let me start with a hypothesis that the powel memorandum was a savior for the leftists. it was pivotal in suppressing the leftist principles from getting some traction in america. maybe without it the left would have gained enough upper hand for the maniacal psychopath right-wingers to be provoked enough and do to the leftists what they did to the native americans.
i agree that a successful socialist society is a better society. i wish everyone, including me, is a socialist. just like a smoker wishing he is not a smoker. of course it's better if workers control the means of production and everyone is equal as long as it leads to better prosperity and happiness for all. i'm not a socialist, but i don't mind my country becoming socialist, as long as it's achieved through zero violence.
i only support socialism where nobody wants to own property. i don't support a socialist society that does NOT ALLOW anyone to own property through violent or totalitarian means because it will be as stupid as the christian belief that "eternal suffering awaits anyone who questions god's infinite love". note that socialists and right-wingers agree that socialism only works if people are benevolent and humane. the difference is that socialists believe people are benevolent and humane enough while right-wingers believe otherwise. that makes the phrase "armed socialist revolution" an oxymoron. it should only be "socialist transformation" or "socialist enlightenment".
i don't really have strong disagreements with the things that socialists say. it's what they are not saying that blows my mind.
let's say 90% of people, including the military and police, reaches a level of enlightenment where they no longer desire to own property and their primary enjoyment in life is to help fellow human beings. they decide to have a true socialist society, the type that uses money or currency to exchange goods and services. the other 10% still owns key factories and apartment buildings and don't want to give up their properties. there are also people who would rather work as employees because they are offered better wages and they don't really care about having a say in the means of production. also, someone wants to convert an unused land into a dairy farm. let's say there are 10 people who just want to be wage laborers after the farm is created. they don't want to participate in the startup of the farm because it's too much work. they would rather just be milking the cows or delivering the milk to customers in exchange for wages. they are also afraid the cows might all die from a deadly disease and all their hard work will be wasted. they don't want to take any risk. when the cows die from the disease they want to conveniently just leave the farm and laugh at the owner who's lifetime of sacrifice just went up in smoke.
if you are a socialist, what do you believe should be done to the people who refuses to give up their right to own property? what about people who prefers wage labor? should they be left alone? would you build your own factories and apartments? or would you confiscate them from people who might have spent their blood sweat and tears to build them? THESE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION SOCIALISTS HAVE TO INCLUDE IN THEIR SPEECHES OR WRITINGS. yet they cowardly hide in the safety of obscurity by leaving out these very critical information. it's amazing how they are suppose to be super smart and knowledgeable intellectuals yet they always make this very stupid mistake. i've seen speeches of chomsky where he talks for an hour about dismantling of corporations without specifying exactly how. it's quite troubling. chomsky should at least emphasize the non aggression principle (NAP) else he is different from the washington consensus only that what he is doing is permanent. maybe what chomsky meant was people should join co-ops. if that's what he meant it baffles me why he did not just say it. i support anyone who promotes co-ops, which is the closest you can get to a true socialism that works.
however there are clues as to whether a socialist will tolerate confiscation of properties using violence and aggression. those who supported the lenin/stalin soviet state socialism definitely would allow violence. those who gave a thumbs up to libertarian socialism of 1936 catalonia spain also supports violence because the revolution stole the factories, burned churches and even executed the priests. to me it's horrifying just thinking about it because my mom goes to church everyday and i'm sure she would rather burn than leave church. ironically, chomsky gave a thumbs up to the 1936 catalonia revolution even if he is suppose to be the biggest critic of atrocities. so in this minor instance he is being hypocritical. i still like chomsky. i never expect anyone to be perfect. the socialists that i would praise are those that gives a thumbs up to zapatistas in mexico and cooperatives around the world but gives a thumbs down to any violent socialist revolution. i don't know if such socialist exists. the zapatistas do commit violence but only in self defense and they are not trying to steal other people's hard work and dreams.
my conscience forces me to be fair and just. unfortunately, my conscience also tells me that owning property and voluntarily making contracts with other people is my right. of course a super intellectual leftist can prove using science and logic that there is no such right. but that's irrelevant. morality arguments are stupid in the real world. it's only good for classrooms and catechism classes. if hitler won then i would be a slave right now and all i can do is cry myself to sleep every night. if an invading army rapes my wife and daughter i can't laugh at the rapist and say haha jokes on you because you are the bad guys and we are the good guys. am i suppose to cut myself daily to punish myself for belonging to a specie that annihilated the neanderthals? am i suppose to give half of my hard earned income to a black person or native american because i'm enjoying the fruits of a country that enslaved or massacred their ancestors? the answer is no. you know why? because my conscience does not require me to do such things.
however, if someone tells me my country's military is going to commit genocide on jewish people so that i will enjoy economic prosperity, i will risk my life to try to overthrow my government to prevent the genocide. my conscience does not allow me to cause harm on people who are not trampling on my rights. else i will not be able to sleep soundly at night. even if jewish people put me out of business in a fair competition, i still won't have ill feelings towards them because they did not do anything to violate my rights. my conscience even motivates me to protect people who can't protect themselves. most of my income nowadays is spent on helping poor people.
but if someone tells me my country's military is going to invade east timor whose people are supporting a leftist government, i would wholeheartedly support the invasion. a leftist government could lead to the creation of a communist state on indonesia's border that could be used as a base for incursions by unfriendly powers (e.g. china) into indonesia. it could be a potential threat to western submarines. oil reserves in east timor could have fueled the communist economies of the region. is it justified? of course not. it's even immoral. but the morality argument is irrelevant and only idiots will bother making that argument. the end game of all types of socialist or communist governments is to strip me of my right to own property. i first arrived in america in 1993 with only $300 in my pocket. i worked hard and sacrificed a lot to buy my rental properties.in 2009 i retired early to enjoy ultimate freedom for the rest of my life. i'm sure a socialist government will confiscate my properties and all i can do is cry myself to sleep every night.
if i'm living in america, why would i be concerned about a communist state in indonesia? only short sighted idiots will ask that question. true socialism is about achieving global solidarity of the working class. it's ultimate goal is world socialism through a permanent revolution. if i was a factory worker i would be very tempted to join that revolution because i would love to have all the profits of the factory be equally divided. if socialism or communism succeeds in one country, it can easily spread to other countries and take over the world. it only takes a more charismatic che guevara to spark a revolution.
only a leftist would bother writing about the US backed atrocities in east timor. of course they will only give information that makes kissinger and the US government look like hitler. however, by just looking at the backdrop of what was going on at that time, i realized i would have done the same thing kissinger did. our deadly rival the soviet union and china were also backing communist guerillas in southeast asia. soviet union and vietnam backed the communist guerillas in laos to overthrow the government just 5 days before the indonesian invasion of east timor. and communists took over cambodia and murdered a lot of people just a few months before. so it's not really a good vs evil story. it's just survival of the fittest. also, 58 thousand US soldiers just died in the war in vietnam, and still lost. the domino theory was no joke. it was a legitimate fear of the unknown. besides, people of east timor were already killing each other in a civil war before indonesia invaded.
i even wished marcos in the philippines was as brutal as suharto. i had many months of sleepless nights when my father's employees where massacred and he got a death threat from communist guerrillas just because he introduced farming techniques to the remote farmers. it angered the communists because the farming techniques caused the farmers to be economically self reliant so they had less motivation to join the communist insurgency - https://ian-crystal.blogspot.com/2019/05/apple-falling-far-from-the-tree.html
but then again i hate to play the good vs evil game. if an alien with superman powers come to earth and allows itself to be owned and controlled by native americans, and the native americans decide to take back america by killing all non native americans, then i will just laugh, gather my family and tell them, "we are screwed. let's just wait to die". i'm not going to act like a palestinian or a leftist and jump up and down crying foul or injustice. i'm not going to think the native americans are bad people. i'm just going to think they are lucky people. on a second thought this event would probably be like a wet dream to chomsky and the leftists so they would also be laughing as they await their death.
i also notice the newer generations are getting more entitled, self absorbed, and weaker because unlike the older generations, everything they want and need just falls into their lap. they tend to want everything to be free and easy. they would favor socialism because it makes their life easier in the short term, just like thieves enjoying short term prosperity after a heist. these are ingredients to a major perfect storm, second only to the "nuclear proliferation + climate change + neolibaralism" perfect storm.
mankind is left with very tough choices. if we become socialists, then soon there will be more chaos and suffering. but if we don't become socialist, then a time will come when organized human ceases to exist because of a nuclear conflagration. according to leftists, true democracy is only achievable through libertarian socialism and true democracy is the only way humans can communicate and cooperate with each other. if we are lucky to avoid the nuclear conflagration, then in 50 years organized humans will cease to exist due to climate change. but i don't believe socialism will be better at solving the nuclear and climate change threats. the world can only be saved if most human beings have the socialist personality. a socialist system will only make things worse based on the personalities of people i've observed in the entire 49 years of my existence (https://ian-crystal.blogspot.com/2019/04/my-street-cred.html).
if we ignore the climate change and nuclear threats, i think that james madison was a genius for designing a government where the competent opulent minority can protect itself from the less competent majority through checks and balances. if chomsky was part of the constitutional convention i'm sure he would have argued with madison saying "do you have science to back that up? can you prove that human nature is imperfect such that checks and balances are necessary?".
democracy is just a nice sounding buzzword. it's just a means to an end. if the majority votes to take my hard earned properties away, or prevents me from owning properties, then i would want to put a bullet in their heads just like the capitalist in the video below. the socialist in the video says we should just operate on principle. well, nobody disagrees with that but that's like saying we should just have wings so we can fly and there would be no carbon emissions. the socialist dreams are so unnatural such that he can't even give an answer to a very simple question.
by the way the video is a great example of a fun and meaningful debate by 2 people who are on the opposite sides of the political spectrum. i hope my rants would promote this kind of attitude. also, it's so eerie for me to realize that although i favor capitalism, i will be very tense and nervous if i play golf with the capitalist in this video. he scares the bajeezus out of me. on the other hand, i am not a socialist but i would love to play golf with the socialist in this video. i probably would try to poke his tummy with my 5 iron and he probably will just laugh and try to get back at me and we will be chasing each other around the golf course laughing.
what should i do if the majority votes to take my hard earned properties away? it depends. if the anti socialists are only 1% then i would just cry myself to sleep every night. if we are 20% then i would join the fight because i will be confident we will win. it would be like alan turing being maltreated by the british officials, except this time alan turing turns into an incredible hulk and smashes the british officials. this alan turing analogy is perfect because it's the lack of understanding of human nature that is causing the chaos.
what if entrepreneurial spirit and the desire to own properties is just as natural and strong as homosexual desires? intellectuals may laugh at my pseudo science but as i said morality, righteousness and science did not protect the native americans from being decimated.
what if i look around and notice there is a strong demand for roasted chicken but no supply because the worker councils are too slow? what if i'm the only one excited with my roasted chicken business idea such that i end up doing all the hard work? yet my lazy team gets equal pay. what if the worker's council votes to fire me because i just happen to be an unlikable person? psychopath captains of industry and people like me with entrepreneurial spirit will be very miserable. we want to have the option to work hard, save, invest and retire early. there really is no right or wrong. it's all about the way of life. just like the crusades were originally a battle for way of life between the settled farmers of the west and pastoralist herders from the east. morality arguments are really irrelevant and even stupid in the real world. if you try to impede on my freedom, then i have no choice but to kill you. of course you can call me evil. but it's really irrelevant because native americans were the good guys and look what happened to them. the only smart thing that can be said is - let's fight it out and may the best man win. it's really that simple.
i usually read comments in the internet where socialists say capitalists are psychopaths. i agree with that label, just like i would agree if native americans call the european settlers psychopaths. i would also have agreed with the neanderthals if they felt homosapiens were psychopaths. so what? does not really mean anything.
i laugh when leftists say the power lies in the hands of the majority. it just shows they are clueless and naive about the real world. a competent minority can easily crush an incompetent majority. especially a lazy and spoiled majority who would rather leech on the hard work of other people. this is just one of the many proofs that leftist have a very poor instinct for self preservation.
business people need both IQ and EQ to succeed while intellectuals only need IQ. thus the term "crazy professor" in popular culture. business people have fierce competitive spirit or maniacal psychopath killer instinct. unlike hugo chavez who was very lenient towards his enemies - he allowed the rich to enrich themselves and he even granted amnesty to the leaders of the coup against him. imagine if a coup happens in america the leaders of the coup would surely get the death penalty. that means i should move to venezuela because it's a freeer and more humane society.
leftist intellectuals are also not very good at organizing people. that is why despite their intelligence and immense knowledge they can't even practice a close cousin of their ideology by starting co-ops.
mr. burns will have psychopaths and soldier types in his team. socialists may have the majority in their team but most of them are homer simpsons. i really feel sorry for leftists they can never catch a break. originally mr burn's nuclear power plant was suppose to symbolize a right wing or conservative evil's thirst for profit without regard for the environment but now it turns out nuclear power might be the only effective way to address climate change.
chinese and russians are genetically less psycopathic than settlement societies such as US and israel. you can't get any more psycopathic than decimating the native american population and enslaving black people for 2 centuries. in israel's case, at first their hands were tied because nowadays you can't just occupy a gaza or westbank for no reason. but lo and behold the arab countries and palestinians gave the psychopaths in israel the greatest gift ever by attacking them not just once, but many times. the stupid leftists are also giving israel the greatest gift by continuing to give the palestinians hope and moral support for their rhetorical and violent attacks against israel (https://ian-crystal.blogspot.com/2017/01/leftists-harming-the-palestinians.html).
because russians are less psychopathic, instead of revolting when they were not allowed to own properties and do contracts (business) with one another, the psychopaths just joined the tyrannical state government where they amassed riches and owned properties. in maoist china, corruption in the communist party was more subdued. however, their psychopaths had the option to flee to neighboring countries that is why countries like the philippines and indonesia was gifted with high pedigree captains of industry and leaders of society. or as leftists want to call them - tyrannical psychopaths.
then, slowly but surely, mr burns and the competent psychopaths take back their place in history, but this time "la semaine sanglante" style. and possibly even genghis khan style. and as usual, as so common in the anal of history, the left starts their usual dance of crying injustice !!! brutality !!! oppression !!! shark bites !!! meanwhile homer simpson just ignores them while he eats pizza and watches NFL football.
the good news is these are just my feelings and i'm just an idiot.
here is an update to this article that relates to more recent events - https://ian-crystal.blogspot.com/2021/11/negative-value-conondrum.html
(for more of my knowledge bombs, click the "ian's knowledge bombs" banner at the top of this article and choose any article in the table of contents that piques your interest)
(for more of my knowledge bombs, click the "ian's knowledge bombs" banner at the top of this article and choose any article in the table of contents that piques your interest)
No comments:
Post a Comment