„Night Of The Witches“ – Day Of The Idiots

[nikolabeacon]

I wish there were a planet inhabited only by children. By dear, carefree, happy children… If only there were a place where children lived happily without being tortured, starved, raped and killed, I wouldn’t mind going to “hell” and endure the most brutal torture. Could that place still be our planet Earth? The destruction of the mind is the ultimate consequence of the development of capitalism. This destruction of the human scentience is based on the following “logic” : live to work; work to shop; shop to discard; discard to enable the process of global destruction to proceed smoothly…. Capitalism turns people into “good for nothing” petty-bourgoises. Guided by the illusions created by the capitalist propaganda machinery, people become alienated from the processes that determine their destiny and thus the capitalist villains are able to become masters over their lives. We are currently in the process of erasing the national and, thereby, historical self-consciousness. . “Mass events” destroy the mind and sterilise man’s change-creating energy. Sports stadiums and centers have become the cult venues of the modern world. It is no accident that robotised gladiators and circus players are paid enormous amounts for their performances. Instead of looking to the future, young people are fixated on football or basketball ball or the tennis racket or the blood stained boxer’s fist… “New” forms of “entertainment” designed for the young appear on a daily basis and instead of drawing on cultural heritige, they are copying the “mass production” in the West aimed at destroying the national identity and creating a mondialistic idiocy. The importance attached by the media to manifestations such as “Halloween” (Night of the Witches) shows the extent to which the “public space” has become the property of the capitalist clans, those seeking to woo the West by destroying our culture and consequently eradicating our people from the historical arena.

The space given by the media to illiterate “prophets” instead of educated and wise people also shows the extent to which the mind is degraded in today’s world. This is the culmination of the development of “democracy”. I remember a neighbor I once had, Granny Novka, who was a professional medium and an amateur “Madame”. Her “predictions” turned out to be completely true. She, for example, correctly predicted the death of our friend, Auntie Ruzica and her husband, Uncle Bata. She also foresaw the death of our dog Luci and that the lavatory in her yard was going to collapse. She correctly predicted that she would get a certificate of virginity in spite of being married for 40 years. She foresaw that the local authorities would demolish her house, which in 1804 used to be the home of one of the first schools in Serbia, and that a local grocery would be erected in its place. She was also correct in saying that keeping pigs in the town and washing them on the Ibar river town beach would be banned. She predicted that she would be run over by a truck and that nobody would attend her funeral. And she was correct in that, too…

Today, Granny Novka would stand a good chance of becoming the president of the country. Considering the people in our political arena and the extent to which people have lost any hope of becoming the masters of their own destinies, many of them would look for a guiding star in the illiterate clairvoyant. We are now “going through a transition,” anyway. What is the end of our journey? Granny Novka would surely know the answer. Once, when she was cross with me, she uttered the words that might become her most relevant prophecy: “You all shall perish!”. If we do not confront the capitalist barbarians, Granny Novka’s words may turn out to be a deadly curse. “Mondialism” is a global ecocidal and genocidal order with a technocratic character, based on the destruction of nations and national cultures; on the eradication of historical, and thus, libertarian human self-consciousness; on the splitting of countries into “regions” so that the most powerful capitalist concerns can achieve their monstrous goals by bribing the local oligarchs and preventing an organised resistance by the oppressed working people… The true purpose of “mondialism” is the transformation of the world into the object of exploitation and human beings into the means of a destructive capitalist reproduction. This is also the true purpose of the “non-governmental” organisations. They are an exclusive political instrument of the most powerful capitalist groups in the West meant for the destruction of nations, states and democratic institutions, which enable people to express their political will. As a reaction to this mondialistic barbarism, we see a rise of national movements based on religious single-mindedness. They are also incapable of offering any meaningful solutions as they are all based on the destructive capitalist mindlessness. They are also led by the “horsemen of the apocalypse”. Both of these ideologies are based on the absolutized principles of private property and class society, and both fight against the emancipatory legacy of civil society and the idea of a future based on a life-creating mind and social justice. The only difference is that one of them promises “gardens of Eden” in the existing world, while the other promises them in heaven. As far as “belief in God” is concerned, are we talking about the “God” of the Catholic church? Or the “God” referred to by the Nazis and featured on the belt buckles of the German SS divisions? Or the “God” of the Americans, whose fascistoid terror-bombing of Serbian villages and towns was cynically called “Merciful Angel”? And what about the “omnipotent, omnipresent and merciful God” of the Christian colonists who, in the name of “God”, killed millions of American Indian children and almost obliterated the Indians from the Earth. What was the “omnipresent, omnipotent and merciful God” thinking when the American Christians, in his name, whipped African boys to death, castrated and hanged their fathers and raped their sisters and mothers? What was the “omnipresent, omnipotent and merciful God” doing in Auschwitz when, in his name, the German Christians killed the Jewish children in the gas chambers? What was the “omnipotent, omnipresent and merciful God” doing in Jasenovac, when the Christian Ustasha, in his name, butchered Orthodox Serbian children and gouged out their eyes – and while the children were praying for salvation? What was the “omnipotent, omnipresent and merciful God” doing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki when the American Christians, in his name, killed tens of thousands of children with their atomic bombs? What was the “omnipotent, omnipresent and merciful God” doing in Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Chile, Argentina, Serbia, Iraq, Syria, Lybia …. – where the Americans, in his name, killed millions of children, leaving behind only burnt villages and nuclear battlefields? Why doesn’t the “omnipresent, omnipotent and merciful God” respond to the pleadings of millions of children who are asking him for help, and why doesn’t he deal with the capitalist monsters who, in his name, are slaughtering the weak and destroying the world, which is the “work of God”? As far as “paradise” is concerned, it does not seem to be such a wonderful place as they would like us to believe. No one can possibly be delighted by a “paradise” inhabited by the likes of Hitler, Musolini, Franco, Horti, Pavelic… If we add to the list millions of murderers who have been granted indulgences by the Christian churches so that they can enter the “gardens of Eden”, very little is left of the enthusiasm with which people refer to that “heaven”. Not to mention the prospect of “eternal life” in the company of murderers, which certainly cannot bring us “blissfulness”. What are the choices offered to man after his earthly life? Is it the “hell”, where he will be burning on a ceaseless fire? Or is it “paradise”, filled with monstrous killers? Is there a place in the universe where man can find peace? I wish there were a planet inhabited only by children. By dear, carefree, happy children… If only there were a place where children lived happily without being tortured, starved, raped and killed, I wouldn’t mind going to “hell” and endure the most brutal torture. Could that place still be our planet Earth? Translated from Serbian by Vesna Todorović (Petrović). Author Ljubodrag Duci Simonovic

 

[Agent207]

As agent Smith said, we are a plague for this planet; you can just imagine how wonderful it would look by today, hadn't we ever existed.

I can only predict what a sewer it will become within 100 years more with us as host.

Not self-centered, wishful thinking here. Just facts.

As for the happy children's world, I can't recommend enough this classic

 

[nikolabeacon]

As agent Smith said, we are a plague for this planet; you can just imagine how wonderful it would look by today, hadn't we ever existed.

I can only predict what a sewer it will become within 100 years more with us as host.

Not self-centered, wishful thinking here. Just facts.

As for the happy children's world, I can't recommend enough this classic

It will for sure... if we continue to believe that something will change for better in this destructive system without our own effort to radicaly change a way of life....majority donf want to abandon a fake state of comfort that system is giving to them..And soon many of that midlle classes will be also on bottom.......i believe in amazing human potentials...i donf think that "human" as a organism is problem

 

[x-ray peat]

As agent Smith said, we are a plague for this planet; you can just imagine how wonderful it would look by today, hadn't we ever existed.

I can only predict what a sewer it will become within 100 years more with us as host.

Not self-centered, wishful thinking here. Just facts.

As for the happy children's world, I can't recommend enough this classic

You can tell when the propaganda has taken its hold when the victim is asking for his own demise. Let me guess you are also a white male that believes that white men being the cause of all the worlds problems, should be eliminated. The one thing I agree with in this thread is the term idiots as in useful idiots. You may wish to investigate that term further because communism is not designed to save anybody. It is designed to enslave you. To paraphrase Orwell, it is a boot crushing a human face - forever.

 

[nikolabeacon]

You can tell when the propaganda has taken its hold when the victim is asking for his own demise. Let me guess you are also a white male that believes white men being the cause of all the worlds problems, should be eliminated. The one thing I agree with in this thread is the term idiots as in useful idiots. You may wish to investigate that further because communism is not designed to save anybody. It is designed to enslave you. To paraphrase Orwell, it is a boot crushing a human face - forever.

Comunism is not an option

You can tell when the propaganda has taken its hold when the victim is asking for his own demise. Let me guess you are also a white male that believes white men being the cause of all the worlds problems, should be eliminated. The one thing I agree with in this thread is the term idiots as in useful idiots. You may wish to investigate that further because communism is not designed to save anybody. It is designed to enslave you. To paraphrase Orwell, it is a boot crushing a human face - forever.

I agree. Communism is not a solution as we know it by defintion..and of course if it is forced by someone on TOP...as with every other system.Ray Peat can also be characterized as having a slightly"communist sound "..

 

[x-ray peat]

Comunism is not an option

I agree. Communism is not a solution as we know it by defintion..and of course if it is forced by someone on TOP...as with every other system.Ray Peat can also be characterized as having a slightly"communist sound "..

Then why would you quote a long anti-west diatribe by a communist ex basketball player? And I don't think RP has a "slightly communist sound" at all. He is way too smart to fall for a bankrupt ideology that has never worked and never will.

 

[nikolabeacon]

Then why would you quote a long anti-west diatribe by a communist ex basketball player? And I don't think RP has a "slightly communist sound" at all. He is way too smart to fall for a bankrupt ideology that has never worked and never will.

"West" is used only for better understanding of the situation because it resembles current situation the best. Russia And China are almost the same nowdays.i n terje of organizations....in people difference is hugeee..And I know this man myself And talked with him personaly people donf understand him And his true critique through olympic movement And sport....Sport is a capitalist tool for ruling ... .So to talk about communism just by defintion is point less as with any other enforced system...yoh can call it whatever yoh want. " Ray Peat does the thinking "can also enslave you as everything in this world if you donf have you inner image And world in your mind

 

[nikolabeacon]

to understand true olympic or Sport system And how is created...Sport is Now a Religion....based on exploitation of Body And then Nature of course..And also yoh should read abouI Zeitgeist Fascism to understand current destructive Religion based on omnipotence of technology, technics And robots And science without humanistic view

 

[x-ray peat]

And his true critique through olympic movement And sport....Sport is a capitalist tool for ruling

Its called bread and circuses... and has been a tool of the ruling elite no matter what economic system. Also, sports where much more important of a tool to communist countries than it ever was to the West. The west of course had shopping and better TV.

 

[keith]

I'm not going to get involved in any in depth discussion for it against capitalism or communism, because I think most people reading this will have already made up their minds, but just want to make a few points about what has been written. (1) Orwell's quote was about totalitarianism, not communism. (2) The Soviet Union, People's Republic of China, etc., though calling themselves communists, never established a political system that could remotely be described as communism as understood by the theorists who developed the concept. They are sometimes described as "state communists" (an oxymoron) or "state capitalists". At certain times, they certainly would have met Orwell's description of totalitarian, but that can exist under any economic system. The Nazi and Fascist totalitarian systems were free(er) market versions. (3) Orwell frequently described himself as a socialist, though I don't think he ever called himself a communist. (4) Ray Peat has spoken of Kropotkin, an anarcho-communist (Marx also described communism as "stateless" suggesting a similar vision), in a very positive way.

I would encourage all to keep an open mind. Political/social/economic matters can be very complex. And if you are going to quote someone like Orwell, I would suggest reading him...well, I would suggest that anyway. You get to know his thoughts best reading his essays, but my all time favorite book is Homage to Catalonia, which is his account of fighting in the Spanish Civil War.

 

[x-ray peat]

I'm not going to get involved in any in depth discussion for it against capitalism or communism, because I think most people reading this will have already made up their minds, but just want to make a few points about what has been written. (1) Orwell's quote was about totalitarianism, not communism. (2) The Soviet Union, People's Republic of China, etc., though calling themselves communists, never established a political system that could remotely be described as communism as understood by the theorists who developed the concept. They are sometimes described as "state communists" (an oxymoron) or "state capitalists". At certain times, they certainly would have met Orwell's description of totalitarian, but that can exist under any economic system. The Nazi and Fascist totalitarian systems were free(er) market versions. (3) Orwell frequently described himself as a socialist, though I don't think he ever called himself a communist. (4) Ray Peat has spoken of Kropotkin, an anarcho-communist (Marx also described communism as "stateless" suggesting a similar vision), in a very positive way.

I would encourage all to keep an open mind. Political/social/economic matters can be very complex. And if you are going to quote someone like Orwell, I would suggest reading him...well, I would suggest that anyway. You get to know his thoughts best reading his essays, but my all time favorite book is Homage to Catalonia, which is his account of fighting in the Spanish Civil War.

Are we talking about the same George Orwell? Homage to Catalonia is extremely critical of Communism. Yes, he did volunteer to fight on behalf of the Spanish Republic but he soon became disillusioned with the hypocrisy and brutality of the Spanish Communists who conducted a vicious purge against their own allies. Orwell had to flee for his life. He may have been a socialist but because of this experience he was a fervent anti-Communist and anti-Stalinist for the rest of his life.

As for 1984, it is precisely about communism. Don’t believe me?
“[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office” George Orwell

If you think Communism can exist without being totalitarian, think again. The reason that every single Communist state in history has been and will always be totalitarian is because a free people would never choose to live under its insane and hypocritical rules. What do you think the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is? It is totalitarianism plain and simple directly from the mind of Marx. However Marx lied, the Dictatorship does not just fade away and Communism does not just magically become "Stateless" once those nasty bourgeoisie are gone. No political power has ever just faded away into anarchy, or ever will. Marx knew this and so did Orwell hence the boot stomping on a human face forever.

“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.” George Orwell

As for Kropotkin, he was just one more of Lenin’s useful idiots. It was only after the Bolsheviks took power that he realized he had been used. The truth is that Anarchism and Anarcho Communism are are so irrational as political theories that they never have and never will be implemented. They only exist to keep people separated per the maxim of Divide and Rule.

So before you accuse someone of not having read a book they quote, you should make sure that not only have you read it, but that you actually understand it. In addition to re-reading your "all-time favorite book", Homage to Catalonia and 1984, I would highly suggest that you read Animal Farm. It too is not exactly pro-Communist, but then again you may actually think that it is.

 

[nikolabeacon]

I'm not going to get involved in any in depth discussion for it against capitalism or communism, because I think most people reading this will have already made up their minds, but just want to make a few points about what has been written. (1) Orwell's quote was about totalitarianism, not communism. (2) The Soviet Union, People's Republic of China, etc., though calling themselves communists, never established a political system that could remotely be described as communism as understood by the theorists who developed the concept. They are sometimes described as "state communists" (an oxymoron) or "state capitalists". At certain times, they certainly would have met Orwell's description of totalitarian, but that can exist under any economic system. The Nazi and Fascist totalitarian systems were free(er) market versions. (3) Orwell frequently described himself as a socialist, though I don't think he ever called himself a communist. (4) Ray Peat has spoken of Kropotkin, an anarcho-communist (Marx also described communism as "stateless" suggesting a similar vision), in a very positive way.

I would encourage all to keep an open mind. Political/social/economic matters can be very complex. And if you are going to quote someone like Orwell, I would suggest reading him...well, I would suggest that anyway. You get to know his thoughts best reading his essays, but my all time favorite book is Homage to Catalonia, which is his account of fighting in the Spanish Civil War.

Exactly. Communism never existed in history of human society by definition And ideas...it was all Fake ... Ray peat is Anarcho communist by definition or call it that whatever you want...so definitions are very problematic because it is very hard to establish a system based only on some empty definitions...its much more complex than just by some definitions witch will like ANY Fixed Definition confuse you And ENSLAVE you..I see a lot of people ENSLAVEd by "definitions by Ray peat" also...

Are we talking about the same George Orwell? Homage to Catalonia is extremely critical of Communism. Yes, he did volunteer to fight on behalf of the Spanish Republic but he soon became disillusioned with the hypocrisy and brutality of the Spanish Communists who conducted a vicious purge against their own allies. Orwell had to flee for his life. He may have been a socialist but because of this experience he was a fervent anti-Communist and anti-Stalinist for the rest of his life.

As for 1984, it is precisely about communism. Don’t believe me?
“[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office” George Orwell

If you think Communism can exist without being totalitarian, think again. The reason that every single Communist state in history has been and will always be totalitarian is because a free people would never choose to live under its insane and hypocritical rules. What do you think the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is? It is totalitarianism plain and simple directly from the mind of Marx. However Marx lied, the Dictatorship does not just fade away and Communism does not just magically become "Stateless" once those nasty bourgeoisie are gone. No political power has ever just faded away into anarchy, or ever will. Marx knew this and so did Orwell hence the boot stomping on a human face forever.

“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.” George Orwell

As for Kropotkin, he was just one more of Lenin’s useful idiots. It was only after the Bolsheviks took power that he realized he had been used. The truth is that Anarchism and Anarcho Communism are are so irrational as political theories that they never have and never will be implemented. They only exist to keep people separated per the maxim of Divide and Rule.

So before you accuse someone of not having read a book they quote, you should make sure that not only have you read it, but that you actually understand it. In addition to re-reading your "all-time favorite book", Homage to Catalonia and 1984, I would highly suggest that you read Animal Farm. It too is not exactly pro-Communist, but then again you may actually think that it is.

Its called bread and circuses... and has been a tool of the ruling elite no matter what economic system. Also, sports where much more important of a tool to communist countries than it ever was to the West. The west of course had shopping and better TV.

It is not bread And circuses...Olympic movement and Sport is much much more than that..You And many people dont even try to understand current destructive Religion of olympic movement and Sport....and I said if you really want to understand current situation based on new Destructive Religion which is called THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT...It is fascist in in nature and very destructive way of thinking based on omnipotence of technologys, technics and robotics and on science wich does not have humanistic , dialectical and hystorical viewpoint.........And i saw a lot of discussion on this forum about Ray peat political opinion and about capitalism....and I want to ASK everyone who reads this...to answer me what is basic word that explains univerzum, nature, human body, all plant and animal life, and environment and life itself ...and If you think of it and find word SYNERGY...it is the only word in our language that means behavior of whole systems unpredicted by the separately observed behaviors of any of the system's separate parts or any subassembly of the system's parts.Universe is synergetic .Life is synergetic. And what "political system or Definition" resembles it the best? The opposite of nature is impossible.

 

[x-ray peat]

Exactly. Communism never existed in history of human society by definition And ideas...it was all Fake ... Ray peat is Anarcho communist by definition or call it that whatever you want...so definitions are very problematic because it is very hard to establish a system based only on some empty definitions...its much more complex than just by some definitions witch will like ANY Fixed Definition confuse you And ENSLAVE you..I see a lot of people ENSLAVEd by "definitions by Ray peat" also...

There is a whole thread on people projecting their own ideologies and beliefs onto Ray. Just because he quoted Kropotkin as a philosopher does not make him an anarcho- communist. I am sure Kropotkin wrote on many subjects.

It is not bread And circuses...Olympic movement and Sport is much much more than that..You And many people dont even try to understand current destructive Religion of olympic movement and Sport....and I said if you really want to understand current situation based on new Destructive Religion which is called THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT...It is fascist in in nature and very destructive way of thinking based on omnipotence of technologys, technics and robotics and on science wich does not have humanistic , dialectical and hystorical viewpoint.........And i saw a lot of discussion on this forum about Ray peat political opinion and about capitalism....and I want to ASK everyone who reads this...to answer me what is basic word that explains univerzum, nature, human body, all plant and animal life, and environment and life itself ...and If you think of it and find word SYNERGY...it is the only word in our language that means behavior of whole systems unpredicted by the separately observed behaviors of any of the system's separate parts or any subassembly of the system's parts.Universe is synergetic .Life is synergetic. And what "political system or Definition" resembles it the best? The opposite of nature is impossible.

THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT? You really think that all of the problems of today can be traced to a 10 year old movie? In the words of Neo, Zeitgeist is just another mechanism of control. You probably won't see it but the same is true with your beliefs in synergy and nature. We are not a colony of ants or a hive of bees but possess the God given right to act as free individuals. Who do you think would control the human beehive? Who uses the beehive as one of their symbols?

 

[nikolabeacon]

There is a whole thread on people projecting their own ideologies and beliefs onto Ray. Just because he quoted Kropotkin as a philosopher does not make him an anarcho- communist. I am sure Kropotkin wrote on many subjects.


THE ZEITGEIST MOVEMENT? You really think that all of the problems of today can be traced to a 10 year old movie? In the words of Neo, Zeitgeist is just another mechanism of control. You probably won't see it but the same is true with your beliefs in synergy and nature. We are not a colony of ants or a hive of bees but possess the God given right to act free individuals. Who do you think would control the human beehive? Who uses the beehive as one of their symbols?

. Yes i am sure. It is based on omnipotence of technology and science which fragments everything and eventually all that fragmented knowledge will collapse. Same will happen If people who blindly folow all " ideas" of Ray Peat start to rely solely on medication and other magical powders without real life...And i see that this is happening...SYNERGY is not my belief...it is a FACT..But probably you are so detached From nature that you think that it is some kind of old naturalistic funny story.....who said that we are like ants or bees..funny....I said that we are in SYNERGY with Universe ...And that mean that we must cooperate with nature. And that story about free individuals...it is matter of you If you are free or not...
In the world of freedom the real value will be attributed to poetic expression, which will also imply the body-talk. In that sense, not language, but play becomes the supreme form of establishing human society. Instead of living the life of the chosen, as it is with Nietzsche, the acme of life will represent living life as free, creative people; instead of the aristocratic class as an organic community united by parasitism and by existential fear of the laborers, the supreme challenge will be the society as an organic community of free creative personalities; instead of the need to suppress repressive normative confinement and the repressive esthetic canons (by means of which the elitist class status is determined), Man's need for the other as a physical and spiritual being will dominate; instead of the child's subordination to repressive normative stereotypes, the child's education by means of living life as free creative personalities will become the basic pedagogical principle... It is an issue of superseding the "fragmentized" and of attaining the "synthetic" man who represents a unity of Apollonian and Dionysian, that will not represent a privilege of the "new nobility", as it is with Nietzsche, but the basic human right. The world is what Man carries inside himself and what he can establish together with other people. Authentic creativeness is "transformation" of the outer world into an experience of human intensity, happiness... Instead of the world of misfortune as a negative basis for play, which is, therefore, an expression of a hopeless attempt to escape from the society, the world of happy people will become the ground and inspiration for the development of a rich playing personality. Genuine play is not merely Man's supreme intellectual relation with the world; it does not only represent Man's self-knowledge and self-expression, but also his self-creation, and is, as such, the most comprehensive form of experiencing the world. No more will Man live in a world he refers to as something (im)posed and outer-human (alien). Instead, he will perceive the world as his own creation, in a word, as his manifested (and not "infested") humanness. This is not an issue of simulated totalizing of the world by means of simple subjectivism, as is the case with romanticism, but of totalizing the libertarian/creative activism of which the main "product" is a society as a community of free people. Playing becomes the supreme form of "appropriation" of the world by Man, which eventually represents the "appropriation" of himself with "no residue". Man will not attain "unity" with the world through labor, technology, play, art... – but will make the world: creation of the world will become Man's self-creation; "unity with the world" will become "unity" of Man with another human being. The development of Man as a universal free creative being and the enhancement of interpersonal relations will become the "measure" of development of the world. Life itself will become the supreme symbol of humanness.

 

[x-ray peat]

who said that we are like ants or bees..

you did

Ants like bees are like an examples of small universes. Word that that describe its the best is SYNERGY SYNERGY is the only word in our language that means behavior of whole systems unpredicted by the separately observed behaviors of any of the system's separate parts or any subassembly of the system's parts.... I am so happy i have a privilege that we have bees in family And that i was able to see And study and learn many things about their life And organizations which can be implemented in human society too.

like I said turning free men into a colony of ants or a beehive is a very old dream of the ruling classes.

As for your other Utopian dreams, those too were given to you by your beekeepers. Time to wake-up.

 

[nikolabeacon]

you did

like I said turning free men into a colony of ants or a beehive is a very old dream of the ruling classes.

As for your other Utopian dreams, those too were given to you by your beekeepers. Time to wake-up.

If you concluded From that , that I think that WE are LIKE bees ...and by quoting some adam weisshaup (and then deleting that), just one more court jester of capitalist philosophy for destroying every hope in someones confused mind...And Orwell also...and also your prevalent notion that you are so detached From nature and other people and free in your actions and life that you can' do whatever comes to your mind....then You showed me up totally ....

 

[x-ray peat]

If you concluded From that , that I think that WE are LIKE bees ...and by quoting some adam weisshaup (and then deleting that), just one more court jester of capitalist philosophy for destroying every hope in someones confused mind...And Orwell also...and also your prevalent notion that you are so detached From nature and other people and free in your actions and life that you can' do whatever comes to your mind....then You showed me up totally ....

I am not trying to show you up.I was merely pointing out that Communism/ the left also has its share of court jesters. I am also not saying that we should be detached from nature but that we need to be very suspicious of any philosophy that is given to us and that has a very old pedigree. Saying that we can learn a lot from the operation of bees that "can be implemented in human society" is one such philosophy . The fact that the majority of bees are called drones should tell you that this is not a positive framework for higher level conscious beings like us. Communism is the human equivalent of the hive.

 

[keith]

Are we talking about the same George Orwell? Homage to Catalonia is extremely critical of Communism. Yes, he did volunteer to fight on behalf of the Spanish Republic but he soon became disillusioned with the hypocrisy and brutality of the Spanish Communists who conducted a vicious purge against their own allies. Orwell had to flee for his life. He may have been a socialist but because of this experience he was a fervent anti-Communist and anti-Stalinist for the rest of his life.

As for 1984, it is precisely about communism. Don’t believe me?
“[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office” George Orwell

If you think Communism can exist without being totalitarian, think again. The reason that every single Communist state in history has been and will always be totalitarian is because a free people would never choose to live under its insane and hypocritical rules. What do you think the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is? It is totalitarianism plain and simple directly from the mind of Marx. However Marx lied, the Dictatorship does not just fade away and Communism does not just magically become "Stateless" once those nasty bourgeoisie are gone. No political power has ever just faded away into anarchy, or ever will. Marx knew this and so did Orwell hence the boot stomping on a human face forever.

“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.” George Orwell

As for Kropotkin, he was just one more of Lenin’s useful idiots. It was only after the Bolsheviks took power that he realized he had been used. The truth is that Anarchism and Anarcho Communism are are so irrational as political theories that they never have and never will be implemented. They only exist to keep people separated per the maxim of Divide and Rule.

So before you accuse someone of not having read a book they quote, you should make sure that not only have you read it, but that you actually understand it. In addition to re-reading your "all-time favorite book", Homage to Catalonia and 1984, I would highly suggest that you read Animal Farm. It too is not exactly pro-Communist, but then again you may actually think that it is.

"Communism" as used by Orwell in the quote above represents the totalitarian style communism of Stalin. I think you are missing, or perhaps unwilling to entertain the difference between that, and the communism envisioned by men like Kropotkin. I believe he was using the word communism as many call the U.S. a democracy, which it is or isn't, depending on which definition you use. Some insist it is a republic, which it certainly is, but if you look up the dictionary definition of a democracy, it typically will include republics with democratically elected governments.

In Homage to Catalonia, Orwell was critical of the Soviets, because they actively opposed the revolution. As he noted, the Soviets had taken the approach that Communism could only be achieved through the Leninist model where an elite vanguard would siege power and create a dictatorship that would create the conditions necessary for Communism, which would then develop when the conditions were right. If the Spanish were able to move directly into Communism, bypassing the dictatorship Lenin and Stalin insisted was a necessary part of the transition, it would destroy the mythology on which the Soviet dictatorship was based. That's a big difference from him being critical of the communists in Spain. He was a member of one of the most far left foreign brigades.

Anyway, I hope anyone interested will read Orwell and Kropotkin and as many other view points as they can, and make up their own minds. I don't want to convince you of anything. You seem like a smart guy, you just seem a little rigid in your view points. Maybe that's not the case, and I'm just reading that way. Apologies if I incorrectly suggested you hadn't read Orwell.

I always try to keep an open mind, and reconsider my opinions when presented with new information. Im not interested in a forum debate, so am exiting from this discussion. Hope I added something worthwhile.

By the way, the full Orwell quote is from a letter, and Orwell specifically noted that 1984 is not intended to attack a "collectivist economy", which supports the idea that his concern was with the totalitarian aspect of Soviet style communism, not the idea of communism itself, or at least that is how I read it:

"Dear Mr. Sheldon,

Many thanks for your letter of August 9th. I think your interpretation of the book's political tendency is very close to what I meant. It was based chiefly on communism because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office. What I most particularly did not intend was an attack on the British Labour Party, or on a collectivist economy as such. I have no doubt you do not need telling, but I emphasise this because I see that part of the American press has used the book as a sermon on what Socialism in England must lead to."

 

[x-ray peat]

"Communism" as used by Orwell in the quote above represents the totalitarian style communism of Stalin. I think you are missing, or perhaps unwilling to entertain the difference between that, and the communism envisioned by men like Kropotkin. I believe he was using the word communism as many call the U.S. a democracy, which it is or isn't, depending on which definition you use. Some insist it is a republic, which it certainly is, but if you look up the dictionary definition of a democracy, it typically will include republics with democratically elected governments.

In Homage to Catalonia, Orwell was critical of the Soviets, because they actively opposed the revolution. As he noted, the Soviets had taken the approach that Communism could only be achieved through the Leninist model where an elite vanguard would siege power and create a dictatorship that would create the conditions necessary for Communism, which would then develop when the conditions were right. If the Spanish were able to move directly into Communism, bypassing the dictatorship Lenin and Stalin insisted was a necessary part of the transition, it would destroy the mythology on which the Soviet dictatorship was based. That's a big difference from him being critical of the communists in Spain. He was a member of one of the most far left foreign brigades.

Anyway, I hope anyone interested will read Orwell and Kropotkin and as many other view points as they can, and make up their own minds. I don't want to convince you of anything. You seem like a smart guy, you just seem a little rigid in your view points. Maybe that's not the case, and I'm just reading that way. Apologies if I incorrectly suggested you hadn't read Orwell.

I always try to keep an open mind, and reconsider my opinions when presented with new information. Im not interested in a forum debate, so am exiting from this discussion. Hope I added something worthwhile.

By the way, the full Orwell quote is from a letter, and Orwell specifically noted that 1984 is not intended to attack a "collectivist economy", which supports the idea that his concern was with the totalitarian aspect of Soviet style communism, not the idea of communism itself, or at least that is how I read it:

"Dear Mr. Sheldon,

Many thanks for your letter of August 9th. I think your interpretation of the book's political tendency is very close to what I meant. It was based chiefly on communism because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office. What I most particularly did not intend was an attack on the British Labour Party, or on a collectivist economy as such. I have no doubt you do not need telling, but I emphasise this because I see that part of the American press has used the book as a sermon on what Socialism in England must lead to."

I appreciate the full quote from Orwell, but I still have to disagree with you on what he believed. He was a staunch democratic socialist and was definitely not a communist. A more collectivist economy is also part of the socialist doctrine.

I think it is you that may not be as open to new ideas as you may like to think. Orwell knew communism required totalitarianism and wanted no part of it. It was often said that he was trying to save socialism from communism. Again, it was Marx that developed the concept of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat i.e. totalitarianism. Neo-Marxists like to say that they would do it differently this time but sorry, human nature doesn't change. If it were possible, it would have been done so already.

 

[keith]

Let me guess you are also a white male that believes that white men being the cause of all the worlds problems, should be eliminated. The one thing I agree with in this thread is the term idiots as in useful idiots.

He is way too smart to fall for a bankrupt ideology that has never worked and never will.

If you think Communism can exist without being totalitarian, think again. The reason that every single Communist state in history has been and will always be totalitarian is because a free people would never choose to live under its insane and hypocritical rules.

As for Kropotkin, he was just one more of Lenin’s useful idiots.

The truth is that Anarchism and Anarcho Communism are are so irrational as political theories that they never have and never will be implemented.

You probably won't see it but the same is true with your beliefs in synergy and nature.

As for your other Utopian dreams, those too were given to you by your beekeepers. Time to wake-up.

but sorry, human nature doesn't change. If it were possible, it would have been done so already

The above quotes are the ones that suggested to me that you aren't very open minded or willing to consider other points of view.

I think it is you that may not be as open to new ideas as you may like to think

What is your reason for thinking this? Is it something I wrote, or are you judging me on what you are assuming to be my beliefs?