Communism: The Flaw of the Land
An analysis of Key Assumptions: "Wealth is Criminal," "The End of Property (for Some),"
A fellow revolutionary had said of Marx,
If his heart had matched his intellect,
and if he possessed as much love as hate,
I would have gone through fire for him.
But, a most dangerous personal ambition has eaten away all the good in him.
From Thomas Sowell’s Marx the Man
Favorite Quotes from this Article
[Communism] is a persuasive argument that has been debunked by almost a century of living history.
The unaddressed Satisologie of the soil and earth, the unmitigated heat, winds, rains, torrential downpours and fluctuations in light, barometric pressure, and animal life all interconnect and inter-depend in the forest. It’s not an easy thing for a human to formulate an accurate decomposition and recompose elements in a new, creative way while still accounting for everything as well or better. This is what we are trying to do with Communism, but in the organic spectrum of human social norm.
Helen Keller once said “Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” She was spot on. Marx and Engels were both misanthropes who grew fond of one another. They were actually overcoming suffering together by writing the Communist Manifesto. Ah, if we could have left it at art and appreciated it for its aesthetic value.
Pre-ramble
Before I begin this exposition on some major flaws in Communist thought, I would like to remind the reader that I was given a copy of the Communist Manifesto at age thirteen by a close scholar and friend B. The cadence eluded my quizzical mind at thirteen because “struggle” had a limited meaning; I had not seen workers and business owners and the deplorable conditions of 1800s London that Karl Marx was exposed to with his own senses. Reel forward twenty years and as an adult who has traveled and seen fellow humans through to be intelligent, loving, kind, daring, and above all, curious, it pains me to know that Karl Marx ended up a misanthrope.
As a final precursory aside I would simply like to mention that Karl Marx was without cash most of his existence and what he could mooch from his parents in his early life he did — not even paying his college tuition with the money allotted, living a Bohemian life on campus. When he was very old and dying, he became very rich, for his writings finally reached a large enough audience. In today’s world, Karl Marx could write today and publish today and have some income from creating a book, overnight. He would not have had to have Engels subsidize the whole of his life, for Engels provided Marx an annuity and quite frequently bailed his wife and daughters out for rent and the like. Marx tried to live a luxurious life while everyone was scraping by, and he believed so strongly that his writings would start a revolution — but he did not care if the revolution made things better or worse, as long as he was on top when the dust settled. Case in point, he always believed himself to be on top, even when all the world was but dust.
Sections
This article about Early and Foundational Communism features two headings: “Wealth is Criminal” and “The End of Property (for Some)” which are distillations formulated here freshly for your convenience in understanding the general and pervasive flaws in Communist thought.
Please enjoy and if you have any feedback or comments please write to vaso at satisologie.com or reach out via jack dorsey’s twitter @_vaso
Being a Man is Brutal - About the Gentleman’s Agreement
Claim of Communism: Wealth is Criminal
Propaganda Artifacts
Persuasive and Debunked - Before we roll into history
Rule by the Intelligentsia
173 Years Since it was Writ in 1847
Welcome to Yugoslavia, Best Place in Whole World
It’s easy to join, impossible to leave
On Truth
On Domestic Zones
Levels of Person
Truman Video - Ushering in the Truman Doctrine
The End of Property (for Some)
Back to the Brutality of Being a Man - A Gentleman’s Agreement Revisited
The Overarching Aims of Communism, Phase 1 and Phase 2
The Ongoing Goal of Communism
Firstly, an entirely different analogy.
Being a Man is Brutal
My friends and I have an idea, it’s called the Gentleman’s Agreement; of the seven of us. We each get a large chunk of land somewhere in the world and we share the ownership. You have your home base that you are responsible for maintaining. And, you can visit any one of the other six plots indefinitely, provided you are extending the same courtesy to the other six members.
What happens when you stop extending that courtesy to the other Gentlemen? You are in violation of the agreement. This is a very simple example and a practical real-world application of distributed ownership and responsibility.
Claim of Communism: Wealth is Criminal
In essence, Communism is a form of government that places control back in the hands of the people, based on the assumption that wealth is criminal.
The Communist argues that wealth is the mark of greed. More accurately based on present-day knowledge, wealth is the mark of greed unless you get that wealth through Communist-approved means.
Subsection B: God is dead and his laws are write-able just like tabernacle choruses. Marx might have said, “We are God now.” [see Marx the Man, poetry of young Marx]
"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."
Helen Keller once said “Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” She was spot on. Marx and Engels were both misanthropes who grew fond of one another. They were actually overcoming suffering together by writing the Communist Manifesto. Ah, if we could have left it at art and appreciated it for its aesthetic value.
Please, read just the beginning of the Communist Manifesto to refresh yourself:
I. Bourgeois and Proletarians
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.
Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.
In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank. In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebeians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations.
The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.
Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other – Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.
And there it is; through definition of an out-group and in-group the Communist manifesto creates a position. Unfortunately for everyone, the revolution instilled by Communistic thought will be successful in its destruction of the old forest of monuments and structures, and only partially successful in its establishments of new structures to overtake the Satisologie of the situation through intellectualization of needs wants and resources.
Imagine trying to create a man-made forest, and account for all the ecological needs of the biome in the process. Marx was a man to think it could be done through wholly artificial means. The unaddressed Satisologie of the soil and earth, the unmitigated heat, winds, rains, torrential downpours and fluctuations in light, barometric pressure, and animal life all interconnect and inter-depend in the forest. It’s not an easy thing for a human to formulate an accurate decomposition and recompose elements in a new, creative way while still accounting for everything as well or better. This is what we are trying to do with Communism, but in the organic spectrum of human social norm.
Propaganda Artifacts
Communistic thought requires an unceasing flow of propaganda artifacts that risk contradicting and outdating themselves against the current current of thought.
Recall how the Maoist regime embedded “contradiction” as the numeral three tenant of party ideology — helpful if your doctrine is riddled with self-contradictory holes — “yeah that’s number three for you, man.”
Persuasive and Debunked
The basic argument is that wealth is criminal, and only by removing the wealthy class can we remove all criminality. This is a persuasive argument that has been debunked by almost a century of living history, and in calling upon the true historical events I shall show that the Communistic Thought is founded on misapprehensions on how the system of world need and reaction functions.
Essentially, the Communist Infesto is an attempt at understanding the underlying antagonism(s) of man. One strong persistent social inequity is identified and what is espoused is a version of eliminating this antagonism. However, it simply puts Marx and Engels into the top echelon of a new antagonism, along with anyone with their zest for philosophy. Rule by the intelligentsia — but only the intelligentsia that understands the playbook.
Rule by the Intelligentsia
Rule by the intelligentsia — but only the intelligentsia that understands the playbook.
Look at this quote from the legal document that is the “Constitutional” basis of the Party Room of Control (PRC):
"The socialist transformation of the private ownership of the means of production was completed, the system of exploitation of man by man eliminated and the socialist system established. "
“The exploitation of man by man has been eliminated” …?
That's not what one writes in a founding document when one has a legitimate government. One does not start with "Mission Accomplished" and work their way back.
173 Years Since it was Writ in 1847
It's been 173 years since the Communist Manifesto was written. In that 173 years, let’s see some of the historical transpirations.
February 21, 1848: German economist and philosopher Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels publish The Communist Manifesto, calling for a working-class revolt against capitalism. Its motto, “Workers of the world, unite!” quickly became a rallying cry.
Too bad the actual tag line, "Wealth is criminal" did not catch on.
Communism has been attempted before, and it's very easy. You actually don't need to kill anyone, you just need to keep creating propaganda and philosophical thought to preoccupy the intelligentsia that could oppose you. You need to make it mandatory law that they know the dictums inside and out, and you put the peddling and meddling to the printingpress metal. It only sucks if you are not smart enough to think of propaganda and then you have to resort to using violent force.
November 7, 1917: With Vladimir Lenin at the helm, the Bolsheviks, ascribing to Marxism, seize power during Russia’s October Revolution and become the first communist government. Later that month, the leftist Socialist Revolutionaries defeat the Bolsheviks in an election, but, despite his promises of “bread, land and peace,” Lenin uses military force to take power. It’s during this period the Red Terror (executions of the Czar’s officials), prisoner-of-war labor camps and other police state tactics are established.
July 1, 1921: Inspired by the Russian Revolution, the Communist Party of China is formed.
January 21, 1924: Lenin dies at age 54 of a stroke, and Joseph Stalin, who had served as Lenin’s general secretary, eventually takes over official rule of the Soviet Union until his death in 1953 from a brain hemorrhage. He industrialized the country through a state-controlled economy, but it led to famine. Under his regime, detractors were deported or imprisoned in labor camps, and, as part of the Great Purge, 1 million people were executed under Stalin’s orders.
1940 to 1979 (39 year span): Communism is established by force or otherwise in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Yugoslavia, Poland, North Korea, Albania, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, China, Tibet, North Vietnam, Guinea, Cuba, Yemen, Kenya, Sudan, Congo, Burma, Angola, Benin, Cape Verde, Laos, Kampuchea, Madagascar, Mozambique, South Vietnam, Somalia, Seychelles, Afghanistan, Grenada, Nicaragua and others.
Welcome to Yugoslavia, Best Place in Whole World
Balkanization, a moving picture.
The case of Yugoslavia is amazing because its establishment was the only one done flawlessly, or as flawlessly as could be done. The chief ingredient was propaganda.
General Tito, just a leader of some rebel forces against the Nazis at the time, was squirreling away from the Mutes (what Yugoslavs called the Germans because they could not understand their language). It was a guerrilla campaign similar to that of the US rebels against the red coats. Tito was doing well with his troops on terrain they understood better than anyone else. Tito requested more typewriters instead of more guns. He would ask for help and what he needed was more typewriters. He needed to leave a wake of propaganda papers flurrying about every township and riverside settlement to make sure people knew he was the one doing the saving.
When it was clear that the Nazis were losing the Balkans to domestic forces, Tito stopped fighting and let the rest of the militants keep the struggle going. Recognizing fame as a sureshot to the top, he turned his attention to creating even more illustrious propaganda that would showcase him as the single point of Salvation in the struggle. By the time the skirmishes and general wartime were over, Tito's name was the only one on people's tongues, and he became unabashed dictator of a new experiment called Yugoslavia.
It’s easy to join the club, impossible to leave.
When the nations that composed Yugoslavia said they were leaving the union, the threat was military action. Imagine a unified army with people from Ohio, South Carolina, California, Montana, and Alabama all being dispatched to prevent California from leaving the union. Would you kill a fellow Californian to keep the union together? This was more-or-less the question facing Yugoslav military and para-military forces that were sent to prevent cession from the union. Not only a quandry-ridden quagmire, but an utter ethical question mark when we consider that the longevity of the union did not really lend to the success of the people. Indeed, the Satisologie of the independent states to pursue their own intentions, interests, and national relationships was a force that dramatically outweighed even the risk of death and total annihilation itself. “Give me liberty or give me death” is not just an American notion.
The absurdity of attacking your own body to save your own brain shined through the dark clouds of Communist ignorance.
On Truth
As Buddha says, “Three things cannot long remain hidden: The Sun, the Moon, and the Truth.”
On Domestic Zones
How did Yugoslavia end up in “domestic zones?” The latest theory from our think-tank is that the unity of the tribes was a perceived threat to Communism and therefore border lines were etched throughout the rivers and forests to ensure a sort of cultural gerrymandering that would ensnare any leap to unification or common solidarity.
Personally, I suspect some foul play between Tito and the Fascist Italians who carved out swathes of Yugoslavia into ethnic zones. Until then, there was not that great a distinction for terrain and religion, but after the formation of these "domestic zones" the timebomb of balkanization was put into motion. Unwittingly, they put 49 years on the timer, set to detonate in '91 and '92.
Learning from History
What happens when you run out of propaganda artifacts to keep the intelligentsia occupied? You must get smarter or get violent. But, if you get violent, you have invited the end of your Communism Experiment.
Notice how smartness and violence are opposites here. It's often true. The way forward is not through thrashing, but it's easy to see that thrash takes place.
Levels of Person
What can we learn about Communism and its problems?
There are 3 levels of person and 1 "nonperson" level. I'm not joking.
1. Leadership class. Individualist societies create a dictator. Collectivist societies a parliament. Can own land. Usually, extranationally to avoid suspicion domestically.
2. Communist Party member and normal "citizen," with rights to property that can be put on a truck. Excludes land.
3. Not a party member but a "citizen," with rights to property that can be put on a truck. Excludes land.
4. Not a human, not a person, no rights. Property belonging to everyone, to be used as seen fit by the leadership class.
Truman Video, the Truman Doctrine
Truman Doctrine (started 1947 "A Fateful Hour")
If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world and we shall surely endanger the welfare of this nation.
Great Responsibilities have been placed upon us by the swift movement of events.
The End of Property (for Some)
Back to the Brutality of Being a Man: A Gentleman’s Agreement Revisited
It would be hypocritical of one of the Gentlemen of the Agreement to keep property (land) hidden from the other Gentlemen in the Agreement. Doing so would be some sort of hypocrisy, a demonstration that they did not fully believe in the power of the Agreement, or its tenants, or its simplicity and excellence in sharing all your land with everyone else.
The End of Property for Some
Of course, the Gentleman’s Agreement above is just a simple example, that would not lead to any sort of revolt among 7 friends, but imagine if you are a leader in the Communist party in your nation, is it consistent with your belief system to buy land extranationally? It is not uncommon for Communist party members from Asian countries to own land in the United States, for example. Is that not a problem or a belief mismatch? There is no land ownership in the nation of origin, but there can be ownership extranationally. Either, people are fully subscribed and believe that their way will surely win out in the end, so mismatched means justify the ending; or they are not fully subscribed or real adherents to their belief system and “believe it” only when it benefits them.
The Overarching Aims of Communism, Phase 1 and Phase 2
Phase I
"Workers of the World Unite!" ( = "Wealth is Criminal" )
Phase II
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
Oversimplification
A Communist state is a prison, with an overhanging admonition that all ought to work on maxim alone.
The second phase of Communism is only attainable through education.
However, education often contradicts fundamental principles in Communism, which incites an arms-race of propaganda.
One way to slow down this arms-race is to require central approval of each and every decision. Centralisation, however, is only as powerful as its ability to apply propaganda and force.
But say I buy in to it, and say I want to eat an Oreo.
So I write a letter to the kitchen council asking the president of the kitchen, and he lets me know. The president might check in with the city council, who checks in with the mayor, who checks in with the governor, who might check in with the president of the nation. Assuming nobody above wished to postpone my Oreo, I can have one. But I have to wait for confirmation from on-high. And where is my desire for an Oreo three hours later when I am in the garden? Things have moved on, but my needs are brewing and going mostly unfulfilled. In a communist country there is a lot of jealousy and anger because there is a general loss of positionality. In terms of coarse freedoms, the leadership class is like an average puritanical American citizen with strong proclivities for self-censorship, and everyone else is below that.
The Ongoing Goal of Communism
Equality, contrary to popular belief, is not a stated goal in any of the literature.
From each according to his chess game, to each according to his hunger for potatoes.
From each according to his intelligence and dexterity and "God-given gifts" to each according to his desire, want, greed, need, necessity, and argued paucity.
What are the needs of an individual? Nobody knows. Karl Marx doesn't know.
What are the abilities of an individual? nobody knows. Only that individual can know, and sometimes they don't know. Sometimes it only comes through positive nurturing, like how Engels nurtured Marx.
So it says, Max Ability, without any path to uncover it.
And it says Minimal Needs, without any respect for incumbent Satisological Processes beyond the human gullet.
Effectively, Ability is ability to write propaganda, and minimization of Need means that anyone who cannot write a party proposal as intelligently as Karl Marx has no needs that need addressing.
[1] The Communist Manifesto https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf
[2] Marx the Man, book by Thomas Sowell (Economist, former Marxist). You can listen to it as an audiobook on YouTube.
[3] History.com Timeline of Significant Communism Events https://www.history.com/topics/russia/communism-timeline
[4] Wikipedia Graphic for the Breakup of Yugoslavia https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Breakup_of_Yugoslavia-TRY2.gif/450px-Breakup_of_Yugoslavia-TRY2.gif
[5] Stanford Entry on Karl Marx https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/