War With Communists

[Martin Hash]

Communism Works

[de officiis]

My dad just told me it looks good on paper but doesn't work in the real world. I'm assuming he meant the economic aspects of it. I hope he didn't mean any of the societal aspects of it

Nah he's not stupid.

I just recall vividly the visceral reaction. He was of an age where he would've been a young man in the midst of the Joe McCarthy era, but we never talked about that. I don't know how widespread anti-communist sentiments were in the '70's, but I never got the feeling that his views were unusual or extreme. I suspect maybe the older generation here in the U.S. has just kind of assumed that their attitudes were more or less to be taken for granted. It seems as though some folks at our colleges and universities have been quietly undermining those beliefs.

[apeman]

Communism Works

main point of Martin's short judgement:

What those Stan nations have today is because of communism, which works pretty well when a society is being dragged into modernity

Why? I'm sure you considered opportunity cost, how could you be confident?

[Martin Hash]

Communism Works

main point of Martin's short judgement:

What those Stan nations have today is because of communism, which works pretty well when a society is being dragged into modernity

Why? I'm sure you considered opportunity cost, how could you be confident?

Since the Commies have gone, the Stans are slipping back into barbarism. They're picking cotton like it's 1830, and for Kyrgyzstan, cotton is their main agricultural export.

[Hastur]

In order for Communism to work you have to change human nature. It might work for some other species of sentient animals but not for humans. We are hierarchical pyramid builders.

[Martin Hash]

In order for Communism to work you have to change human nature. It might work for some other species of sentient animals but not for humans. We are hierarchical pyramid builders.

These are my thoughts on where communism is appropriate.

I don't know what the IQ of the people in Kyrgyzstan is but it's high enough they will work but low enough that complex entrepreneurship is rare. Capitalism requires profits. You can't make money from poor people or some Capitalist would be doing it already, so those poor people just pick their cotton & ride their water buffalo in the fields for centuries while the rest of the world moves on. Here's where communism comes in: it doesn't require profits. As long as there's production someplace, the excess can be used to keep an artificial economy going. Hence, the people of Russia paid for the tractors & machinery that the Kyrgyzstani people used, and provided a veneer of the modern aspects of life; enough that the outside world was fooled anyway. As long as Russians paid for and managed Kyrgyzstan, it prospered, from 1922 to 1992, the best 70 years of their history. Eventually, the Russian people were, "fuck that shit, we're Capitalists now," and Kyrgyzstan slowly slid back to its old ways. Communism is definitely "give a man a fish" rather than "teach him how to fish," but some people just can't fish.

p.s. Apparently, the lower the IQ, the more outside cash & management has to flow in, because communism in Africa was a failure.

[Speaker to Animals]

In order for Communism to work you have to change human nature. It might work for some other species of sentient animals but not for humans. We are hierarchical pyramid builders.

These are my thoughts on where communism is appropriate.

I don't know what the IQ of the people in Kyrgyzstan is but it's high enough they will work but low enough that complex entrepreneurship is rare. Capitalism requires profits. You can't make money from poor people or some Capitalist would be doing it already, so those poor people just pick their cotton & ride their water buffalo in the fields for centuries while the rest of the world moves on. Here's where communism comes in: it doesn't require profits. As long as there's production someplace, the excess can be used to keep an artificial economy going. Hence, the people of Russia paid for the tractors & machinery that the Kyrgyzstani people used, and provided a veneer of the modern aspects of life; enough that the outside world was fooled anyway. As long as Russians paid for and managed Kyrgyzstan, it prospered, from 1922 to 1992, the best 70 years of their history. Eventually, the Russian people were, "fuck that shit, we're Capitalists now," and Kyrgyzstan slowly slid back to its old ways. Communism is definitely "give a man a fish" rather than "teach him how to fish," but some people just can't fish.

p.s. Apparently, the lower the IQ, the more outside cash & management has to flow in, because communism in Africa was a failure.

That's actually a thesis worth pursuing.

One thing, though.. Innovation, at least, depends upon IQ, but IQ is not the only ingredient you need. Chinese have a higher IQ, but they really are not as innovative as people of European descent. They are a bit too conformist after a few thousand years of bureaucracy selecting for conformist behavior by rewarding the conformists with high IQ with advancement in the state, which provided them with more resources that made it possible for them to have more children on average than those who were lower IQ or did not naturally conform.

There's something else that matters.

[Martin Hash]

In order for Communism to work you have to change human nature. It might work for some other species of sentient animals but not for humans. We are hierarchical pyramid builders.

These are my thoughts on where communism is appropriate.

I don't know what the IQ of the people in Kyrgyzstan is but it's high enough they will work but low enough that complex entrepreneurship is rare. Capitalism requires profits. You can't make money from poor people or some Capitalist would be doing it already, so those poor people just pick their cotton & ride their water buffalo in the fields for centuries while the rest of the world moves on. Here's where communism comes in: it doesn't require profits. As long as there's production someplace, the excess can be used to keep an artificial economy going. Hence, the people of Russia paid for the tractors & machinery that the Kyrgyzstani people used, and provided a veneer of the modern aspects of life; enough that the outside world was fooled anyway. As long as Russians paid for and managed Kyrgyzstan, it prospered, from 1922 to 1992, the best 70 years of their history. Eventually, the Russian people were, "fuck that shit, we're Capitalists now," and Kyrgyzstan slowly slid back to its old ways. Communism is definitely "give a man a fish" rather than "teach him how to fish," but some people just can't fish.

p.s. Apparently, the lower the IQ, the more outside cash & management has to flow in, because communism in Africa was a failure.

That's actually a thesis worth pursuing.

One thing, though.. Innovation, at least, depends upon IQ, but IQ is not the only ingredient you need. Chinese have a higher IQ, but they really are not as innovative as people of European descent. They are a bit too conformist after a few thousand years of bureaucracy selecting for conformist behavior by rewarding the conformists with high IQ with advancement in the state, which provided them with more resources that made it possible for them to have more children on average than those who were lower IQ or did not naturally conform.

There's something else that matters.

Yeah, innovation needs to come from somewhere, and there must be a genetic component? Communism works in China for the same reason it worked in Kyrgyzstan. It's just now hitting the 70 year mark there, I wonder if in another couple decades, they'll have created self-sustaining Capitalism. (Marx was almost right, he just had the economic order hierarchy reversed: Capitalism is the ultimate state.)

[Speaker to Animals]

This story sums up why innovation is a bit retarded in China despite their much higher average IQ:

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/europ ... fugee-camp

[apeman]

Interesting