Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: communism

  1. #1
    SlavaPHP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    TIM
    ENTP / INTj
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default communism

    What types is communism based on... Ti?

  2. #2
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,572
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ppl who are like totdally JEALOUS that i have corporate money of coursee that's Ti and Fe and Fe

  3. #3
    Decadent Charlatan Aquagraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Continental Vinnland
    TIM
    OmniPoLR
    Posts
    3,961
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Socialism is sinful" - FlaxSeed

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    ppl who are like totdally JEALOUS that i have corporate money of coursee that's Ti and Fe and Fe
    "I will domesticate you" - FlaxSeed
    “I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden

  4. #4
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,891
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I definitely think that communism relates much more with Ti than anything else, a very extreme neurotic kind of Ti. There's this idea that everything can be thought out logically and put into action, as if people will not want to change their careers or find themselves having different motivations and desires during their lives, as if logic can determine what is best for people to do as a society, as if we should do only the things we are good at even if it means being soul-crushed, etc.

  5. #5
    Decadent Charlatan Aquagraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Continental Vinnland
    TIM
    OmniPoLR
    Posts
    3,961
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    I definitely think that communism relates much more with Ti than anything else, a very extreme neurotic kind of Ti. There's this idea that everything can be thought out logically and put into action, as if people will not want to change their careers or find themselves having different motivations and desires during their lives, as if logic can determine what is best for people to do as a society, as if we should do only the things we are good at even if it means being soul-crushed, etc.
    Not that bad answer actually. I expected worse from this thread.
    “I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden

  6. #6
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,950
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the principles of dialectical materialism and historical inevitability have a more Ni sense to them, imo.

    in fact they seem decidedly beta. you take dynamic thing like history that first swirls chaotically and shapelessly and then assert it moves towards a state of definitiveness. Ni -> Ti

  7. #7
    Contra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    1,404
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lecter View Post
    the principles of dialectical materialism and historical inevitability have a more Ni sense to them, imo.

    in fact they seem decidedly beta. you take dynamic thing like history that first swirls chaotically and shapelessly and then assert it moves towards a state of definitiveness. Ni -> Ti
    I feel like this is why I know so many Beta NFs who "kinda sorta almost" like the idea of communism

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    TIM
    f a g g o t
    Posts
    385
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    "Socialism is sinful" - FlaxSeed



    "I will domesticate you" - FlaxSeed
    Where did Flaxxy say all this? Being that new and already we're quoting her?

  9. #9
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,139
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have a Ti-ISTj friend (he knew me from left-wing anti-war public forums and protests I used to go to). He tends to support and defend communism and socialism. He once told me that he's scared of communism, yet still wants it. He said there is a light side to communism, yet no light side to capitalism whatsoever. I think one problem is that people blame capitalism for all the corruption, injustice, oppression, etc. in the world. What about blaming abusive childrearing, bad people/individuals who make bad/evil decisions, etc. Things like that will exist in communism, socialism, etc. In fact, some of the most ruthless evil people will pretend to be good or say they will do what is in the best interests of the majority and deceive many (left-wing, right-wing, moderate-centrist, etc. doesn't really matter). And of course, like my aunt once told me, power corrupts even the purest minds. Because of my changing views, this Ti-ISTj friend and I don't really agree on much anymore, except that imperialism and war are almost always bad and that anal is a perversion. He didn't like the word "sin", yet agreed that it's a perversion (I think there are plenty of leftists who don't like anal and don't think it's safe). [Anyway, to be honest we were never that compatible as friends. He's too dogmatic, rigid, and closed-minded to different viewpoints. I think I like Trump, I guess, yet I like to read Jonah Goldberg's books, even though he hates Trump.] And I'm almost finished reading the novel Family by Pa Chin (which was translated from Chinese). This novel is definitely a lot more left-wing than right-wing, yet I really like it.


    Here are some excerpts from The Black Book of Communism:

    'Sometimes the Bolsheviks subjected...people to genocide. The policy of “de-Cossackization” begun in 1920 corresponds largely to our definition of genocide: a population group firmly established in a particular territory, the Cossacks as such were exterminated, the men shot, the women, children, and the elderly deported, and the villages razed or handed over to new, non-Cossack occupants. Lenin compared the Cossacks to the Vendee during the French Revolution and gladly subjected them to a program of what Gracchus Babeuf, the "inventor" of modern Communism, characterized in 1795 as “populicide."

    The "dekulakization" of 1930-1932 repeated the policy of "de-Cossackization" but on a much grander scale. Its primary objective, in accordance with the official order issued for this operation (and the regime's propaganda), was "to exterminate the kulaks as a class." The kulaks who resisted collectivization were shot, and the others were deported with their wives, children, and elderly family members. Although not all kulaks were exterminated directly, sentences of forced labor in wilderness areas of Siberia or the far north left them with scant chance of survival. Several tens of thousands perished there; the exact number of victims remains unknown. As for the great famine in Ukraine in 1932-33, which resulted from the rural population's resistance to forced collectivization, 6 million died in a period of several months.

    Here, the genocide of a "class" may well be tantamount to the genocide of a "race"--the deliberate starvation of a child of a Ukrainian kulak as a result of the famine caused by Stalin's regime "is equal to" the starvation of a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto as a result of the famine caused by the Nazi regime. Such arguments in no way detract from the unique nature of Auschwitz--the mobilization of leading-edge technological resources and their use in an "industrial process" involving the construction of an "extermination factory," the use of gas, and cremation. However, this argument highlights one particular feature of many Communist regimes--their systematic use of famine as a weapon. The regime aimed to control the total available food supply and, with immense ingenuity, to distribute food purely on the basis of "merits" and "demerits" earned by individuals. This policy was a recipe for creating famine on a massive scale. Remember that in the period after 1918, only Communist countries experienced such famines, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of people. And again in the 1980s, two African countries that claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, Ethiopia and Mozambique, were the only such countries to suffer these deadly famines.

    A preliminary global accounting of the crimes committed by Communist regimes shows the following:

    The execution of tens of thousands of hostages and prisoners without trial, and the murder of hundreds of thousands of rebellious workers and peasants from 1918 to 1922

    The famine of 1922, which caused the deaths of 5 million people

    The extermination and deportation of the Don Cossacks in 1920

    The murder of tens of thousands in concentration camps from 1918 to 1930

    The liquidation of almost 690,000 people in the Great Purge of 1937-38

    The deportation of 2 million kulaks (and so-called kulaks) in 1930-1932

    The destruction of 4 million Ukrainians and 2 million others by means of an artificial and systematically perpetuated famine in 1932-33

    The deportation of hundreds of thousands of Poles, Ukrainians, Balts, Moldovans, and Bessarabians from 1939 to 1941, and again in 1944-45

    The deportation of the Volga Germans in 1941

    The wholesale deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1943

    The wholesale deportation of the Chechens in 1944

    The wholesale deportation of the Ingush in 1944

    The deportation and extermination of the urban population in Cambodia from 1975 to 1978

    The slow destruction of the Tibetans by the Chinese since 1950.

    No list of the crimes committed in the name of Leninism and Stalinism would be complete without mentioning the virtually identical crimes committed by the regimes of Mao Zedong, Kim Il Sung, and Pol Pot.'



    The Bolshevik Terror, with its clear methodology, its specificity, and its carefully chosen aims, easily predated the civil war, which developed into a full-scale conflict only at the end of the summer of 1918. The following list indicates in chronological order the evolution of different types of terror and its different targets from the early months of the regime:

    - Non-Bolshevik political militants, from anarchists to monarchists.

    - Workers fighting for the most basic rights, including bread, work, and a minimum of liberty and dignity.

    - Peasants — often deserters — implicated in any of the innumerable peasant revolts or Red Army mutinies.

    - Cossacks, who were deported en masse as a social and ethnic group supposedly hostile to the Soviet regime. "De-Cossackization" prefigured the massive deportations of the 1930s called "dekulakization" (another example of the deportation of ethnic groups) and underlines the fundamental continuity between the Leninist and Stalinist policies of political repression.

    - "Socially undesirable elements" and other "enemies of the people," "suspects," and "hostages" liquidated "as a preventive measure," particularly when the Bolsheviks were enforcing the evacuation of villages or when they took back territory or towns that had been in the hands of the Whites.

    The best-known repressions are those that concern political militants from the various parties opposed to the Bolsheviks. Numerous statements were made by the main leaders of the opposition parties, who were often imprisoned and exiled, but whose lives were generally spared, unlike militant workers and peasants, who were shot without trial or massacred during punitive Cheka operations.

    One of the first acts of terror was the attack launched on 11 April 1918 against the Moscow anarchists, dozens of whom were immediately executed. The struggle against the anarchists intensified over the following years, although a certain number did transfer their allegiance to the Bolshevik Party, even becoming high-ranking Cheka officials, such as Aleksandr Goldberg, Mikhail Brener, and Timofei Samsonov. The dilemma faced by most anarchists in their opposition to both the new Bolshevik dictatorship and the return of the old regime is well illustrated by the U-turns of the great peasant anarchist leader Nestor Makhno, who for a while allied himself with the Red Army in the struggle against the Whites, then turned against the Bolsheviks after the White threat had been eliminated. Thousands of anonymous militant anarchists were executed as bandits as part of the repression against the peasant army of Makhno and his partisans. It would appear that these peasants constituted the immense majority of anarchist victims, at least according to the figures presented by the Russian anarchists in exile in Berlin in 1922. These incomplete figures note 138 militant anarchists executed in the years 1919-1921, 281 sent into exile, and 608 still in prison as of 1 January 1922.

    The left Socialist Revolutionaries, who were allies of the Bolsheviks until the summer of 1918, were treated with relative leniency until February 1919. As late as December 1918 their most famous leader, Maria Spiridonova, presided over a party congress that was tolerated by the Bolsheviks. However, on 10 February 1919, after she condemned the terror that was being carried out on a daily basis by the Cheka, she was arrested with 210 other militants and sentenced by a revolutionary court to "detention in a sanatorium on account of her hysterical state." This action seems to be the first example under the Soviet regime of the sentencing of a political opponent to detention in a psychiatric hospital. Spiridonova managed to escape and continued secretly to lead the left Socialist Revolutionary Party, which by then had been banned by the Soviet government. According to Cheka sources, fifty-eight left Socialist Revolutionary organizations were disbanded in 1919, and another forty-five in 1920. In these two years 1,875 militants were imprisoned as hostages, in response to Dzerzhinsky's instructions. He had declared, on 18 March 1919: "Henceforth the Cheka is to make no distinction between White Guards of the Krasnov variety and White Guards from the socialist camp . . . The Socialist Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks arrested are to be considered as hostages, and their fate will depend on the subsequent behavior of the parties they belong to." [L. Gerson, The Secret Police in Lenin’s Russia (Philadelphia: Tample University Press, 1976), pp. 151-152; G. Leggett, The Cheka: Lenin’s Political Police (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 311-316.]



    Of all the repressive episodes, the one most carefully hidden by the new regime was the violence used against workers, in whose name the Bolsheviks had first come to power. Beginning in 1918, the repressions increased over the following two years, culminating in 1921 with the well-known episode in Kronstadt. From early 1918 the workers of Petrograd had shown their defiance of the Bolsheviks. After the collapse of the general strike on 2 July 1918, trouble broke out again among the workers in the former capital in March 1919, after the Bolsheviks had arrested a number of Socialist Revolutionary leaders, including Maria Spiridonova, who had just carried out a memorable tour of the Petrograd factories, where she had been greeted with tremendous popular acclaim. The moment was already one of extreme delicacy because of dire shortages of food, and these arrests led to strikes and a vast protest movement. On 10 March the general assembly of workers of the Putilov factories, at a meeting of more than ten thousand members, adopted a resolution that solemnly condemned the Bolshevik actions: 'This government is nothing less than the dictatorship of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, kept in place thanks to the Cheka and the revolutionary courts."

    The proclamation called for power to be handed over to the Soviets, free elections for the Soviets and for the factory committees, an end to limitations on the quantity of food that workers could bring into the city from the countryside (1.5 pudy, or about 55 pounds), the release of political prisoners from the ''authentic revolutionary parties," and above all the release of Maria Spiridonova. To try to put a brake on this movement, which seemed to get more powerful by the day, Lenin came to Petrograd in person on 12 and 13 March 1919. But when he tried to address the workers who were striking in the factories, he was booed off the stage...

    On 16 March 1919, Cheka detachments stormed the Putilov factory, which was defended by armed workers. Approximately 900 workers were arrested. In the next few days more than 200 strikers were executed without trial in the Schlusselburg fortress, about thirty-five miles from Petrograd. A new working practice was set in place whereby all the strikers were fired and were rehired only after they had signed a declaration stating that they had been deceived and "led into crime" by counterrevolutionary leaders. Henceforth all workers were to be kept under close surveillance. After the spring of 1919, in several working-class centers a secret Cheka department set up a network of spies and informers who were to submit regular reports about the "state of mind" in the factory in question. The working classes were clearly considered to be dangerous.

    The spring of 1919 was marked by numerous strikes, which were savagely put down, in some of the great working-class centers in Russia, such as Tula, Sormovo, Orel, Bryansk, Tver, Ivanovo Voznesensk, and Astrakhan. The workers' grievances were identical almost everywhere. Reduced to starvation by minuscule salaries that barely covered the price of a ration card for a half-pound of bread a day, the strikers sought first to obtain rations matching those of soldiers in the Red Army. But the more urgent demands were all political: the elimination of special privileges for Communists, the release of political prisoners, free elections for Soviets and factory committees, the end of conscription into the Red Army, freedom of association, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and so forth.

    What made these movements even more dangerous in the eyes of the Bolshevik authorities was their frequent success in rallying to their cause the military units stationed in the town in question. In Orel, Bryansk, Gomel, and Astrakhan mutinying soldiers joined forces with the strikers . . . . taking over and looting parts of the city, which were retaken by Cheka detachments and troops faithful to the regime only after several days of fighting. The repressions in response to such strikes and mutinies ranged from massive lockouts of whole factories and the confiscation of ration cards — the threat of hunger was one of the most useful weapons the Bolsheviks had — to the execution of strikers and rebel soldiers by the hundreds.

    Among the most significant of the repressions were those in Tula and Astrakhan in March and April 1919. Dzerzhinsky came to Tula, the historical capital of the Russian army, on 3 April 1919 to put down a strike by workers in the munitions factories. In the winter of 1918-19 these factories had already been the scene of strikes and industrial action, and they were vital to the Red Army, turning out more than 80 percent of all the rifles made in Russia. Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries were very much in the majority among the political activists in the highly skilled workforce there. The arrest, in early March 1919, of hundreds of socialist activists provoked a wave of protests that culminated on 27 March in a huge "March for Freedom and against Hunger," which brought together thousands of industrial and railway workers. On 4 April Dzerzhinsky had another 800 "leaders" arrested and forcibly emptied the factories, which had been occupied for several weeks by the strikers. All the workers were fired. Their resistance was broken by hunger; for several weeks their ration cards had not been honored. To receive replacement cards, giving the right to a half-pound of bread and the right to work again after the general lockout, workers had to sign a job application form stipulating, in particular, that any stoppage in the future would be considered an act of desertion and would thus be punishable by death. Production resumed on 10 April. The night before that, 26 "leaders" had been executed.

    The town of Astrakhan, near the mouth of the Volga, had major strategic importance in the spring of 1919, as it was the last Bolshevik stronghold preventing Admiral Kolchak's troops in the northwest from joining up with those of General Denikin in the southwest. This circumstance alone probably explains the extraordinary violence with which the workers' strike in the town was suppressed in March. Having begun for both economic reasons (the paltry rations) and political reasons (the arrest of socialist activists), the strike intensified on 10 March when the 45th Infantry Regiment refused to open fire on workers marching through the city. Joining forces with the strikers, the soldiers stormed the Bolshevik Party headquarters and killed several members of the staff. Sergei Kirov, the president of the regional Revolutionary Military Committee, immediately ordered "the merciless extermination of these White Guard lice by any means possible." Troops who had remained faithful to the regime and to the Cheka blocked all entrances to the town and methodically set about retaking it. When the prisons were full, the soldiers and strikers were loaded onto barges and then thrown by the hundreds into the Volga with stones around their necks. From 12 to 14 March between 2,000 and 4,000 strikers were shot or drowned. After 15 March the repressions were concentrated on the bourgeoisie of the town, on the pretext that they had been behind this "White Guard conspiracy" for which the workers and soldiers were merely cannon fodder. For two days all the merchants' houses were systematically looted and their owners arrested and shot. Estimates of the number of bourgeois victims of the massacres in Astrakhan range from 600 to 1,000. In one week between 3,000 and 5,000 people were either shot or drowned. By contrast, the number of Communists buried with great pomp and circumstance on 18 March — the anniversary of the Paris Commune, as the authorities were at pains to point out — was a mere 47. Long remembered as a small incident in the war between the Whites and the Reds, the true scale of the killing in Astrakhan is now known, thanks to recently published archival documents.* These documents reveal that it was the largest massacre of workers by Bolsheviks before the events at Kronstadt.

    *Brovkin, Behind the Front Lines, pp. 82-85; S. P. Melgunov, The Red Terror in Russia (London: Dent, 1925), pp. 58-60

    At the end of 1919 and the beginning of 1920, relations between the Bolsheviks and the workers deteriorated even further, following the militarization of more than 2,000 businesses. As the principal architect of the militarization of the workplace, Trotsky laid out his ideas on the issue at the Ninth Party Congress in March 1920. Trotsky explained that humans are naturally lazy. Under capitalism, people were forced to search for work to survive. The capitalist market acted as a stimulus to man, but under socialism "the utilization of work resources replaces the market.” It was thus the job of the state to direct, assign, and place the workers, who were to obey the state as soldiers obey orders in the army, because the state was working in the interests of the proletariat. Such was the basis of the militarization of the workplace, which was vigorously criticized by a minority of syndicalists, union leaders, and Bolshevik directors. In practice this meant the outlawing of strikes, which were compared to desertion in times of war; an increase in the disciplinary powers of employers; the total subordination of all unions and factory committees, whose role henceforth was to be simply one of support for the producers' policies; a ban on workers' leaving their posts; and punishments for absenteeism and lateness, both of which were exceedingly widespread because workers were often out searching for food.



    'When the tyrants could no longer hide the truth—the firing squads, the concentration camps, the man-made famine—they did their best to justify these atrocities by glossing them over. After admitting the use of terror, they justified it as a necessary aspect of revolution through the use of such catchphrases as "When you cut down a forest, the shavings get blown away” or "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs.” Vladimir Bukovsky retorted that he had seen the broken eggs, but no one he knew had ever tasted the omelet! Perhaps the single greatest evil was the perversion of language. As if by magic, the concentration-camp system was turned into a "reeducation system,” and the tyrants became “educators" who transformed the people of the old society into “new people.” The “zeks”, a term used for Soviet concentration camp prisoners, were forcibly "invited" to place their trust in a system that enslaved them. In China the concentration-camp prisoner is called a "student" and he is required to study the correct thoughts of the Party and to reform his own faulty thinking.

    As is usually the case, a lie is not, strictly speaking, the opposite of the truth, and a lie will generally contain an element of truth. Perverted words are situated in a twisted vision that distorts the landscape; one is confronted with a myopic social and political philosophy. Attitudes twisted by Communist propaganda are easy to correct, but it is monumentally difficult to instruct false prophets in the ways of intellectual tolerance. The first impression is always the one that lingers. Like martial artists, the Communists, thanks to their incomparable propaganda strength grounded in the subversion of language, successfully turned the tables on the criticisms leveled against their terrorist tactics, continually uniting the ranks of their militants and sympathizers by renewing the Communist act of faith. Thus they held fast to their fundamental principle of ideological belief, as formulated by Tertullian for his own era: "I believe, because it is absurd."

    Like common prostitutes, intellectuals found themselves inveigled into counterpropaganda operations. In 1928 Maksim Gorky accepted an invitation to go on an "excursion" to the Solovetski Islands, an experimental concentration camp that would "metastasize" (to use Solzhenitsyn's word) into the Gulag system. On his return Gorky wrote a book extolling the glories of the Solovetski camps and the Soviet government. A French writer, Henri Barbusse, recipient of the 1916 Prix Goncourt, did not hesitate to praise Stalin's regime for a fee. His 1928 book on "marvelous Georgia" made no mention of the massacre carried out there in 1921 by Stalin and his henchman Sergo Ordzhonikidze. It also ignored Lavrenti Beria, head of the NKVD, who was noteworthy for his Machiavellian sensibility and his sadism. In 1935 Barbusse brought out the first official biography of Stalin. More recently Maria Antonietta Macciochi spoke gushingly about Mao Zedong, and Alain Peyrefitte echoed the same sentiments to a lesser degree, while Danielle Mitterrand chimed in to praise the deeds of Fidel Castro. Cupidity, spinelessness, vanity, fascination with power, violence, and revolutionary fervor — whatever the motivation, totalitarian dictatorships have always found plenty of diehard supporters when they had need of them, and the same is true of Communist as of other dictatorships.

    Confronted with this onslaught of Communist propaganda, the West has long labored under an extraordinary self-deception, simultaneously fueled by naivete in the face of a particularly devious system, by the fear of Soviet power, and by the cynicism of politicians. There was self-deception at the meeting in Yalta, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt ceded Eastern Europe to Stalin in return for a solemn undertaking that the latter would hold free elections at the earliest opportunity. Realism and resignation had a rendezvous with destiny in Moscow in December 1944, when General Charles de Gaulle abandoned hapless Poland to the devil in return for guarantees of social and political peace, duly assured by Maurice Thorez on his return to Paris.

    This self-deception was a source of comfort and was given quasi-legitimacy by the widespread belief among Communists (and many leftists) in the West that while these countries were "building socialism," the Communist "Utopia," a breeding ground for social and political conflicts, would remain safely distant. Simone Weil epitomized this pro-Communist trendiness when she said, "revolutionary workers are only too thankful to have a state backing them—a state that gives an official character, legitimacy, and reality to their actions as only a state can, and that at the same time is sufficiently far away from them geographically to avoid seeming oppressive." Communism was supposedly showing its true colors — it claimed to be an emissary of the Enlightenment, of a tradition of social and human emancipation, of a dream of “true equality," and of "happiness for all" as envisioned by Gracchus Babeuf. And paradoxically, it was this image of Enlightenment" that helped keep the true nature of its evil almost entirely concealed.'









    Screen Shot 2019-11-19 at 6.48.27 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2019-11-22 at 10.38.28 PM.png

    Here are some excerpts from The Black Book of Communism:

    'Sometimes the Bolsheviks subjected...people to genocide. The policy of “de-Cossackization” begun in 1920 corresponds largely to our definition of genocide: a population group firmly established in a particular territory, the Cossacks as such were exterminated, the men shot, the women, children, and the elderly deported, and the villages razed or handed over to new, non-Cossack occupants. Lenin compared the Cossacks to the Vendee during the French Revolution and gladly subjected them to a program of what Gracchus Babeuf, the "inventor" of modern Communism, characterized in 1795 as “populicide."

    The "dekulakization" of 1930-1932 repeated the policy of "de-Cossackization" but on a much grander scale. Its primary objective, in accordance with the official order issued for this operation (and the regime's propaganda), was "to exterminate the kulaks as a class." The kulaks who resisted collectivization were shot, and the others were deported with their wives, children, and elderly family members. Although not all kulaks were exterminated directly, sentences of forced labor in wilderness areas of Siberia or the far north left them with scant chance of survival. Several tens of thousands perished there; the exact number of victims remains unknown. As for the great famine in Ukraine in 1932-33, which resulted from the rural population's resistance to forced collectivization, 6 million died in a period of several months.

    Here, the genocide of a "class" may well be tantamount to the genocide of a "race"--the deliberate starvation of a child of a Ukrainian kulak as a result of the famine caused by Stalin's regime "is equal to" the starvation of a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto as a result of the famine caused by the Nazi regime. Such arguments in no way detract from the unique nature of Auschwitz--the mobilization of leading-edge technological resources and their use in an "industrial process" involving the construction of an "extermination factory," the use of gas, and cremation. However, this argument highlights one particular feature of many Communist regimes--their systematic use of famine as a weapon. The regime aimed to control the total available food supply and, with immense ingenuity, to distribute food purely on the basis of "merits" and "demerits" earned by individuals. This policy was a recipe for creating famine on a massive scale. Remember that in the period after 1918, only Communist countries experienced such famines, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of people. And again in the 1980s, two African countries that claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, Ethiopia and Mozambique, were the only such countries to suffer these deadly famines.

    A preliminary global accounting of the crimes committed by Communist regimes shows the following:

    The execution of tens of thousands of hostages and prisoners without trial, and the murder of hundreds of thousands of rebellious workers and peasants from 1918 to 1922

    The famine of 1922, which caused the deaths of 5 million people

    The extermination and deportation of the Don Cossacks in 1920

    The murder of tens of thousands in concentration camps from 1918 to 1930

    The liquidation of almost 690,000 people in the Great Purge of 1937-38

    The deportation of 2 million kulaks (and so-called kulaks) in 1930-1932

    The destruction of 4 million Ukrainians and 2 million others by means of an artificial and systematically perpetuated famine in 1932-33

    The deportation of hundreds of thousands of Poles, Ukrainians, Balts, Moldovans, and Bessarabians from 1939 to 1941, and again in 1944-45

    The deportation of the Volga Germans in 1941

    The wholesale deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1943

    The wholesale deportation of the Chechens in 1944

    The wholesale deportation of the Ingush in 1944

    The deportation and extermination of the urban population in Cambodia from 1975 to 1978

    The slow destruction of the Tibetans by the Chinese since 1950.

    No list of the crimes committed in the name of Leninism and Stalinism would be complete without mentioning the virtually identical crimes committed by the regimes of Mao Zedong, Kim Il Sung, and Pol Pot.'



    The Bolshevik Terror, with its clear methodology, its specificity, and its carefully chosen aims, easily predated the civil war, which developed into a full-scale conflict only at the end of the summer of 1918. The following list indicates in chronological order the evolution of different types of terror and its different targets from the early months of the regime:

    - Non-Bolshevik political militants, from anarchists to monarchists.

    - Workers fighting for the most basic rights, including bread, work, and a minimum of liberty and dignity.

    - Peasants — often deserters — implicated in any of the innumerable peasant revolts or Red Army mutinies.

    - Cossacks, who were deported en masse as a social and ethnic group supposedly hostile to the Soviet regime. "De-Cossackization" prefigured the massive deportations of the 1930s called "dekulakization" (another example of the deportation of ethnic groups) and underlines the fundamental continuity between the Leninist and Stalinist policies of political repression.

    - "Socially undesirable elements" and other "enemies of the people," "suspects," and "hostages" liquidated "as a preventive measure," particularly when the Bolsheviks were enforcing the evacuation of villages or when they took back territory or towns that had been in the hands of the Whites.

    The best-known repressions are those that concern political militants from the various parties opposed to the Bolsheviks. Numerous statements were made by the main leaders of the opposition parties, who were often imprisoned and exiled, but whose lives were generally spared, unlike militant workers and peasants, who were shot without trial or massacred during punitive Cheka operations.

    One of the first acts of terror was the attack launched on 11 April 1918 against the Moscow anarchists, dozens of whom were immediately executed. The struggle against the anarchists intensified over the following years, although a certain number did transfer their allegiance to the Bolshevik Party, even becoming high-ranking Cheka officials, such as Aleksandr Goldberg, Mikhail Brener, and Timofei Samsonov. The dilemma faced by most anarchists in their opposition to both the new Bolshevik dictatorship and the return of the old regime is well illustrated by the U-turns of the great peasant anarchist leader Nestor Makhno, who for a while allied himself with the Red Army in the struggle against the Whites, then turned against the Bolsheviks after the White threat had been eliminated. Thousands of anonymous militant anarchists were executed as bandits as part of the repression against the peasant army of Makhno and his partisans. It would appear that these peasants constituted the immense majority of anarchist victims, at least according to the figures presented by the Russian anarchists in exile in Berlin in 1922. These incomplete figures note 138 militant anarchists executed in the years 1919-1921, 281 sent into exile, and 608 still in prison as of 1 January 1922.

    The left Socialist Revolutionaries, who were allies of the Bolsheviks until the summer of 1918, were treated with relative leniency until February 1919. As late as December 1918 their most famous leader, Maria Spiridonova, presided over a party congress that was tolerated by the Bolsheviks. However, on 10 February 1919, after she condemned the terror that was being carried out on a daily basis by the Cheka, she was arrested with 210 other militants and sentenced by a revolutionary court to "detention in a sanatorium on account of her hysterical state." This action seems to be the first example under the Soviet regime of the sentencing of a political opponent to detention in a psychiatric hospital. Spiridonova managed to escape and continued secretly to lead the left Socialist Revolutionary Party, which by then had been banned by the Soviet government. According to Cheka sources, fifty-eight left Socialist Revolutionary organizations were disbanded in 1919, and another forty-five in 1920. In these two years 1,875 militants were imprisoned as hostages, in response to Dzerzhinsky's instructions. He had declared, on 18 March 1919: "Henceforth the Cheka is to make no distinction between White Guards of the Krasnov variety and White Guards from the socialist camp . . . The Socialist Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks arrested are to be considered as hostages, and their fate will depend on the subsequent behavior of the parties they belong to." [L. Gerson, The Secret Police in Lenin’s Russia (Philadelphia: Tample University Press, 1976), pp. 151-152; G. Leggett, The Cheka: Lenin’s Political Police (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 311-316.]



    Of all the repressive episodes, the one most carefully hidden by the new regime was the violence used against workers, in whose name the Bolsheviks had first come to power. Beginning in 1918, the repressions increased over the following two years, culminating in 1921 with the well-known episode in Kronstadt. From early 1918 the workers of Petrograd had shown their defiance of the Bolsheviks. After the collapse of the general strike on 2 July 1918, trouble broke out again among the workers in the former capital in March 1919, after the Bolsheviks had arrested a number of Socialist Revolutionary leaders, including Maria Spiridonova, who had just carried out a memorable tour of the Petrograd factories, where she had been greeted with tremendous popular acclaim. The moment was already one of extreme delicacy because of dire shortages of food, and these arrests led to strikes and a vast protest movement. On 10 March the general assembly of workers of the Putilov factories, at a meeting of more than ten thousand members, adopted a resolution that solemnly condemned the Bolshevik actions: 'This government is nothing less than the dictatorship of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, kept in place thanks to the Cheka and the revolutionary courts."

    The proclamation called for power to be handed over to the Soviets, free elections for the Soviets and for the factory committees, an end to limitations on the quantity of food that workers could bring into the city from the countryside (1.5 pudy, or about 55 pounds), the release of political prisoners from the ''authentic revolutionary parties," and above all the release of Maria Spiridonova. To try to put a brake on this movement, which seemed to get more powerful by the day, Lenin came to Petrograd in person on 12 and 13 March 1919. But when he tried to address the workers who were striking in the factories, he was booed off the stage...

    On 16 March 1919, Cheka detachments stormed the Putilov factory, which was defended by armed workers. Approximately 900 workers were arrested. In the next few days more than 200 strikers were executed without trial in the Schlusselburg fortress, about thirty-five miles from Petrograd. A new working practice was set in place whereby all the strikers were fired and were rehired only after they had signed a declaration stating that they had been deceived and "led into crime" by counterrevolutionary leaders. Henceforth all workers were to be kept under close surveillance. After the spring of 1919, in several working-class centers a secret Cheka department set up a network of spies and informers who were to submit regular reports about the "state of mind" in the factory in question. The working classes were clearly considered to be dangerous.

    The spring of 1919 was marked by numerous strikes, which were savagely put down, in some of the great working-class centers in Russia, such as Tula, Sormovo, Orel, Bryansk, Tver, Ivanovo Voznesensk, and Astrakhan. The workers' grievances were identical almost everywhere. Reduced to starvation by minuscule salaries that barely covered the price of a ration card for a half-pound of bread a day, the strikers sought first to obtain rations matching those of soldiers in the Red Army. But the more urgent demands were all political: the elimination of special privileges for Communists, the release of political prisoners, free elections for Soviets and factory committees, the end of conscription into the Red Army, freedom of association, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and so forth.

    What made these movements even more dangerous in the eyes of the Bolshevik authorities was their frequent success in rallying to their cause the military units stationed in the town in question. In Orel, Bryansk, Gomel, and Astrakhan mutinying soldiers joined forces with the strikers . . . . taking over and looting parts of the city, which were retaken by Cheka detachments and troops faithful to the regime only after several days of fighting. The repressions in response to such strikes and mutinies ranged from massive lockouts of whole factories and the confiscation of ration cards — the threat of hunger was one of the most useful weapons the Bolsheviks had — to the execution of strikers and rebel soldiers by the hundreds.

    Among the most significant of the repressions were those in Tula and Astrakhan in March and April 1919. Dzerzhinsky came to Tula, the historical capital of the Russian army, on 3 April 1919 to put down a strike by workers in the munitions factories. In the winter of 1918-19 these factories had already been the scene of strikes and industrial action, and they were vital to the Red Army, turning out more than 80 percent of all the rifles made in Russia. Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries were very much in the majority among the political activists in the highly skilled workforce there. The arrest, in early March 1919, of hundreds of socialist activists provoked a wave of protests that culminated on 27 March in a huge "March for Freedom and against Hunger," which brought together thousands of industrial and railway workers. On 4 April Dzerzhinsky had another 800 "leaders" arrested and forcibly emptied the factories, which had been occupied for several weeks by the strikers. All the workers were fired. Their resistance was broken by hunger; for several weeks their ration cards had not been honored. To receive replacement cards, giving the right to a half-pound of bread and the right to work again after the general lockout, workers had to sign a job application form stipulating, in particular, that any stoppage in the future would be considered an act of desertion and would thus be punishable by death. Production resumed on 10 April. The night before that, 26 "leaders" had been executed.

    The town of Astrakhan, near the mouth of the Volga, had major strategic importance in the spring of 1919, as it was the last Bolshevik stronghold preventing Admiral Kolchak's troops in the northwest from joining up with those of General Denikin in the southwest. This circumstance alone probably explains the extraordinary violence with which the workers' strike in the town was suppressed in March. Having begun for both economic reasons (the paltry rations) and political reasons (the arrest of socialist activists), the strike intensified on 10 March when the 45th Infantry Regiment refused to open fire on workers marching through the city. Joining forces with the strikers, the soldiers stormed the Bolshevik Party headquarters and killed several members of the staff. Sergei Kirov, the president of the regional Revolutionary Military Committee, immediately ordered "the merciless extermination of these White Guard lice by any means possible." Troops who had remained faithful to the regime and to the Cheka blocked all entrances to the town and methodically set about retaking it. When the prisons were full, the soldiers and strikers were loaded onto barges and then thrown by the hundreds into the Volga with stones around their necks. From 12 to 14 March between 2,000 and 4,000 strikers were shot or drowned. After 15 March the repressions were concentrated on the bourgeoisie of the town, on the pretext that they had been behind this "White Guard conspiracy" for which the workers and soldiers were merely cannon fodder. For two days all the merchants' houses were systematically looted and their owners arrested and shot. Estimates of the number of bourgeois victims of the massacres in Astrakhan range from 600 to 1,000. In one week between 3,000 and 5,000 people were either shot or drowned. By contrast, the number of Communists buried with great pomp and circumstance on 18 March — the anniversary of the Paris Commune, as the authorities were at pains to point out — was a mere 47. Long remembered as a small incident in the war between the Whites and the Reds, the true scale of the killing in Astrakhan is now known, thanks to recently published archival documents.* These documents reveal that it was the largest massacre of workers by Bolsheviks before the events at Kronstadt.

    *Brovkin, Behind the Front Lines, pp. 82-85; S. P. Melgunov, The Red Terror in Russia (London: Dent, 1925), pp. 58-60

    At the end of 1919 and the beginning of 1920, relations between the Bolsheviks and the workers deteriorated even further, following the militarization of more than 2,000 businesses. As the principal architect of the militarization of the workplace, Trotsky laid out his ideas on the issue at the Ninth Party Congress in March 1920. Trotsky explained that humans are naturally lazy. Under capitalism, people were forced to search for work to survive. The capitalist market acted as a stimulus to man, but under socialism "the utilization of work resources replaces the market.” It was thus the job of the state to direct, assign, and place the workers, who were to obey the state as soldiers obey orders in the army, because the state was working in the interests of the proletariat. Such was the basis of the militarization of the workplace, which was vigorously criticized by a minority of syndicalists, union leaders, and Bolshevik directors. In practice this meant the outlawing of strikes, which were compared to desertion in times of war; an increase in the disciplinary powers of employers; the total subordination of all unions and factory committees, whose role henceforth was to be simply one of support for the producers' policies; a ban on workers' leaving their posts; and punishments for absenteeism and lateness, both of which were exceedingly widespread because workers were often out searching for food.



    'When the tyrants could no longer hide the truth—the firing squads, the concentration camps, the man-made famine—they did their best to justify these atrocities by glossing them over. After admitting the use of terror, they justified it as a necessary aspect of revolution through the use of such catchphrases as "When you cut down a forest, the shavings get blown away” or "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs.” Vladimir Bukovsky retorted that he had seen the broken eggs, but no one he knew had ever tasted the omelet! Perhaps the single greatest evil was the perversion of language. As if by magic, the concentration-camp system was turned into a "reeducation system,” and the tyrants became “educators" who transformed the people of the old society into “new people.” The “zeks”, a term used for Soviet concentration camp prisoners, were forcibly "invited" to place their trust in a system that enslaved them. In China the concentration-camp prisoner is called a "student" and he is required to study the correct thoughts of the Party and to reform his own faulty thinking.

    As is usually the case, a lie is not, strictly speaking, the opposite of the truth, and a lie will generally contain an element of truth. Perverted words are situated in a twisted vision that distorts the landscape; one is confronted with a myopic social and political philosophy. Attitudes twisted by Communist propaganda are easy to correct, but it is monumentally difficult to instruct false prophets in the ways of intellectual tolerance. The first impression is always the one that lingers. Like martial artists, the Communists, thanks to their incomparable propaganda strength grounded in the subversion of language, successfully turned the tables on the criticisms leveled against their terrorist tactics, continually uniting the ranks of their militants and sympathizers by renewing the Communist act of faith. Thus they held fast to their fundamental principle of ideological belief, as formulated by Tertullian for his own era: "I believe, because it is absurd."

    Like common prostitutes, intellectuals found themselves inveigled into counterpropaganda operations. In 1928 Maksim Gorky accepted an invitation to go on an "excursion" to the Solovetski Islands, an experimental concentration camp that would "metastasize" (to use Solzhenitsyn's word) into the Gulag system. On his return Gorky wrote a book extolling the glories of the Solovetski camps and the Soviet government. A French writer, Henri Barbusse, recipient of the 1916 Prix Goncourt, did not hesitate to praise Stalin's regime for a fee. His 1928 book on "marvelous Georgia" made no mention of the massacre carried out there in 1921 by Stalin and his henchman Sergo Ordzhonikidze. It also ignored Lavrenti Beria, head of the NKVD, who was noteworthy for his Machiavellian sensibility and his sadism. In 1935 Barbusse brought out the first official biography of Stalin. More recently Maria Antonietta Macciochi spoke gushingly about Mao Zedong, and Alain Peyrefitte echoed the same sentiments to a lesser degree, while Danielle Mitterrand chimed in to praise the deeds of Fidel Castro. Cupidity, spinelessness, vanity, fascination with power, violence, and revolutionary fervor — whatever the motivation, totalitarian dictatorships have always found plenty of diehard supporters when they had need of them, and the same is true of Communist as of other dictatorships.

    Confronted with this onslaught of Communist propaganda, the West has long labored under an extraordinary self-deception, simultaneously fueled by naivete in the face of a particularly devious system, by the fear of Soviet power, and by the cynicism of politicians. There was self-deception at the meeting in Yalta, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt ceded Eastern Europe to Stalin in return for a solemn undertaking that the latter would hold free elections at the earliest opportunity. Realism and resignation had a rendezvous with destiny in Moscow in December 1944, when General Charles de Gaulle abandoned hapless Poland to the devil in return for guarantees of social and political peace, duly assured by Maurice Thorez on his return to Paris.

    This self-deception was a source of comfort and was given quasi-legitimacy by the widespread belief among Communists (and many leftists) in the West that while these countries were "building socialism," the Communist "Utopia," a breeding ground for social and political conflicts, would remain safely distant. Simone Weil epitomized this pro-Communist trendiness when she said, "revolutionary workers are only too thankful to have a state backing them—a state that gives an official character, legitimacy, and reality to their actions as only a state can, and that at the same time is sufficiently far away from them geographically to avoid seeming oppressive." Communism was supposedly showing its true colors — it claimed to be an emissary of the Enlightenment, of a tradition of social and human emancipation, of a dream of “true equality," and of "happiness for all" as envisioned by Gracchus Babeuf. And paradoxically, it was this image of Enlightenment" that helped keep the true nature of its evil almost entirely concealed.'
    Last edited by HERO; 11-23-2019 at 05:42 AM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,966
    Mentioned
    1092 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    the sense of the term "communism" is the collectivism -
    the approach when the group's common interests (and hence of the majority) are set as primery goal
    it's based on love to people and humanism

    type's specific is how this approach is realized on practice, with what dominating accents of how to care about people

    Russia had a socialism, which was mostly controlled by betas.
    socialism is a centralized rule where the state represents the main control over material resources and producing
    it's supposed to be for interests of the majority. was thought as a middle stage from the capitalism to the communism. was made rather surfacely in Russia - without enough collectivistic change in individual psyche of mass people, without good enough personal and wide development of humans. so socialism was weak, failed to go to the communism and all returned to the capitalism by political overturn
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  11. #11
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    15,079
    Mentioned
    847 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm surprised nobody has mentioned gamma capitalists

  12. #12
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,161
    Mentioned
    625 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    -ism is a religion

    I like systems that help improve human life. I don’t like systems that are their own religion. I have my own faith
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  13. #13
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,459
    Mentioned
    130 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    the sense of the term "communism" is the collectivism -
    the approach when the group's common interests (and hence of the majority) are set as primery goal
    it's based on love to people and humanism

    type's specific is how this approach is realized on practice, with what dominating accents of how to care about people

    Russia had a socialism, which was mostly controlled by betas.
    socialism is a centralized rule where the state represents the main control over material resources and producing
    it's supposed to be for interests of the majority. was thought as a middle stage from the capitalism to the communism. was made rather surfacely in Russia - without enough collectivistic change in individual psyche of mass people, without good enough personal and wide development of humans. so socialism was weak, failed to go to the communism and all returned to the capitalism by political overturn
    The majority only matters when you think you will be a part of it. Humanism should consider minorites as part of society too, and the smallest minority is the individual.

    Our consciousness is individual, not collective, so trying to model what is best for people (individuals) as if they were something they are not is not only doomed to fail, it's in denial of what it means to be human on a very deep level.


  14. #14
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,791
    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think Communism as a whole is ESI. There is a strong element of Fi in how communist ideology condemns exploiters, and the advocacy of violent revolution is obviously Se valuing. Weak Te/Ne is also evident in communism's suppression/disregard of entrepreneurism in favor of ethics and straight-up hard work.

  15. #15
    ☁ ☁ ☁ ☁ ☁ Birdie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    I'm surprised nobody has mentioned gamma capitalists
    Gamma capitalists don't really believe in communism, they just believe in using
    others to benefit themselves lmao.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beautiful sky View Post
    -ism is a religion

    I like systems that help improve human life. I don’t like systems that are their own religion. I have my own faith
    While I get what you're saying, the third definition of -ism is relating to religion.
    The first two do not. I don't want to argue semantics, just pointing out ism does
    not always imply religion and it is silly to think it does.
    Everything interests me but nothing holds me.

  16. #16
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    8,193
    Mentioned
    913 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Birdie View Post
    Gamma capitalists don't really believe in communism, they just believe in using
    others to benefit themselves lmao.
    Harsh, @Birdie. Not wrong, but harsh. Lol.

    Hey, sometimes Gamma capitalists try to extend the benefits to their team, whoever that is this week.
    Last edited by Adam Strange; 01-30-2020 at 02:52 PM.

  17. #17
    Socionics is a spook ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    15,079
    Mentioned
    847 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Perceiving people in terms of best practical use sounds like some Te thing. They can opt into identifying with it if they want. (I don't even know if you guys are talking about gammas who are fans of capitalism or using it as a catch-all term for gammas or what)

  18. #18
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,458
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    People can capitalize on communism if they're astute politically. Most Fi and Ti-types value personal autonomy and freedom, which is somewhat counter to communist doctrine. However, some Ti-types became communist dictators perhaps because the position gave them ultimate autonomy. An IE cannot be equated to an ideology but any type can adopt any ideology for various reasons......

    a.k.a. I/O

  19. #19
    ☁ ☁ ☁ ☁ ☁ Birdie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Harsh, @Birdie. Not wrong, but harsh. Lol.

    Hey, sometimes Gamma capitalists try to extend the benefits to their team, whoever that is this week.
    I've gotten more harsh over the years
    Everything interests me but nothing holds me.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    TIM
    ILE-Ti SO/SX 7w6
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The lazy brand of Delta NFs LOVE communism, but usually because they just want someone to pay them 75k to do silly art projects no one cares about while high on edibles

  21. #21
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    946so/sp SEI-Fe ELVF
    Posts
    6,346
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i'm not anti american (whatever that means), i know communism is bad. i also know about the lying and the denial of inequality from my lame ass govt. i really think if the right wing cares so much they should do a better job instead of bitching at what the left is doing. they are pathetic. can this hit them in the balls? cause they are not fulfilling their purpose.

    point is, you can't lie to me over and over and expect me to believe you. i'm not an idiot even though to people from higher classes i may appear as one. i know you fucked over my entire life. i know you fucked over other people far worse. and although i love to forgive, i never forget.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,966
    Mentioned
    1092 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  23. #23
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    958
    Mentioned
    141 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Birdie View Post
    Gamma capitalists don't really believe in communism, they just believe in using
    others to benefit themselves lmao.
    Not untrue generally, but to gammas like me it's all about mutually beneficial outcomes. So what if I use you to benefit myself if you are also benefited even if you fail to see how? Hell, I'm the type to try and engineer a situation where, while we both benefit each other, you get the better deal. Granted, I still benefit, but if we got all autistically mathematical you "objectively" got an (admittably slightly) better deal.

    I sadly understand how and why my quadra can and perhaps likely will fall into sociopathy all things being equal, which makes me very sad that so many that seem to share my thinking process seem to end up as either Commies or Atheists. From my own experience and perspective both are utterly laughable from both a logical standpoint and an emotive one.

    I seek a dialogue with anyone who disagrees viscerally with all I've just said. As I've stated many times before, I seek more data. Please, give me more

  24. #24
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,458
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pure capitalism wins by one. If I take all the potatoes that you grew and distribute one to everyone who has none leaving you with only one, we all starve together. If you keep all the potatoes that you grew then there'll be one left alive. Both idealistic extremes had to come from Ne minds.

    a.k.a. I/O

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •