats itself; another explanation would be that those people are fully aware of the historical record and thus have malicious intent)
but even so-called capitalism is socialism, namely market-socialism. Classical socialism (state-ownership of the Means-Of-Production) might not the exact kind of socialism that contemporary socialists strive for anymore (control over the MOP has been subsumed in/expanded to the desire for total ownership of the total citizen-experience (existence); aka totalitarianism), but even the self-styled “right” (in so far as a not-left exists) is utterly socialist;
A “Socialist” is some politician who pretends to be (representative of) all of society.
“Socialism” means the transfer of power from the citizen to the state.
“Capitalism”, which is the label politicians apply to market-socialism, is the transfer of all market power from the citizen to the state, meaning citizens are merely passengers on the train of commercial affairs. Without “capitapism” tere would also be no lobbyists, able to keep the citizens away from what they want; the agro-lobby helps keep people overweight by shoving a bunch of carbs into their gobs.

Why socialists are wrong

Instead of “socialist”, in the title, one can read “politician” and draw more or less the same conclusion.

Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and pretend that they probably mean well. Which, given that today it is well over a century since the Russian revolution, would be somewhat hard to do.
Surely by now, it is clear to everyone that government fails.
Expecting any good to come from the ever ongoing bipolar sherang of left-right; no, left and more left; no, right is the only good way to go! is beyond naive, rather it’s patently ridiculous.
“Look at the mess the left has caused, to cure it; put us in total, absolute power!”
Then, at the next elections, the right can only complain about the current mess (which they’ve made), and claim that they’re the only ones that can solve it.
And vv, obviously.
Better to stop transferring power away from the people, to government (that’s called socialism, both left and right do this) and give people the choice to live under a political government or not.
Meaning if they choose to live in a political commune, that’s up to them. So long as they don’t expect me to go live there as well, or to pay them to do their living (as political entities are quite typically economic failures)

On Russia: no, not under.

A quarter century after communism, the economy of the country with a population of 144,500,000, the GDP of Russia, is still muvh bigger than that of New York state (population: <20million, according to: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population).
Sctually, according to this video: Russia’s impending drink catastrophe https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BAlz1zRCC8A 25% of Russians live under the poverty line.

So, any time some jingoist claims to your face that “Wehave to defend against the Russians”, do the world a favor and punch him in the face.