Divine works


eng deu рус


I am a leftist anti-communist:

I am an anti-communist - internal - within the left movement.
I have nothing to do with real anti-communists like Churchill, McCarthy,
Anti-communism has been an element of movements which hold many different political positions, including conservatism, fascism, liberalism, nationalism, social democracy, anarchism, libertarianism and leftism. ( https :// en . wikipedia . org / wiki / Anti - communism )
- in this list, only fascism is real anti-communism.
I am an anti-communist - in a narrow sense - I am an opponent of Soviet communism.
At the level of declarations of good intentions, I have a positive attitude towards communism.

I am an anti-communist because the communists in the USSR did not begin to look in practice for the natural socio-economic niche of communism, but went the way of violence, preferred to hold on "with bayonets", and used the correct of their theoretical ideas only for propaganda.
The communists have already lost - when they first used mass violence.
I am not so much an anti-communist as an anti-KGB- st , an anti-terrorist.     .
- I am against planting anything with the help of terror.
Terror corrupts. Terror destroyed communism itself.

But I am an anti-communist not even because communism in the USSR was accompanied by terror, not because there were no freedoms and democracy in the USSR. - In the late USSR, repressions were no more than average for authoritarian "capitalist" countries. People did not particularly need freedoms and democracy.

More important than life today:

Today, for a new problem - the survival of mankind - all this is secondary. -
I am an anti-communist only because the technologies of propaganda and manipulation developed in the USSR, the USSR was actually supported by them, by the KGB. That is, it was a system that anticipated, brought closer an extremely dangerous future.

I am an anti-communist, because the true signs of communism belong more to the political right wing . ( from see : Left-Right.docx )
For the supposedly ultra-left communists themselves, the biggest enemies were the left - the Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Social Democrats, the anarchists, and not the right. The ultra-right, the fascists were closer to the communists than the anarchists, and it was not a tactical alliance, but an essential one.
Among the anarcho-communists there are those who consider themselves a communist, but reject the power, the state.
Soviet communists became anti-communists - the first.

The communists turned to the right, instead of going to the left, towards true freedom and democracy.
True, the ideologists of communism - Lenin, Trotsky were wrong - in good faith. Although their mistake cost humanity almost 200 million dead.

Communists are the same capitalists:

Communists are the same capitalists who use the "proletariat" to eliminate competitors - independent business executives. - Similar to the use of "zombie" oligarchs -Putin - against other oligarchs.
If the communists planned to give power to the proletariat, then they would develop democracy, not dictatorship, and they themselves would be democrats.

Impartiality:

The "communists" tritely fought for power, using and distorting communism - only as a means of struggle.
However, despite the fact that communism allowed all this, it must be treated - objectively. - And the idea of communism cannot be called "misanthropic", like Nazism.
The founders of communism were driven by desires - justice, freedom, equality and brotherhood, and even humanism - happiness for all people.
Yes, theoretical errors led to repressions, among other things.
But, it is more correct to judge all the same - according to good intentions.
After pornocracy and centuries of inquisition, the symbols of Christianity are not prohibited.
Lenin, of course, is far from being the Christ, and yet it is correct to separate the personalities of the figures from the theory.

2 components of communism:

It is necessary to distinguish, separate 2 components of communism:
1. Dictatorship, state-monopoly, which gave power to the KGB and the FSB, and
2. Ideological.
Initially, the ideas of communism were based on the ideas of justice and equality.
However, the analysis of the theorists of communism, looking for the causes of justice and ways to eliminate it, remained rather superficial and aimed not at positive construction, but at the denial of "capitalism", and the denial in its entirety, along with "bourgeois democracy".
The power of the KGB was given - due to the lack of positive theoretical construction, as a forced support of an artificial ill-conceived system.
State monopolism began with monopoly - theoretical, with the monopoly first of Leninism, and then of Stalinism.

The basis of communism is not "progressive" social relations, but propaganda:

The ideology of communism really began with good intentions.
The Communists, when they were in opposition, used propaganda sincerely enough and in the same way as all other parties.
However, the "communists " - the bosses who seized and monopolized power in Russia, began to use propaganda - as a means of maintaining their power.
Propaganda immediately became demagogy (deliberate misrepresentation) and hypocrisy.

"Clean" tool:

Propaganda exists as long as there is a person.
However, the "communists " - the bosses made propaganda - the main means of obtaining, retaining power, made it a "pure" tool in the sense that ideology lost its main property - to be an expression of views and opinions, and turned into a "pure" tool for achieving some goals.
Precisely as a "pure" tool, propaganda is the biggest threat to the existence of mankind.
And it was in Russia that propaganda developed as a "pure" tool.

It's not about communism, it's about fanaticism:

Communism is guilty of allowing fanaticism and lawlessness.

The theory of the "dictatorship of the proletariat":

Guilty, more precisely, is the theory of the "dictatorship of the proletariat", which gave rise to fanaticism and lawlessness.
Terror did not rest on the rulers of the USSR, the people themselves were terrorists.
- A large part of the people in the 1920s were fanatics.
The largest part of the people agreed with fanaticism.
Yes, the political ignorance of the people, their misunderstanding of the possibilities of democratic mechanisms was to blame. The culprit was tsarism, which made communism popular. But this is about communism.

We say "Party", we mean "KGB",
We say "KGB", we mean "Party".

The "dictatorship of the proletariat" led to the dictatorship of the KGB.

The theory of "democratic centralism":

Also guilty is the theory of "Democratic centralism", which is not democratic at all.
"Theoretically", in 1917, the communists could follow the path of a real competitive people's democracy, create a "Homogeneous socialist government . "
Even the preservation of legal competition within the CPSU would have made it possible to avoid most of the excesses that sent communism to the dustbin of history.
"Democratic" centralism gave birth to a "class" of parasites-cynics-hypocrites-traitors, which turned out to be worse than "capitalists".
"Democratic" centralism gave rise to cynical monsters like Yeltsin.

Centralism -absolutism based on ideology gave birth to Putinism.
Centralism has created a natural selection of careerism through deceit and cynicism.

In 1988, I had a dialogue with a nomenclature worker of the CPSU:
- "Democratic centralism" remove.
- It's our business.
- Then we will have to remove the 6th article of the Constitution ["On the leading role of the CPSU"].

Theory of "National Property":

The strategy of overcoming the monopolism of the "capitalists" with the help of the absolute monopoly of the state is absurd.
Economic monopoly ruined the economy of the USSR, political monopoly gave rise to monsters.
The Communists did not want to work out an "Economic Theory of Socialism", although this was not only the fault, but also the misfortune of communism.
The main anti-communists were the "communists" themselves, since they only discredited the ideas of communism.

"Public" property was not public property because it was not democratically managed.
"Collective farms" were not collective farms.

Example: Dispossession :

The property of the "kulaks", for example, in the "Steppe" was not isolated.
There was a division of responsibility and functions - within the crowded clans. The wealth of the family differed from each other - not much. There were almost no owners separate from the clans.
Property was attributed to the heads of clans - artificially.
Property was not redistributed, but confiscated in favor of the "state".
The purpose of the confiscation was not the equalization of welfare, but political suppression - the elimination of the economic basis for the independence of people.

Useful ideas of communism:

Self-government, absence of politicians:

Combination of free social work with labor activity.
- With a developed specific IT , " cook -management" can really be more effective for cooks than their "professional" enemies, managers.
True, the idea of self-government is optimally supplemented by the idea of the institution of "Servants of the People" - professionals paid only by P 2 P , directly by citizens.

Police instead of police

- Developing this idea with alternative science (CSS) can be very effective.
This idea can be effective also in view of the numerous shortcomings of the existing institution of the police - numerous murders of citizens by the police and other delinquent actions by "law enforcement officers".

Planned Economy:

See: Planned Economy and AI.docx

Pros of Communism:

In communism, there were also positive cultural phenomena, such as camaraderie, altruism, ideology, enthusiasm.

Partnership:

True, this phenomenon was based on - survival and opposition.
At the same time, selfishness grew.

Apology of the USSR:

Modern critics of the USSR usually exaggerate the suffering of people in the USSR. - Yes, there was a shortage of goods, but people adapted and not only did not starve, but also had prosperity at the level of poor "democratic" countries. But there was social security, and there was no such economic polarization as in these countries.
The fact that economic growth stopped in the USSR and there was an inefficient economic system did not matter. Ethnic groups and national republics were not oppressed in the USSR.

The moral character of the communists:

The USSR was better than the USA, if only because the Soviet people were better than the Americans.
Yes, this phrase is very vague.
This means that, if we do not take into account the cause of ideology (propaganda) and the hypocrisy of the "leaders", the moral character of the average Russian in the 1950s was better than that of an American.
- The educational impact of the church on American youth in the 1950s fell sharply.
American youth were left to their own devices. What ideas drove her? - Selfish. - Non-serious musical perversions, drugs.
At the same time, most of the Soviet youth really wanted to build communism, and it was not out of fear that they behaved as befits the builders of a brighter future.
There were ideological humanist fighters or environmental activists in the USA - an order of magnitude less.

In a communist society, a person was devalued. In it, man was a means of building a communist society.
However, on the 2nd side, communism fosters altruism.
A "humane society" educates egoists.
Senseless American old people - fans of only primitive epicureanism, rap and crack - are disgusting.

Careerists, hypocrites and traitors had a high percentage only among - "nomenklatura workers".
The moral character of ordinary communists - those who were not eager to " monetize " their position, did not participate in the "natural selection" of power - was very high.
Ordinary communists

Yes, the CPSU was divided:
- into those who ensured its effective functioning - with the help of lies and propaganda, "at any cost", and
- fooled executors.
Yes, the CPSU was actually divided into those who wanted to have rights, and those who had only duties and were responsible.
Yes, the perpetrators were fanatics who " approved " the crimes of the top.
But they approved of them - conscientiously mistaken, without actually having personal benefits from this.

The moral character of ordinary communists was not inferior to that of fanatics - Christians and Islamists.
After the death of Stalin, in 1956, the top of the CPSU decided that "binding with blood" ordinary communists did not pay off - it was the top itself that bore the greatest victims.
After 1956, unlike the Nazis and Islamists, the rank-and-file communists did not personally commit crimes.
The only exception was the KGB.
But by that time, the KGB had turned into a closed terrorist corporation outside the party, whose services the top of the CPSU used - only against real dissidents, and not for an internal struggle for power.

"Changed the awl for soap":

A worker in the Russian Federation began to live no better than he lived in the USSR .
On the 1st side, Japanese toys became available to him,
On the 2nd side, the quality of life has not reached the European level, and has not increased relative to the level of the USSR.
The sacrifices of the 1990s were in vain.

Not the GKChP, but Yeltsin:

Yeltsin turned out to be option " B " for the rulers of the USSR.
The Russians were seduced by the promise of "a pie in the sky instead of a tit in the hand" - proven in the Gorbachev case.
As a result, Yeltsin deceived the Russians, giving them a " dashing 90s" and discrediting democracy.

"We wanted the best, but it turned out as always":

The KGB deceived the "democrats" - as always - having failed to suppress the "trial" with the help of the State Emergency Committee - the KGB led it with the help of the Trojan-Yeltsin, and compromised "democracy".
Yeltsin was a democrat only in words, but in fact he retained the former state. management and political monopoly, only destroying the system of the State Planning Commission and transferring state property to the oligarchs.
After all, the reason that the quality of life has not reached European standards is that democracy has not been built - the authorities have remained independent of the people, all problems are still solved through Moscow, there is still no self-government at all levels.
The "democrats" hoped to build a democracy, but the KGB shot down the parliament.
It was necessary to support Gorbachev, and not the political fraudster Yeltsin then. At the very least, Gorbachev acted honestly and openly and entered into dialogue. (By the way, we should bring this to Gorbachev, too, while he is alive).

In an attempt to bring the legal system in line with propaganda - the actual owners of the property = the main "revolutionaries" organized a counter-revolution.
Fortunately, the "hegemon" was intimidated, atomized , disorganized and fooled.

external factor. Corruption of the KGB:

There is a fairly plausible conspiracy theory that the CIA played a significant role in the fall of communism.
The KGB terrorized the communists well, but proved useless in its direct official purpose.

The economic equality of communism was the cause of its own instability.
- The relatively poor top of the "nomenklatura" could be easily bribed.

The Cold War suited the US establishment.
But when Gorbachev announced the transition to the "market", the US "sponsors" felt threatened - not for the US, but for themselves - that the market communism of the USSR would become an attractive example for the US people.
And then the "owners" of the United States chipped in money to corrupt the leadership of the USSR - including the leadership of the KGB and the leadership of the union republics.

The "anarchy" of the 1990s, or rather the involvement of criminals while maintaining the state dictatorship, was caused by the need to counteract the self-organization of labor collectives - with the help of criminal authorities.

Hitler is an angel compared to the Putinists = KGB:

Hitler was not a selfish cynic.
Hitler loved the Germans - in his own way, albeit perversely.
Hitler was wrong, he killed 13 million Germans, but he was wrong - in good faith too.
Putinists also blew up residential buildings just to come to power.

fascists- " communists ", however, turned out to be good entrepreneurs and, in 1993, using the "Stop the thief!"
I am an anti-communist because communism gave rise to Putinism, the main threat to humanity.

Don't miss your 2nd chance:

If the Democrats get a second chance, then this time it cannot be missed, because not only the standard of living of Russians, but the existence of mankind depends on it.
Therefore, you need to prepare carefully.

"We will go the other way":

In 1990, I tried to create a tool for this - the "Deliberative Structure".
The "democrats" hoped for the West, but the West let them down. The West supported Yeltsin:
Firstly, Western politicians short-sightedly wanted only to eliminate what was coming from the USSR, to destroy it, just as they destroyed Germany in 1918.
Secondly, there is no self-government at all levels in the West either.
Navalny , by the way, does not see any preparation for democracy either.

On turning the imperialist war into a civil war :

The British and German rulers sent their workers to kill each other in 1914 because of their own interests. “There was no need for the workers themselves to kill each other. Moreover, if someone refused to kill, then they killed him. ("306 British and Commonwealth soldiers were executed for...desertion during World War I" - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertion)
Indeed, it was more rational that the workers killed each of their several hundred rulers than if the rulers killed millions of workers.
Even under the Law of Legal Britain, the death penalty was due for the serial murder of a million people.

Perhaps the communists are right to some extent when they said that the capitalists became more humane because of the fear of the revenge of the communists - after the communists killed thousands of "capitalists" in the same Russia.

People's Diplomacy:

People's diplomacy is perhaps a more reliable means of preventing wars than the United Nations.
Only world wars are not profitable for the rulers - they do not pay off for them.
The rulers can also simply make a mistake - Hitler wanted to kill only 100,000 Germans, but miscalculated and killed about 14 million.
Therefore, agreements between rulers like the UN are unreliable.
It is more reliable if people negotiate among themselves - directly, without intermediaries, and completely excluding rulers from the process, from whom there is more harm than good.
Moreover, today there are sufficient instrumental capabilities to implement this.

"Collective farms":

In the USSR, collective farms were fictitious, only discrediting the very possibility of collective work.
Collective farms are democratic economic structures.
There were no independent collective farms in the USSR, but there were divisions of a nationwide corporation.

Tomorrow, the development industry in the economy will exceed the industry of direct production.
It is extremely important today to create "collective farms" of free developers, especially since development:
1. Does not require capital investments, fixed assets.
2. The "labor" of development can be enjoyable. For the development industry, the "Gift Economy" is adequate.
3. Development is not tied to the land, to the states.
4. The hierarchical development organization is not competitive compared to the horizontal organization. Pseudo- " competitiveness" can exist only under artificial conditions of a far-fetched "Intellectual Property" monopoly supported by violence, deceit and propaganda.

Chechen provocation of the KGB:

In 1999 , the Chechens were provoked by the KGB to intimidate the Russians.
- So that the Russians, disappointed in the " shitocracy ", want a "strong government" that would protect the Russians from bandits and Chechens .
- None of the neighboring states wanted to attack Russia.

Russian cowardice:

The mistake of the KGB is that they have not yet learned how to manipulate the cowardice of the Russians
- Russians consider themselves weak - after all, the bosses can do whatever they want with them.
The KGB-you do not support the cowardice of the Russians, but, on the contrary, inspire them with the strength of Russia.

The strength of the people:

The mistake of the KGB is that they have not yet learned how to manipulate the ideological disunity of the Russians, although they are successfully splitting the United States.
Russians do not understand that power really belongs to the people in Russia, that this is not a hoax.
- If the people reject the KGB, then its power will immediately end.

Communist Allies:

Russians who remember the USSR are afraid of the communists.
In the 1990s, the US rulers played on this fear selfishly and short-sightedly.
But the Russians do not understand that the strength of the communists was in popular support.
Stupid American "analysts" also do not understand that it is beneficial for their customers to oppose the communists in Russia - the KGB there.
Communism will never happen again in Russia.
Already in 1990 communism was not dangerous.
If the Americans had not "go too far" then, and had not supported the swindlers - Yeltsinists - unconditionally, then the communists would have turned into social democrats.

China and Russia:

Today, Russia is a leader in the development and application of "management" technologies - propaganda and manipulation - because it is less stable than China.
China has taken the path of building up the economic foundations of the stability of the political system. Russia inherited from the USSR - a reliance on propaganda and manipulation.
But if the growth of Chinese prosperity slows down or otherwise the instability of the political system increases, then China will bypass Russia in the development and application of propaganda and manipulation technologies, and then it will become the main threat.
Today, China poses a threat so far only - to the ruling "classes" of "democratic" countries - as an economic competitor. His "communist" ideology no longer poses a threat to anyone.

Perhaps I got too carried away - with a comprehensive criticism of Russia - Putin is right - "Whoever calls names, calls himself that." - In Russia, corruption and other shortcomings are the same as in many underdeveloped countries.
I attach importance to Russia only because it is today the leader of manipulations.
However, it is necessary to constantly link the secondary problems with the main one.

 

18336