Tag Archives: Communism

The Benefits of Democracy

27 Feb

The chief benefit of any nominally Democratic form of government is not that it gives the Common Man his say – he is all too often a fool and frequently also a swine –  but the characteristic most commonly named as its major defect; it is inefficient. Not even the most hysterical of rabble-rousers can force it to move swiftly for long, and often they cannot persuade it to move at all. Consequently, many of the worst ideas loose among the chattering classes never move far beyond the college campuses and coffee houses where they are born. Those that do mostly collapse of their own stupidity long before they pose any serious danger to the public at large.

This may seem a fantastic statement, seeing how much Left wing nitwittery we have weighing us down in these modern times, but consider the fate of countries that have – or had – more efficient governments. In Russia and mainland China there were no checks and balances to hinder the visions of the State. The consequences of this efficiency can be counted in millions of deaths, and in widespread poverty, despair, and environmental ruin.

In the United States we are raised to think of the purpose of government to be the safeguarding of the common good, but historically this has never been the case. The purpose of government is, and always has been, to transform the will (and all too often, the whim) of the Head of State into reality, both practical and impractical. The history of this shows clearly that the average Head of State can no more be trusted with planning the future of his people than a five year old can be trusted with a gallon of nitroglycerine. Therefore it can be said that an efficient government is an authentic public menace.

We in the United States have escaped this menace. As we observe the fate of places like Russia or Cuba that did not, we should give daily thanks.

Witch Hunt

9 Jan

One of the keystones of the Liberal version of 20th Century history is the 1950’s Anti-Communist Witch Hunt. Books have been written about it, films made about it, children are taught about it in school. It is an important part of the Liberal/Progressive collective self-image.

It is also largely bushwah.

The public perception of the Salem Witch Trials is based largely on the play THE CRUCIBLE in which teenage girls make baseless accusations against innocent people and cause their deaths. In point of fact the actual historical Trials had both more complicated causes and more complex endings. But THE CRUCIBLE, which was deliberately written to echo the author’s perceived persecution at anti-communism hearings, is routinely taught in public schools, and thus strongly influences the public perception of the Trials.  When something is described as a “Witch Hunt” it is tacitly understood that no actual “Witches” exist, and that anyone caught up in the hunt is an innocent victim. We Modern Educated People are invited to feel superior to those stupid Puritans who believed in witches, and to make the jump to believing that in the modern “Witch Hunt” we are being asked to condemn, there also isn’t any actual quarry. And in the case of the “Anti-Communist Witch Hunt” that simply isn’t so.

Under Stalin, the USSR’s intelligence apparatus ran dozens, possibly hundreds, of agents in the United State both during and after the Second World War. This is irrefutable; we have proof from Soviet era records as well as from contemporary intelligence intercepts. The American Communist Party was substantially funded by the USSR for years. Anger Hiss and the Rosenbergs were demonstrably guilty. Many, if not all, of the “victims” of the “Hollywood Blacklist” were passionate Stalinists who worked seriously, if probably ineffectually, for a Communist Revolution.

This isn’t to say that Senator Joe McCarthy was a hero. He was almost certainly a political bully and general jackass and any damage he may have done to International Communism seems likely to have been accidental. But to the Political Left he was an absolute gift. If he hadn’t been real, they would have needed to invent him.

Because, you see, without the myth that the hunt for Communist agents in the United States was an unjust persecution of enormous proportions the Left would have to face the fact that the Communists of that era were a selection of moderately stupid dupes of a genuine Monster. That, in turn, might force them to examine the stupidity of the later dupes who fell headlong for Mao, who was , if anything, an even bigger monster. And much of their cherished air of Moral Superiority would evaporate like morning mist on a hot summer’s day.

The facts are that there was some justification for various Leftist Socialist delusions at the beginning of the 20th Century, but that by 1950 anyone who wasn’t at least dimly aware that the USSR was a brutal dictatorship was ideologically blinded, or exceptionally stupid, or both. The Intellectual Left embraces Communism and related impositions because such systems hold out the mirage of a society run by Intellectuals. And never mind that the Intellectual Class of any nation that suffers a Communist Revolution is almost instantly liquidated by the thugs and psychopaths that always seem to end up actually running things.

The Western Intellectuals have been allowed to wrap themselves in false Moral Superiority for far too long. They are no improvement on any other self-selected elite of would-be aristocrats. They have not, in the West, ever, suffered anything like the persecution they deserve for promoting a system that spreads death and misery the way Communism does. They should be told in no uncertain terms that their Witch Hunt narrative is hogwash, their Moral Superiority bushwah, and their suitability to tell other people how to live as illusory as a syphilitic Bishop’s.

Religions and Societies

30 Apr

Part of the ongoing Culture Wars (and there is always an ongoing Culture War, unless a society is stagnant) is the battle between Intellectual Atheism and Christianity. Naturally both sides are playing the victim card for all they are worth, and just as naturally a lot of the arguments on both sides are so much eyewash.

I was raised as a Protestant Christian, though I have agnostic tendencies. I have never really considered Atheism; I see too much Art in the world to be convinced that there is no Artist. I cannot, therefore, be an impartial judge. But I can make some observations.

Societies founded upon Protestant Christianity are, at least to me, clearly preferable to any of the present alternatives. Catholicism has a historical tendency to produce cultures where the vast majority of people are peasants, and conditions are such that they will stay peasants. Buddhism sounds very nice in theory, but Buddhist societies are also full of peasants, and the peasants in Buddhist societies tend to be treated like farm animals. Islam, at least at the moment, is dominated by violent mobs. Hindus, for reasons that I can’t get my mind around, tolerate the Caste system (*spit*).

Protestants created the first western societies where the spread of literacy was a social priority. They formed the first anti-slavery movement that was not, at base, a slave’s revolt. Theirs are the first societies to even pay lip service to the rights of women and minorities. I don’t know why this should be so, but it is plainly in evidence.

By contrast, Atheists, in the wake of the 20th Century, have a great deal of explaining to do. The U.S.S.R. was an Atheistical society, and so was Mao’s China. Both slaughtered people with an enthusiasm that would have at least startled the most bloodthirsty Spanish Inquisitor. It seems to me that by asserting the nonexistence of Gods, Atheistical societies remove a major check on the rapaciousness of the State, which promptly acts with the kind of calm restraint associated with a column of army ants. Communist (and therefore Atheist) societies murdered between 85 million and 100 million people in the Twentieth Century, according to THE BLACK BOOK OF COMMUNISM (Harvard Press). That is at least an order of magnitude worse than anything any other Religion had managed.

There are plenty of swine who call themselves Christians, the Westboro Baptist Church being a prime example. And Christian societies have a great deal to be ashamed of. But Protestant Christianity is still head and shoulders (and a good deal of the abdomen) above anything else available. Maybe Atheism can produce a nation sized society that doesn’t end up using mass slaughter as a tool of Statecraft, but I want to see it before I believe in it. The 20th Century, with its litany of (Communist) Stalin, (Communist) Mao, and other little tin-pot Communists too numerous and depressing to mention, has worn out any benefit of the doubt to which Atheism might once have been entitled.

The Elites

9 Apr

Throughout human history governments have been run by Elites of various kinds, largely self-selected. There have been warrior elites, theocratic elites, mercantile elites, and (now) intellectual elites. As a rule, while they may have risen to power through some sort of discernible merit, over the span of their control the rationales that these elites have given for their supremacy have been less than persuasive.

Up to the Renaissance, the usual pattern was either a strong King (and his Aristocratic hangers-on) making use of the Priests or a strong Priesthood making use of the King. When you had a weak King and a weak Priesthood, you usually got invaded, and when you had a strong King and a strong Priesthood you frequently got a civil war. No matter what happened, the peasants got it in the neck.

The Renaissance introduced a new set of players; the merchants. They had been growing in importance for a long time, and they began to be able to force the Kings and the Priests to listen. Neither the Priests nor the Kings liked that much, and the resulting squabbles added force to the wars of the times.

The Revolutionary War was, in some part, a fight between a King and some merchants. The American Civil War pitted a bunch of would-be Aristocrats (the Southern Plantation Owners) against the merchant/industrialist North.

The Intellectual Class rose to importance as the industrial revolution  really got going in the 19th Century. Previously mind-workers (which is what an intellectual is, after all) were largely confined to the Church or the Aristocracy. With demand for them spreading, and the wealth to pay for them growing, they branched out. And like the Kings, Priests, and Merchants before them they quickly determined that the world would run much better if they were in charge.

The thing is, none of the elites have a good record. The history of human progress is, all to often, a history of what was achieved in the face of opposition by the current social elite. And the Intellectuals are no exception.

Each type of elite has, naturally, favored that type (or those types) of government that would place them in power. Kings have favored Monarchies. Priests have favored Theocracies. Merchants have favored various flavors of Plutocracy. The Intellectuals, for whatever reason, gravitated to Communalism, and its cousin Socialism, where they have stayed. When Marx wrote a scientific sounding justification for Communalism and called it Communism, the Intellectuals climbed on that bandwagon in vast numbers. No failure of Communism, no exposure of mass slaughter, or broad corruption has been able to make them let go of the dream of Communism/Socialism; a State run by panels of “experts” for the benefit of All.

Not that the Intellectuals are worse than the elites that went before them. The Aristocrats clung to the ideal of their Right to Rule in the face of societal collapse and the obvious degeneration of many of their bloodlines into inbred idiocy. The Southern Planters clung to slavery and actually managed to convince their Poor White quasi-subjects to take up arms to defend the institution that kept those subjects poor. The result was the bloodiest war the United States ever fought.  Other examples of elitist imbecility abound. But the Intellectuals are not better either. In the name of defending their ‘right’ to rule, they have defended the indefensible. Communism spent the 20th Century racking up a record of murder and misery that hadn’t even been approached for magnitude since the death of Attila the Hun.  In an effort to mark themselves as different from the sweating masses, they have also cozied up to all kinds of howling barbarians. They have flirted with mass murderers, genocidal maniacs, child molesters, and thugs. Like the elites that came before them they have the moral stature of slime mold. We should, as a people, cast them onto the ash-heap of history, and then start keeping a sharp eye out for whatever bunch of jumped-up yahoos tries to replace them.  Especially ourselves…