Comrade Holly Wood, cover up — your supreme intellect is showing
Cherry picking — more Scottish than Stalin. ‘Evil as a disease of the few, not an affliction of the many’. The Narcissism of virtuosity. Lecturing birds how to fly:Theory is the child of the cure— why compassion cannot be enforced. Why wasn’t Jesus a commie?
What a novel and refreshing idea
If communism doesn’t lead to red hands, cherry picking does: …
Cherry picking is one of the first anti-intellectual intellectual endeavors one incurs when propagating an ideology — with ignoring ethical wisdom of old coming a (very close) second. (With ideology here meaning something that is so totally devoid of self-awareness: that it’s actions contradict it’s stated aims.)And your complicity here is no less treasonous: fortunately, in a democracy this is merely an innocuous, sarcastic term— that at worst only finds you looking naive and foolish; in a communist setting, anti-mainstream ‘treason’ at best, has you looking deader than dead — with the bonus luxury of having all your living friends suffer in your place.
…Are you more Scottish than Stalin?
The very same reference point (history) by which you orientate your argument of mass greed, corruption— and by extension crimes against humanity — is pointed quite explicitly toward the communist project committing some of the most heinous instances of mass greed, corruption — and crimes against humanity in contemporary society. There is hence a contradiction in your agenda, but hypocrisy has never halted communist dictators, in fact, whilst their people have starved and still starve today, both literally and metaphorically: hypocrisy is the most delicious of cakes and confectionaries that they choose to eat from.
Since you have no intention of not eating your cake; let me join you in the ahistorical badlands: where communism may still have a defensible position yet.
‘Evil as a disease of the few, not an affliction of the many’
You can’t reason with someone who has gone full-blown Nazi. By becoming full Nazi, a person will have demonstrated…medium.com
A quick tangent, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems that you still hold this sentiment, or something like it, without understanding the sheer irony of it’s ends. You seem to think, quite pathologically, that ‘broken’ people like Tila Tequila need only be taken off the air waves— for it to be clean for everybody else to breath. As Huey Long said of Facisim in America: “Of course we’ll have it. We’ll have it under the guise of anti-fascism.”
Not ‘real’ communism — the narcissism of virtuosity
In this world, where no ‘real’ communist project has been given room to take place, where, pray tell, are the virtuous people to initiate it?
Unless you are hiding Ghandi re-incarnate under your bed, I’m going to assume that you believe yourself ,or someone like yourself, to be the self-appointed leader brave and good enough to succeed where others have failed so terribly.
Are you really that narcissistic, to believe yourself of such high and unparalleled virtue, not just of your generation — but of all time?
And even so — hopefully feeling somewhat uncomfortable in the process of entertaining this delusion — what are the fucking chances that all those in your revolutionary circle have even a quarter of your selflessness and purity of heart? Remember, all it takes is one bad seed in your entourage to subvert your revolution and take control of it for themselves: granted you don’t do so first.
One man (Stalin) was responsible for killing the entirety of the Bolshevik guard that initiated the communist revolution: and we can’t even say for certain that they themselves wouldn't have been corrupted had that not happened. And remember, this very hypothetical is based on your argument of systematic greed and corruption: so if you don’t entertain it then you need to throw out your entire premise and do something better with your time . Better yet, don’t tell me — or anybody — about it.
Virtue is precisely that which one doesn’t show.
Lecturing birds how to fly
Thinking, that only now, there is a true and total solution to the problem of greed — and ‘evil — is sheer intellectual masterbation. This propping up of the intellect is the exact same misconception that academics have of tertiary institutions providing unparalleled wealth and growth for society: as if it were never possible before, never-mind the fact that all evidence suggests that is wholly possible without it. This is for the simple reason that Good, much like invention and practical ethics, comes from action in the real world, not philosophical manifestos written whilst sitting in armchairs. Good action has existed long before academic tracts to that effect: much like how birds have flown long before there were lectures about how birds fly.
Theory is the child of the ‘cure’, not the opposite.
So what, only now, there are enough brain cells to go around — that solving the problem of good and evil was just a question of accumulated academia—ignoring totally the practical ethical wisdom and proverbs that existed, and succeeded (were they implemented properly) long before this?
Real or imagined, what can definitely said about Jesus is that he was certainly a hippie and indubitably virtuous. So why in the hell wasn't he a communist? Not because Karl Marx hadn't yet been born, nor because no communist philosophy existed — because if communism were as self-evident and practical as you want it to be: then the logic of communism would be a discovery coming out of brute (virtuous) action, not academic tracts. And hence, Jesus( of all figures) would’ve been it’s chief proponent. (And that’s to say nothing of any other ‘real’ historical figures like him) This is immediately demonstrable on the basis that compassion cannot, by necessity, be enforced.
Compassion Cannot Be Enforced
The aforementioned cherry picking on your behalf, as well as on part of the American left, is exactly why this very-contradiction in terms is not picked up. And, in fact, it seems that enforcing compassion is only having the opposite effect.
Why wasn’t Jesus a commie?
When Jesus was asked by the Jewish slaves what to do when the Romans made them carry their military cargo (known as the Roman Mile), he said “Walk two”. The idea here being, that sincere love and compassion can only come from the spirit of individual action and re-action, not political pleading or larger authoritarian enforcement. Rising up against the Romans would not teach them compassion, or the Jews compassion for that matter — hence, nor would making compassion institutional teach compassion.
Honestly, if you want to see what a failure institutionalizing compassion is, look no further than the Catholic Church.
The line between good and evil, runs not on the political spectrum, but down the line of every mans soul.
Morality is not a brute force exercise of the intellect: just look to see how much of a delightful conversation companion a smart-ass makes. Likewise, look no further than to me: I’m sounding smarmy and self-righteous, by merely communicating valid points that you either don’t know or care not to entertain; and I thus personally believe that coming off as self-righteous is an inevitable, unavoidable, result of such.