Tani says: Info Yes, GIVE TO MIM (don't care which number.
The Pavlovian school placed sociology on a firm biological foundation:
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY. Abiologism, in general, was one of the heresies in
the USSR-Stalin. I defined this as a quote before, generally speaking,
to try to formulate theories about any organism without taking into
account the organisms INNATE BIOLOGICAL NATURE and I will say, this
would INCLUDE VARIATIONS within the SPECIES of organism. As one may
guess, the Pavlovian school had to do with the HUMAN organism and
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY which is remarkably akin to the findings of the MODERN
neurologists such as Damasio and others, many others. I venture to
believe they GOT THIS information from the USSR since it's been coming
out strongly SINCE the fall of the USSR where these sciences ARE being
shared (eg, laser eye survery, a Soviet invention I think back in the
1950's!) The problem I clearly see with the so-called western or
boorjwah versions of definition on "what an organism is" is that they
are SKEWED in favor of whatever unconscious agenda they all have; they
use their new dogmas to JUSTIFY what they do or INVENT what they WANT
TO BE TRUE to bolster unconscious ego. EG, insects do not attack
plants in NATURAL environment where man has not disrupted things by
doing INSANE things: plants lure insects and even direct their
behavior! Plants, in fact do this quite a lot and with a lot of
things. It kinda puts a strange new light on what Neanderthin has to
say: can plants do this to HUMANS? Well, we are HOOKED on them,
ENSLAVED to their care and have been for 10,000 years. And to our
benefit? No on the contrary: to our destruction! But man would NEVER
imagine that something he doesn't even know about could DIRECT his
behavior to his own detriment: man always likes to feel he is in
CONTROL of things. It's HILARIOUSLY funny to see this kind of thinking
in people who don't even know they are being wagged around by their
own UNCONSCIOUS feelings! Even the HIERARCHIES they invent (which most
leftists go along with) are PURE pseudoscience as GOULD pointed out
with bacteria as his comparison.
The two kinds of science, known more as Boorjwah Science versus
Proletarian Science was not something that split in half in the USSR
or due to Stalin OR Lysenko or anyone else. It started during the
SECOND INTERNATIONALE (cf, J. D. Bernal, his EXCELLENT 4 volumes
packed with information). It was advanced by BOGDANOV which Lenin
trashed WITHOUT READING (and ADMITTED he didn't read!). It persisted
and manifest fully with Stalin/Lysenko/Prezent. The 2 trends shifted
into a war of nature versus nurture, genes versus environment tho this
IS what Lysenko was talking about all along, primarily.
The two hard line views as they exist RIGHT NOW are simply put as
follows: One states that genes are everything, the rest is not
important and that everything you are is due to genes. The second view
is that environment is everything and that seems to be more true since
environment existed PRIOR to DNA or genes and environment SHAPED this
DNA - it shaped it in the beginning billions of years ago, too.
ORGANIC life evolved out of INORGANIC THINGS - i.e., in the
ENVIRONMENT that was ancient earth.
But we DO have genes now. But WHAT EXACTLY is genetic and what is
familial or cultural (i.e., environmental)? It's not easy to tell. And
WHEN does something BECOME genetic and by that I mean INHERITED?
Lysenko explained it perfectly in his own words, tho he gets misquoted
all the time.
Africans have a lot of different cultures. So do Europeans and so do
Asians (including Turanians). Hold on - I just made 3 groups. These
are pseudo groups, but in our world they may as well be real, they are
POLITICALLY real (not even culturally real). But it is generally
agreed that almond eyed people with hooded eyes, cheekbones and all
that are some kind of Asian. True, lots of people NOW considered
"white" also have this, but are they white? And African people are
generally thought to have a general "look" also. What is it that, and
when is it that it, FIXES this so that parents of this or that type
give birth to kids who grow into a similar type? Best guess: diet.
That's part of environment: you eat what is grown in an environment.
You are what you eat! Lysenkoism elaborated on this METABOLISM factor
and this worked to CREATE variations in plants, variations that WERE
inherited, that is, FIXED in the genome. These general types of humans
existed as far back as 4000 BC as shown by pictures and descriptions.
So the fixing of this or that type had to have happened PRIOR to
written history. What did it? No one knows. Best guess: environment
AND selective breeding. We Turanians, by the way, a paleoarctics.
But what ELSE is bred into an organism aside from appearance? That's
another BIG issue that makes genetics go to war with
environmentalists.
Again, there is genotype and then there is what gets expressed due to
environmental factors in a phenotype. We identify "races" by
phenotype: appearance. But what ELSE is expressed as phenotype? Big
arguments about that.
PERHAPS: one might think that certain as-given genes exist and as
such, only a certain group of possible phenotypes CAN express based on
what is available TO express in the set of genes one has. Good theory,
but the Human Genome Project seems to squash that idea: unless we are
being lied to about THIS HERE subject: it wouldn't be the first time,
either. Liars on BOTH sides. The most SIMPLE things about us are
genetic. More complex factors are not: they are environmental
(incuding inutero).
Point of fact based on a few hundred years of political reality: IF
whites were to CONTINUE to try to "white flight" away from non-whites,
or more specifically "away from blacks and S. American non-whites"
specifically, if they CONTINUE to try to isolate themselves, or DO
isolate themselves -and if they CONTINUE to put mixed-breeds into the
"other" group and keep them OUT of their own group, then they ARE IN
FACT showing a tendency toward (or desire for) SPECIATION! IN FACT.
Birds migrate too, some never come back. Same with sea creatures, same
with ANYTHING in nature: it's HOW species that belong to the same
genus COME INTO BEING. They separate. Before you know it, you have two
NON-breeding (but able to breed still) variations and given enough
time, you end up with two species INCAPABLE of breeding at all. That's
just the facts. Orientals "yellow-flight" quicker than Europeans
"white flight" so - the same goes for them.
Information, more.
In 1950, Stalin USSR, the PAVLOV neurophysiology school of
"psychology" which was the ONLY authorized school of psychology since
it was BIOLOGICAL, was merged with the Lysenkoist ideas, it was
materialistic, dealing with the mind as a physical thing, like Damasio
does. And the Lysenkoism was aimed at ACTIVE or DIRECTED evolution.
Lysenko dealt with botanical things, but the THEORY which was called
Lysenkoism by its enemies applied to ALL of nature, including man, a
biological organism. It is beyond a doubt clear: SUFFERING, especially
STARVATION is what causes a FAST change which brings about 1st
variations, and 2nd SPECIATION as the variation adapts to the NEW
conditions it needs to SEEK OUT for life (as with volition) and ALSO
steers clear of the OLD conditions (as with volition). The organism
has to do BOTH things; SEEK OUT the NEW AND AVOID the OLD! This is
selection at first within an interbreeding population. Later it
becomes something else because there can BE NO interbreeding anymore.
Consider that at first, the protohominids and proto chimps COULD
breed. Now the hominids and chimps (no longer proto) CAN NOT.
If you want a clear view of just WHAT that Pavlov thing is without
relying on DAMASIO for the hard core neurology, read what I've said
along the lines of such matters as ENVIRONMENT YOU ARE IN (eg, forced
necessity for agrarian behavior) SHAPING the consciousness of each
member of and hence the WHOLE society of this or that people.
I see. The ToD doesn't get into industrial age. There wasn't any
industrial age back then. But had such societies been ALLOWED to
progress with knowledge, they'd have BECOME this and many ALMOST DID.
They didn't "discover" our kind of electricity back then, at least,
they didn't get to it yet. Always remember the word YET. I think that
someone doesn't realize the industrial age also has an AGRIAN base,
subsists on it. Ergo it is ALL ToD. It has a national boundary, it has
warriors (the military) and SO WHAT if it progresses to a common
market economy: that only means it got BIG ENOUGH to NEED TO DO such a
thing. Same for mass production.
After the death of Stalin, Soviet psychology moved closer to the
WESTERN ideas of psychology with Luria and others. As we know from
Damasio and the hard core proofs, this was a wrong move. It is true
that, AS FAR AS IS KNOWN, Pavlovians didn't have the ability to scan
brains, but they sure wrote things AS IF THEY DID have the ability to
do this: maybe they did. And it was a TOTALLY BIOLOGICALLY point of
view, a view SO biological that even Marx's "relation to means of
production and mode of production" was overided by it because: it is
BIOLOGICAL BEINGS with certain neurophysiology that discover how to
make mass production and then who carry it out along the lines they DO
carry it out on (in the west, sweat shops) and it is biological beings
who are RELATING to the means of production. The being comes BEFORE
the things the beings make. The only thing here PRIOR TO the beings
which affects the beings is ENVIRONMENT including METABOLISM. What
beings put INTO the environment, THEN becomes part of the environment
too (Marxian idea) but these are not NATURAL to the environment. The
beings PUT IT INTO the environment: WHY? WHY NEED so much so fast?
Capitalism evolves into something Marx never said. It doesn't just
become monopoly capitalism, imperialism, it becomes BRAINWASH
capitalism where "consumers" are CREATED that want or desire to have
"all this stuff." We call this the ophionic where the desire IS
ophionic: consumers are created Here: a person at work has a fine car,
it gets her from here to there without trouble. WHY does she want to
get, why is she so EFFUSIVE ABOUT "the NEW car" she wants, something
that will cost her over 15 thousand dollars (for which she is willing
to work TWO jobs and on the one I'm working with her on she puts in
for 56 hours (8 hours, 7 days a week)? She is willing to work ALL THAT
MUCH for this "new car" yet she has a car that runs fine and is almost
new. If I were to come along with CLARITY and say 'she is working on
HERSELF, trying to remake HERSELF' it would fly over heads. If I said
she has a belly chakra block that is being FED BY this busy-ness which
fills some emptiness for The New Fancy Car (i.e., the NEW HER) it
would fly over heads. But Pavlov MIGHT understand it if I used his
language and not occultish lingo jargon shortcut talk. It's all
WANNABE. Capitaism evolves into "WANNABE" society/culture! I think the
most evolved type in this capitalist society thus far is the "valley
girl" thing in California. PURE air-headism, exhibitionism and
obsession with THINGS like The New Dress, or The New Shoes.
I don't know one car from another, not make or model, none of that. A
car gets me from point a to point b. I don't give a shit what OOOOO
AAAAAH color it is. So long as I can reach the pedals and have no
trouble driving it due to size, I'm fine. It's purely utilitarian. WHY
do I still feel this way when I live here? I don't know? Wrong, I do.
A car is not something "other than a car" to me. It's JUST a car. It's
not connected to image or selfhood or ego or SEX drive as it is in the
klippoths that evolved here. In Brainwash Capitalism, the "consumer"
WANTS all this stuff, has to have "variety" in the stuff and yet it's
just a fucking car. The variety does not alleviate his utter BOREDOM
with himself. It's a necessary transport vehicle due to lack of PUBLIC
transport that EATS UP MONEY BIG TIME. It's FORCED on me to have one.
Take care of one, SPEND MONEY on one. But to others, they'll work
their lives away only to get this NEW vehicle and get all effusive
over the color and shape and whatnot. If the person GOT OFF she might
not care about cars anymore except as transport things.
I think Mim, like most others in the west, don't know the difference
between MENTAL sex and real physical sex. MENTAL sex is abnormal - and
SUBLIMATED mental sex leads to the creation of "the consumer" with
his/her EMPTY HOLE wanting more and more. And it's all wannabe. MENTAL
sex sublimates energies so that the people are having VICARIOUS sex
(polishing their cars EVERY DAY....) don't even KNOW when or if they
are horney physically at all. Eating disorders come next, the next
step up the ladder of preta-hood. Neurologially they are dissociated
people incapable of last stage logic and incapalbe of knowing what
they feel for real. They are narcissistic which is like an ultimate
form of solopcism.
We can talk of means of production (of the car) and ownership and all
that, and talk about the oil industry but WHY are there so many KINDS
of cars, styles, colors and all that and WHY do people (the beings in
this society) WANT all this clutter? There wouldn't BE so many KINDS
if there were NOT comsumers that WANTED or could be LURED into buying.
Why? It's all psycho-sexual and fucked up. A car is NOT JUST a
transport vehicle forced on anyone. For them, it's MORE. Brainwash
capitalism. LaVey does indeed get into this subject in his own way. IF
we have to have a car due to lack of public transport, why not just
make "A CAR" cheap, easy to use, easy to fix and the SAME, REAL easy
to get parts, REAL easy to fix! Oh, it would be monotanous? That
wouldn't bother a person if they were chakra normal at all. They might
not even NOTICE something as trivial as the COLOR of the car or the
sameness of it - it wouldn't matter at all, it's a THING, like a
toaster or refrigerator. Don't give me the shit about how capitalists
gain by making MANY: someone has to DESIRE IT FIRST! If no one BUYS
it, capitalists go broke.
But anyway, thought I'd mention that ONLY the PAVLOV school, which is
very similar to Damasio and/or Skinner (who was himself a Pavlovian
and got HIS ideas from Pavlov's research) was approved by Stalin who
used logic to decide this. And what we in the Cos gang have been
PRIMARILY talking about (in the Tos flame wars) regarding klippoths
and braindamage HAS BEEN purely Pavlovian in a way. Lysenkoism only
comes in when I bring up the ENVIROMENT which includes, important,
METABOLISM. and we know agriculture and NeanderThin's writings have
EVERYTHING to do with METABOLISM.
I do not think Mim understands what they are reading, IF they are even
able to read (get hold of) any of it, IF they read the Pavlov and/or
Lysenko stuff. It's DEEP - it's so fucking deep that the ONLY thing as
deep as it are the dark doctrines which agree with it. It's NO wonder
that I wonder IF these Soviets HAD these doctrines because the people
who always had them are IN those 11 time zones. Pavlov might have been
what we are calling a GS. PREZENT WAS for sure, he was the man who
helped make Lysenko's practical methods into a doctrine we are calling
Lysenko-ism, helped or urged Lysenko to write it all down AS a
cohesive theory. And I can honestly say about BOTH his critics and his
proponents: they are NOT QUITE understanding what he said! It is most
definitely NOT Lamarckian. It would only be natural for such people to
incorporate what they KNOW about nature into their own sciences.
Karl Popper wrote that the only real challenge to Darwinism, which is
passive (random mutations, etc) evolutionary biology (i.e., Darwinism
doesn't deal with social relations or people PUTTING things into the
environment unless it turns into Social Darwinism which has nothing to
do with Socialism) is ACTIVE Darwinism and that states that animals
and plants ALSO SEEK (an active urge) the conditions of life in which
to live, often for reasons OTHER than just pure necessity! Man sure
proves this point well enough (not just selection of mates, tho that
is ALSO quite important).
Popper said this is the PRIME force in evolution and it can be seen
visibly especially with animals. They SEEK the conditions FOR their
life and yes, perhaps they HAVE TO - but then again, perhaps they
don't have to. Popper said this theory was never developed. Wrong:
it's LYSENKOISM! Verbatum! What HIDES this fact are BOTH the enemies
and friends of Lysenko, those who hate him and mock it out as
Larmarckian and those who ARE Lamarckians and like him due to reading
what his ENEMIES say of him! Lysenko himself called his theory
"CREATIVE SOCIALIST Darwinism." Creative? That's ACTIVE Darwinism.
Sure, IT COULD BE or TURN INTO Social Darwinism IF the organisms
(humans) live in a capitalist type system. Sure it can. WHAT ELSE
would it turn into? Well, it would turn into super exploitation and
eventually RESULT IN some exploited group or groups banding together
demanding Socialist reforms (duh...). Depending on HOW they demand the
reforms (1. striking and/or pressuring the imperialist state or 2.
demanding it at gunpoint by taking over the imperialist state and
remaking it...), would determine what RESULTS happen in the society.
Striking and/or pressuring the state for compromises results in the
creation of a labor aristocracy and boorjwazi. Smashing it and taking
it over could result in anything - in the USSR it resulted in
Communism.
Another confusion is the way the historians, pro AND con tend to paint
a picture where the discovery of the DNA helix is supposed to be
something that demolished Lysenko's theories. Not so. Not the case at
all. Lysenko said and WROTE that he never denied that genes EXISTED.
And in his book (the one some of the gang saw) he even described a
coil-like structure BEFORE Watson and Crick said this. But the fact
that DNA or GENES exist is NOT the point at all and it never was
Lysenko's point. It's that when DNA was discovered it just seemed to
open a door to the SAME PEOPLE who had the SAME THEORIES (which the
Roses show progressively as going from religious hierarchies to
pseudo- biological ones) and who used these SAME THEORIES armed with
"see, there IS DNA" to bolster up their pseudo-science. The biggest
pseudo was the fraud done by Burt with his non-existent twins!
I can use their same logic. An annelid WORM has 50% identical DNA to a
human. Does this mean that the worm is 50% different from a human in
BEHAVIOR and/or THINKING too? Sound funny? (Hey, worm brain...) Would
anyone think of comparing the IQ of worm (if they could even test it)
to a human? This genetic thing has BECOME an IQ issue and a behavioral
issue. Yet it is NOT genes that determine nit-picky behavior at all -
genes determine pretty much that we behave as MAMMALS and PRIMATES,
sexually dimorphic in mating. It is stimulus, upbringing, brain
development within the first 7 years and uterine health and societal
norms within a culture that determine how a human being will react to
any given stimulus. HERE then, is how Pavlov and Lysenko are merged.
They still talk about Lysenkoism, especially in the right wing (not
Nazi) laisses faire type societies, such as the Birch Society. They
talk about Lysenkoism being alive and well. THEY ARE AT LEAST RIGHT
about it and they also POINT TO THE CORRECT social programs to call
Lysenkoist. But they say what the enemies of Lysenko say and put
nonsense into Lysenko's mouth. At least the gang SAW some of what
Lysenko wrote, a whole book. Phil will expose ALL of this in his
paper, or book. In the argument of genes versus environment one MUST
remember what the Nazis did with their genetic views. In fact they
advocated something that WOULD have lead to DYSGENICS but they didn't
know it. The Soviets advocated something that would definitely,
PROVABLY lead to EUGENICS (means GOOD breeding, HEALTHY offspring).
In a society that is homogenous (what Nazis wanted) you eventually end
up with LESS heterozygosity. All I need to prove MY point is point to
the one group of people out there DESPERATE to adopt children because
so many of them can't have them: WHITES.
On another subject:
Mim now says, contrary to the specific thing they wrote me, that there
are millions of Maoists out there. I didn't say anything about that. I
said MIM said they were too small to carry out some of the schemes I
advocated (which is something a terrorist might do, or a spy). I would
imagine that lots of Maoists OUT THERE are in no POSITION to do it.
From what I hear about Mim's members, they ARE in positions, or could
easily GET INTO such positions.
Back to main subject, and it's important to grasp this because this IS
creeping into the COS and Vad's Social Darwinism article is an
excellent counter to it all: No one denies genes exist, Lysenko never
said this tho his enemies claim he did say it! Reminds me of how
Aquino and the Tossers kept repeatedly claiming LaVey said this or
that despite LaVey's own written words! It's IDENTICAL to it. What
Lysenko said was deep, heavy, not known by ANYONE till the 1990's
(which will make it hard for Phil to explain HOW Lysenko knew it:
intuition?). The anti-genetic view is pretty much spelled out by Gould
and even by Wolpoff and the Roses who BOTH spell out the genetic view:
the Roses do it best in "The IQ Racket" (copy given to Gilmore). The
genetic view doesn't even have anything to do with GENES! It's like
RELIGION. They replaced the soul with the DNA is all they did. The
flesh is still viewed as non-immortal!, and irrelevant! The
environmentalist view is the CARNAL view: that makes it satanic. LaVey
is ALWAYS getting into the cultural things the herd react to or what
loners are NOT reacting to, LaVey taked a lot about how the cons dupe
the rubes. That's PURE environmentalist thinking! LaVey talked HEAPS
about how people are made to think they are 'supposed to like this or
that, supposed to do this or that' and he talked about HOW they are
duped into BEHAVING in predictable ways. That's PURE PAVLOV and
environmentalist view. It's NOT genetic. A person is not genetically
programmed to like this or that car. But a baby IS genetically
programmed to prefer BEEF over other meat we eat here in the west and
to prefer ANY MEAT over any vegetable!
The enviromentalist proponents do not deny genes exist, but they have
a much more CORRECT PERSPECTIVE on what genes DO and/or do not do. The
most SIMPLE the phenomena, eg, "how tissue repairs itself" "how the
eye focuses" is genetic, so is blood type. But even the rate of heart
beat differing between individuals is PURELY ENVIRONMENTAL. The most
SIMPLE of things about humans turn out to be genetic. But the minute
you get into more complex things, even how one sees perspective, it
becomes environmental. The genetic proponents want to make EVERYTHING
genetic and disregard the BODILY development as the body is a living
organism INSIDE OF an environment. Even fertility is not purely
genetic, DIET can wreck it. Even RATE OF how we heal is not genetic.
HOW we heal is, but the rate of how fast or slow is environmental.
Meat eaters heal FASTER.
Here is one: how genetic is musical ability? Well, it's definitely
physiological and dependent on how hairs on the inner ear are grown.
But they develop in the uterus and continue to develop with the brain
after birth. You can't make a tone-deaf person hear harmonically and
many KIDS seem to be tone-deaf - so this MUST BE something that
develops inside the uterus. PERHAPS due to expousre inutero - TO
MUSIC. No one knows. We can't experiment on humans like this, as
Lewontin points out when HE talks about twins.
By the way, another subject and I need to clear it up because DUALISTS
CANT FUCKING READ.
I know that the NEP was a necessary thing because of WHAT HAPPENED in
a war torn place, and people that HAD market experience (such as the
kulaks and the whole boorjwazi and others from the past Czarist
regime) had to be put in charge to get the economy going again. NOT MY
POINT. I'm not dualizing this. It STILL DOES NOT negate the FACT, COLD
FACT, that the NEP was the CORE AND ROOT of the later Bukharin
problems involving Yadoga and 10's of thousands of men in an OGPU that
was once the GPU that was once a MULTI PARTY CHEKA and NOT a purely
Bolshevik organazation (AS WAS the NKVD, BACK IN 1917 all the while
that multi-party organization existed which, from what I can gather,
NO ONE KNEW BEFORE I dug this IMPORTANT info out. OK?) The fact does
NOT negate the FACT that NEP had to be done, at least for awhile. But
had someone KNOWN MORE ABOUT the inner workings (not just outer, I
mean inner, i.e., klippothic consumerism/greed) of 'ANY profit motive'
system, LESS would have suffered and more importantly, LESS would have
been WRECKED by people wrecking shit in order to RAISE PRICES by
making things scarce (THRU WRECKING or: WITHHOLDING THINGS....hmm hmm
hmm I believe that's called extortion?). DUH. The one FACT is a fact,
the other fact I throw at Mim is ALSO a fact. BOTH facts exist.
....And without BIRTH, no one would ever die either, tho no one thinks
"hey, death is GREAT" nor does anyone normally look forward to GROWING
OLD AND DYING; yet in LIVING one is DOing exactly that!... Of course,
the SAME war ravaged conditions existed AFTER WWII when these GUGB/KGB
Bukharanites with Krushchev and his clique got their claws in and then
STAYED in.
STOP DUALIZING. There is just NO communication with dualists. I can
CRITICIZE my actions logically, eg. It DOES NOT negate the fact that I
personally might not give a fuck about the criticism or care about
changing ONE THING I did, say on a job, or in a fight I had when I
"went too far" (whatever the fuck THAT is supposed to mean - too far
by WHOSE JUDGEMENT?...). I can criticize the system, but I have to
live IN it just the same. I can say I did an objectively awful thing.
But did I FEEL awful about it? FUCK NO. NOT AT ALL. I didn't feel
anything about it -I might even have felt GOOD about the RESULTS of
that action. But it doesn't change the FACT that it might have been
awful. I don't have a CONFICT with my own feelings, which means that I
can easily use LOGIC to analyze some action, no matter if I did it or
someone else did it, and say objectively if this is "awful within this
given society and it's cultural norms" or not. To western dualists
like Vad this is "making an excuse" or doing the "xtoid justification
shit" which I am NOT DOing or WILLing or even remotely feeling; I
can't even RELATE to it. I may as well BE an alien to HIM. People IN
PERSON know this about me: NO EGO, there is just NO EGO. Another way
of saying it is that I don't have a CONSCIENCE. I wasn't born with
one, nor was I born with an EGO. These stupid clutterances never
developed in me. Nor do they develop in a cat or wolf. There are
certain things a NORMAL animal WILL NOT do - I fear that NONE of you
know the differnce - I KNOW you don't. You are all FILLED, CLUTTERED,
with emotional glued up SHIT, conficts, inner emotional bullshit,
guilts, escapist desires. I don't have ANY of that. NEVER DID.
Back to Bukharin and that:
Bukharin and the WRECKAGE, the whole Purge trial, none of it would
have happened IF NEP DID NOT HAPPEN. But would the society have been
able to DO ANYTHING if they did NOT do the NEP? No one knows. It was
all in chaos. SOMEONE with organizing ability with economy had to take
charge and the ONLY people there that knew this stuff were
CAPITALISTS. Marx never gave anyone a step by step rule book or recipe
on HOW TO DO economy or how to FIX economy after a war in a NON-profit
motive, incentive manner. What aren't you seeing? That STATE
CAPITALISM almost got into the system and that this is what the
Bukharin business was all about? And that state capitalism DID get
into business because this time around, Krushchev KNEW to get the army
on his side and get the core of those Bukharainite GPU men on his side
and, a new move: at the same time, GET RID of the NKVD? He KNEW
because it was the SECOND REPLAY.
POINT OF PAIN for Comrades: NO ONE will be able to REALLY figure out
what I figured out with JUST HOW Krushchev took over unless they LOOK
at what I dug out for them on this, with the
Checka/GPU/OGPU/Yadoga-Bukharin and then Trotsky (some Trotskyites,
not Trotsky in person) connection and yes, it is PAINTUL for some
Comrades to admit that the core/root of it started with NEP. I have no
problem seeing this clearly - and it is all TOO clear to see - you'd
have to make yourself deliberately BLIND to NOT see it. Krushchev made
two SIMPLE, LOGICAL moves:
1. put the old NEP MEN and their allies in power in the KGB and and
army
2. destroyed the NKVD which had ALWAYS BEEN a purely BOLSHEVIK
organization and PRO-collectivization and which was THE organ
patrolling ALL economic sectors!
THERE IT IS. It's all a matter of EGO with these Comrades to put some
criticizm on the Great Lenin. Don't bother me a bit. He's HUMAN, not a
god. He had no other choice than to do NEP. MAYBE. We'll never know.
The smartest economists of the time and in the world were right there
during that time and they opted for the NEP. I can TRUST (but not
KNOW) that they made the right choice for the TIME. Nothing anyone
else advocates (including what MIM _WRONGLY_ thinks I advocate merely
because I POINT TO THE NEP as the core of the problems) makes any kind
of "do-able" sense to me. The peasants of the time were not
revolutionalized or educated, they saw Lenin and then Stalin as a Czar
or something similar, all they knew was SERFDOM to some kulak and/or
how to MIMIC the boyar or kulak. They didn't "know" cooperative action
at the time so I don't see HOW they could have done it and capitalist
kulaks wouldn't KNOW HOW to do it either but at least they DID KNOW
how to quickly fix up the economic MESS that existed there. But: It
was no longer the right choice to CONTINUE IT later on and Stalin
didn't continue it and, BY THEN, TIMING, the peasants WERE
revoutionized/educated. But Krushchev, when he brought it back after
ANOTHER post war period of economic chaos, and then finagled it
permanently into the system, the whole place turned slowly to shit and
now, well -it's pure shit now.
I'm not the one who DUALIZED it when I criticized the NEP. ALL OF YOU
who flamed me for saying it dualized it. You know, two opposing things
can often be BOTH RIGHT. Just because I point to the NEP and the rest
doesn't mean that Lenin should NOT have done it or that he COULD have
done something else, tho it's a good idea to THINK IT OUT: MAYBE HE
COULD have done something else. Lenin himself, of boorjwah background,
DID NOT KNOW what collectivization was! I mean KNOW, in the flesh
KNOW. He was never even POOR! OK, he could have gone all the way with
Dzerzhinsky and REALLY PURGED OUT the Checka. It still doesn't negate
the possibility, the potential, for state capitalism and profiteering
to come BACK after WWII and the economic chaos.
Alls you need to do is change the character of the people and that
easily happens when there is NEED. Alls you need to have to set
brother against brother when they used to be good friends and fine
siblings is to create NEED and then FAVOR one over the other. Greed
and jealousy are then MANIFEST where there was NONE of that before.
The Civil War was the first stage that set this up with the NEPmen.
Then Stalin fixed it. The second stage was WWII and the same NEPmen
with MORE KNOWLEDGE about how to profiteer and exploit and NOT GET
CAUGHT. You know, eventually the rat figures out that left door gives
him a shock and right door gives him food. It quickly learns to avoid
the shock. But NO ONE wants to ferret this out, meanwhile the NEO NEO
revisionists want to cite Stalin's worst crime as the Bukharin shit.
The ONLY way to expose this is to EXPOST WHAT NEP BECAME, the GPU, the
OGPU, GUGB and KGB later. In order to do that, you HAVE to tell what I
told on Lenin and STOP taking it as some kind of negation. Lenin had
NO CHOICE as deduced from the best economic minds that existed in the
world. Stalin also had NO CHOICE other than to pact with Hitler
either. NO CHOICE. It's not like Lenin OR Stalin were the ONLY players
in this drama. But Lenin DID DO things, so did Stalin and that CAN BE
looked at IN ISOLATION as the "Deed Itself" apart from extenuating
things (deconstruction, I do this a LOT, Mim don't get it). IF you
want to figure out HOW Krushchev did it, you have to KNOW ALL ABOUT
BUKHARIN and THOUSANDS OF OTHERS and just WHO and WHAT they were, what
positions they were in. You have to know WHAT IT WAS Bukharin was
against (collectivization) and what he was for (continuance of NEP)
and that leads back to Lenin. You have to know what I dug out about
the ORGANS of security, INTERNAL security! Dzerzhinsky and Stalin
together. Bukharin and Yagoda together. Beria and Stalin AGAINST the
new profiteering APARATCHIK that welled up, predictably, AFTER WWII or
even DURING. Krushchev and Ryumin together inventing plots and
deceiving Stalin who was OLD by this time and who, IN FACT, tried to
resign a few times! This is IN the archives. Malenkov and Beria after
Stalin's death, against Krushchev's KGB and GRU alliance, the SAME
EXACT SHIT that was purged during the Bukharin trial which INCLUDED
those Army Generals. Army, OGPU formers and Yagoda and Bukharin. Army,
OGPU/GUGB/KGB and Ryumin and Krushchev. Same PLAY - different channel!
SOME new players. The Old players got murdered or cast down and out.
(Yes Dear, sorry to inform you that Lenin also laid farts and when he
was a tiny baby he also pissed and shit all over himself. Lenin was
also born from a woman's womb all slimy and wet and gooey and that he
got born because his mother got laid, and he cried just like a baby. I
realize that these details don't apply to JEEESUSSSS who never did
such things.......uh huh....point made.) What's this? the first
communist? Say what? WHO? I might could make a case for Buddha being
one - don't know much about him.
