Tani says: Info Yes, GIVE TO MIM (don't care which number. The Pavlovian school placed sociology on a firm biological foundation: NEUROPHYSIOLOGY. Abiologism, in general, was one of the heresies in the USSR-Stalin. I defined this as a quote before, generally speaking, to try to formulate theories about any organism without taking into account the organisms INNATE BIOLOGICAL NATURE and I will say, this would INCLUDE VARIATIONS within the SPECIES of organism. As one may guess, the Pavlovian school had to do with the HUMAN organism and NEUROPHYSIOLOGY which is remarkably akin to the findings of the MODERN neurologists such as Damasio and others, many others. I venture to believe they GOT THIS information from the USSR since it's been coming out strongly SINCE the fall of the USSR where these sciences ARE being shared (eg, laser eye survery, a Soviet invention I think back in the 1950's!) The problem I clearly see with the so-called western or boorjwah versions of definition on "what an organism is" is that they are SKEWED in favor of whatever unconscious agenda they all have; they use their new dogmas to JUSTIFY what they do or INVENT what they WANT TO BE TRUE to bolster unconscious ego. EG, insects do not attack plants in NATURAL environment where man has not disrupted things by doing INSANE things: plants lure insects and even direct their behavior! Plants, in fact do this quite a lot and with a lot of things. It kinda puts a strange new light on what Neanderthin has to say: can plants do this to HUMANS? Well, we are HOOKED on them, ENSLAVED to their care and have been for 10,000 years. And to our benefit? No on the contrary: to our destruction! But man would NEVER imagine that something he doesn't even know about could DIRECT his behavior to his own detriment: man always likes to feel he is in CONTROL of things. It's HILARIOUSLY funny to see this kind of thinking in people who don't even know they are being wagged around by their own UNCONSCIOUS feelings! Even the HIERARCHIES they invent (which most leftists go along with) are PURE pseudoscience as GOULD pointed out with bacteria as his comparison. The two kinds of science, known more as Boorjwah Science versus Proletarian Science was not something that split in half in the USSR or due to Stalin OR Lysenko or anyone else. It started during the SECOND INTERNATIONALE (cf, J. D. Bernal, his EXCELLENT 4 volumes packed with information). It was advanced by BOGDANOV which Lenin trashed WITHOUT READING (and ADMITTED he didn't read!). It persisted and manifest fully with Stalin/Lysenko/Prezent. The 2 trends shifted into a war of nature versus nurture, genes versus environment tho this IS what Lysenko was talking about all along, primarily. The two hard line views as they exist RIGHT NOW are simply put as follows: One states that genes are everything, the rest is not important and that everything you are is due to genes. The second view is that environment is everything and that seems to be more true since environment existed PRIOR to DNA or genes and environment SHAPED this DNA - it shaped it in the beginning billions of years ago, too. ORGANIC life evolved out of INORGANIC THINGS - i.e., in the ENVIRONMENT that was ancient earth. But we DO have genes now. But WHAT EXACTLY is genetic and what is familial or cultural (i.e., environmental)? It's not easy to tell. And WHEN does something BECOME genetic and by that I mean INHERITED? Lysenko explained it perfectly in his own words, tho he gets misquoted all the time. Africans have a lot of different cultures. So do Europeans and so do Asians (including Turanians). Hold on - I just made 3 groups. These are pseudo groups, but in our world they may as well be real, they are POLITICALLY real (not even culturally real). But it is generally agreed that almond eyed people with hooded eyes, cheekbones and all that are some kind of Asian. True, lots of people NOW considered "white" also have this, but are they white? And African people are generally thought to have a general "look" also. What is it that, and when is it that it, FIXES this so that parents of this or that type give birth to kids who grow into a similar type? Best guess: diet. That's part of environment: you eat what is grown in an environment. You are what you eat! Lysenkoism elaborated on this METABOLISM factor and this worked to CREATE variations in plants, variations that WERE inherited, that is, FIXED in the genome. These general types of humans existed as far back as 4000 BC as shown by pictures and descriptions. So the fixing of this or that type had to have happened PRIOR to written history. What did it? No one knows. Best guess: environment AND selective breeding. We Turanians, by the way, a paleoarctics. But what ELSE is bred into an organism aside from appearance? That's another BIG issue that makes genetics go to war with environmentalists. Again, there is genotype and then there is what gets expressed due to environmental factors in a phenotype. We identify "races" by phenotype: appearance. But what ELSE is expressed as phenotype? Big arguments about that. PERHAPS: one might think that certain as-given genes exist and as such, only a certain group of possible phenotypes CAN express based on what is available TO express in the set of genes one has. Good theory, but the Human Genome Project seems to squash that idea: unless we are being lied to about THIS HERE subject: it wouldn't be the first time, either. Liars on BOTH sides. The most SIMPLE things about us are genetic. More complex factors are not: they are environmental (incuding inutero). Point of fact based on a few hundred years of political reality: IF whites were to CONTINUE to try to "white flight" away from non-whites, or more specifically "away from blacks and S. American non-whites" specifically, if they CONTINUE to try to isolate themselves, or DO isolate themselves -and if they CONTINUE to put mixed-breeds into the "other" group and keep them OUT of their own group, then they ARE IN FACT showing a tendency toward (or desire for) SPECIATION! IN FACT. Birds migrate too, some never come back. Same with sea creatures, same with ANYTHING in nature: it's HOW species that belong to the same genus COME INTO BEING. They separate. Before you know it, you have two NON-breeding (but able to breed still) variations and given enough time, you end up with two species INCAPABLE of breeding at all. That's just the facts. Orientals "yellow-flight" quicker than Europeans "white flight" so - the same goes for them. Information, more. In 1950, Stalin USSR, the PAVLOV neurophysiology school of "psychology" which was the ONLY authorized school of psychology since it was BIOLOGICAL, was merged with the Lysenkoist ideas, it was materialistic, dealing with the mind as a physical thing, like Damasio does. And the Lysenkoism was aimed at ACTIVE or DIRECTED evolution. Lysenko dealt with botanical things, but the THEORY which was called Lysenkoism by its enemies applied to ALL of nature, including man, a biological organism. It is beyond a doubt clear: SUFFERING, especially STARVATION is what causes a FAST change which brings about 1st variations, and 2nd SPECIATION as the variation adapts to the NEW conditions it needs to SEEK OUT for life (as with volition) and ALSO steers clear of the OLD conditions (as with volition). The organism has to do BOTH things; SEEK OUT the NEW AND AVOID the OLD! This is selection at first within an interbreeding population. Later it becomes something else because there can BE NO interbreeding anymore. Consider that at first, the protohominids and proto chimps COULD breed. Now the hominids and chimps (no longer proto) CAN NOT. If you want a clear view of just WHAT that Pavlov thing is without relying on DAMASIO for the hard core neurology, read what I've said along the lines of such matters as ENVIRONMENT YOU ARE IN (eg, forced necessity for agrarian behavior) SHAPING the consciousness of each member of and hence the WHOLE society of this or that people. I see. The ToD doesn't get into industrial age. There wasn't any industrial age back then. But had such societies been ALLOWED to progress with knowledge, they'd have BECOME this and many ALMOST DID. They didn't "discover" our kind of electricity back then, at least, they didn't get to it yet. Always remember the word YET. I think that someone doesn't realize the industrial age also has an AGRIAN base, subsists on it. Ergo it is ALL ToD. It has a national boundary, it has warriors (the military) and SO WHAT if it progresses to a common market economy: that only means it got BIG ENOUGH to NEED TO DO such a thing. Same for mass production. After the death of Stalin, Soviet psychology moved closer to the WESTERN ideas of psychology with Luria and others. As we know from Damasio and the hard core proofs, this was a wrong move. It is true that, AS FAR AS IS KNOWN, Pavlovians didn't have the ability to scan brains, but they sure wrote things AS IF THEY DID have the ability to do this: maybe they did. And it was a TOTALLY BIOLOGICALLY point of view, a view SO biological that even Marx's "relation to means of production and mode of production" was overided by it because: it is BIOLOGICAL BEINGS with certain neurophysiology that discover how to make mass production and then who carry it out along the lines they DO carry it out on (in the west, sweat shops) and it is biological beings who are RELATING to the means of production. The being comes BEFORE the things the beings make. The only thing here PRIOR TO the beings which affects the beings is ENVIRONMENT including METABOLISM. What beings put INTO the environment, THEN becomes part of the environment too (Marxian idea) but these are not NATURAL to the environment. The beings PUT IT INTO the environment: WHY? WHY NEED so much so fast? Capitalism evolves into something Marx never said. It doesn't just become monopoly capitalism, imperialism, it becomes BRAINWASH capitalism where "consumers" are CREATED that want or desire to have "all this stuff." We call this the ophionic where the desire IS ophionic: consumers are created Here: a person at work has a fine car, it gets her from here to there without trouble. WHY does she want to get, why is she so EFFUSIVE ABOUT "the NEW car" she wants, something that will cost her over 15 thousand dollars (for which she is willing to work TWO jobs and on the one I'm working with her on she puts in for 56 hours (8 hours, 7 days a week)? She is willing to work ALL THAT MUCH for this "new car" yet she has a car that runs fine and is almost new. If I were to come along with CLARITY and say 'she is working on HERSELF, trying to remake HERSELF' it would fly over heads. If I said she has a belly chakra block that is being FED BY this busy-ness which fills some emptiness for The New Fancy Car (i.e., the NEW HER) it would fly over heads. But Pavlov MIGHT understand it if I used his language and not occultish lingo jargon shortcut talk. It's all WANNABE. Capitaism evolves into "WANNABE" society/culture! I think the most evolved type in this capitalist society thus far is the "valley girl" thing in California. PURE air-headism, exhibitionism and obsession with THINGS like The New Dress, or The New Shoes. I don't know one car from another, not make or model, none of that. A car gets me from point a to point b. I don't give a shit what OOOOO AAAAAH color it is. So long as I can reach the pedals and have no trouble driving it due to size, I'm fine. It's purely utilitarian. WHY do I still feel this way when I live here? I don't know? Wrong, I do. A car is not something "other than a car" to me. It's JUST a car. It's not connected to image or selfhood or ego or SEX drive as it is in the klippoths that evolved here. In Brainwash Capitalism, the "consumer" WANTS all this stuff, has to have "variety" in the stuff and yet it's just a fucking car. The variety does not alleviate his utter BOREDOM with himself. It's a necessary transport vehicle due to lack of PUBLIC transport that EATS UP MONEY BIG TIME. It's FORCED on me to have one. Take care of one, SPEND MONEY on one. But to others, they'll work their lives away only to get this NEW vehicle and get all effusive over the color and shape and whatnot. If the person GOT OFF she might not care about cars anymore except as transport things. I think Mim, like most others in the west, don't know the difference between MENTAL sex and real physical sex. MENTAL sex is abnormal - and SUBLIMATED mental sex leads to the creation of "the consumer" with his/her EMPTY HOLE wanting more and more. And it's all wannabe. MENTAL sex sublimates energies so that the people are having VICARIOUS sex (polishing their cars EVERY DAY....) don't even KNOW when or if they are horney physically at all. Eating disorders come next, the next step up the ladder of preta-hood. Neurologially they are dissociated people incapable of last stage logic and incapalbe of knowing what they feel for real. They are narcissistic which is like an ultimate form of solopcism. We can talk of means of production (of the car) and ownership and all that, and talk about the oil industry but WHY are there so many KINDS of cars, styles, colors and all that and WHY do people (the beings in this society) WANT all this clutter? There wouldn't BE so many KINDS if there were NOT comsumers that WANTED or could be LURED into buying. Why? It's all psycho-sexual and fucked up. A car is NOT JUST a transport vehicle forced on anyone. For them, it's MORE. Brainwash capitalism. LaVey does indeed get into this subject in his own way. IF we have to have a car due to lack of public transport, why not just make "A CAR" cheap, easy to use, easy to fix and the SAME, REAL easy to get parts, REAL easy to fix! Oh, it would be monotanous? That wouldn't bother a person if they were chakra normal at all. They might not even NOTICE something as trivial as the COLOR of the car or the sameness of it - it wouldn't matter at all, it's a THING, like a toaster or refrigerator. Don't give me the shit about how capitalists gain by making MANY: someone has to DESIRE IT FIRST! If no one BUYS it, capitalists go broke. But anyway, thought I'd mention that ONLY the PAVLOV school, which is very similar to Damasio and/or Skinner (who was himself a Pavlovian and got HIS ideas from Pavlov's research) was approved by Stalin who used logic to decide this. And what we in the Cos gang have been PRIMARILY talking about (in the Tos flame wars) regarding klippoths and braindamage HAS BEEN purely Pavlovian in a way. Lysenkoism only comes in when I bring up the ENVIROMENT which includes, important, METABOLISM. and we know agriculture and NeanderThin's writings have EVERYTHING to do with METABOLISM. I do not think Mim understands what they are reading, IF they are even able to read (get hold of) any of it, IF they read the Pavlov and/or Lysenko stuff. It's DEEP - it's so fucking deep that the ONLY thing as deep as it are the dark doctrines which agree with it. It's NO wonder that I wonder IF these Soviets HAD these doctrines because the people who always had them are IN those 11 time zones. Pavlov might have been what we are calling a GS. PREZENT WAS for sure, he was the man who helped make Lysenko's practical methods into a doctrine we are calling Lysenko-ism, helped or urged Lysenko to write it all down AS a cohesive theory. And I can honestly say about BOTH his critics and his proponents: they are NOT QUITE understanding what he said! It is most definitely NOT Lamarckian. It would only be natural for such people to incorporate what they KNOW about nature into their own sciences. Karl Popper wrote that the only real challenge to Darwinism, which is passive (random mutations, etc) evolutionary biology (i.e., Darwinism doesn't deal with social relations or people PUTTING things into the environment unless it turns into Social Darwinism which has nothing to do with Socialism) is ACTIVE Darwinism and that states that animals and plants ALSO SEEK (an active urge) the conditions of life in which to live, often for reasons OTHER than just pure necessity! Man sure proves this point well enough (not just selection of mates, tho that is ALSO quite important). Popper said this is the PRIME force in evolution and it can be seen visibly especially with animals. They SEEK the conditions FOR their life and yes, perhaps they HAVE TO - but then again, perhaps they don't have to. Popper said this theory was never developed. Wrong: it's LYSENKOISM! Verbatum! What HIDES this fact are BOTH the enemies and friends of Lysenko, those who hate him and mock it out as Larmarckian and those who ARE Lamarckians and like him due to reading what his ENEMIES say of him! Lysenko himself called his theory "CREATIVE SOCIALIST Darwinism." Creative? That's ACTIVE Darwinism. Sure, IT COULD BE or TURN INTO Social Darwinism IF the organisms (humans) live in a capitalist type system. Sure it can. WHAT ELSE would it turn into? Well, it would turn into super exploitation and eventually RESULT IN some exploited group or groups banding together demanding Socialist reforms (duh...). Depending on HOW they demand the reforms (1. striking and/or pressuring the imperialist state or 2. demanding it at gunpoint by taking over the imperialist state and remaking it...), would determine what RESULTS happen in the society. Striking and/or pressuring the state for compromises results in the creation of a labor aristocracy and boorjwazi. Smashing it and taking it over could result in anything - in the USSR it resulted in Communism. Another confusion is the way the historians, pro AND con tend to paint a picture where the discovery of the DNA helix is supposed to be something that demolished Lysenko's theories. Not so. Not the case at all. Lysenko said and WROTE that he never denied that genes EXISTED. And in his book (the one some of the gang saw) he even described a coil-like structure BEFORE Watson and Crick said this. But the fact that DNA or GENES exist is NOT the point at all and it never was Lysenko's point. It's that when DNA was discovered it just seemed to open a door to the SAME PEOPLE who had the SAME THEORIES (which the Roses show progressively as going from religious hierarchies to pseudo- biological ones) and who used these SAME THEORIES armed with "see, there IS DNA" to bolster up their pseudo-science. The biggest pseudo was the fraud done by Burt with his non-existent twins! I can use their same logic. An annelid WORM has 50% identical DNA to a human. Does this mean that the worm is 50% different from a human in BEHAVIOR and/or THINKING too? Sound funny? (Hey, worm brain...) Would anyone think of comparing the IQ of worm (if they could even test it) to a human? This genetic thing has BECOME an IQ issue and a behavioral issue. Yet it is NOT genes that determine nit-picky behavior at all - genes determine pretty much that we behave as MAMMALS and PRIMATES, sexually dimorphic in mating. It is stimulus, upbringing, brain development within the first 7 years and uterine health and societal norms within a culture that determine how a human being will react to any given stimulus. HERE then, is how Pavlov and Lysenko are merged. They still talk about Lysenkoism, especially in the right wing (not Nazi) laisses faire type societies, such as the Birch Society. They talk about Lysenkoism being alive and well. THEY ARE AT LEAST RIGHT about it and they also POINT TO THE CORRECT social programs to call Lysenkoist. But they say what the enemies of Lysenko say and put nonsense into Lysenko's mouth. At least the gang SAW some of what Lysenko wrote, a whole book. Phil will expose ALL of this in his paper, or book. In the argument of genes versus environment one MUST remember what the Nazis did with their genetic views. In fact they advocated something that WOULD have lead to DYSGENICS but they didn't know it. The Soviets advocated something that would definitely, PROVABLY lead to EUGENICS (means GOOD breeding, HEALTHY offspring). In a society that is homogenous (what Nazis wanted) you eventually end up with LESS heterozygosity. All I need to prove MY point is point to the one group of people out there DESPERATE to adopt children because so many of them can't have them: WHITES. On another subject: Mim now says, contrary to the specific thing they wrote me, that there are millions of Maoists out there. I didn't say anything about that. I said MIM said they were too small to carry out some of the schemes I advocated (which is something a terrorist might do, or a spy). I would imagine that lots of Maoists OUT THERE are in no POSITION to do it. From what I hear about Mim's members, they ARE in positions, or could easily GET INTO such positions. Back to main subject, and it's important to grasp this because this IS creeping into the COS and Vad's Social Darwinism article is an excellent counter to it all: No one denies genes exist, Lysenko never said this tho his enemies claim he did say it! Reminds me of how Aquino and the Tossers kept repeatedly claiming LaVey said this or that despite LaVey's own written words! It's IDENTICAL to it. What Lysenko said was deep, heavy, not known by ANYONE till the 1990's (which will make it hard for Phil to explain HOW Lysenko knew it: intuition?). The anti-genetic view is pretty much spelled out by Gould and even by Wolpoff and the Roses who BOTH spell out the genetic view: the Roses do it best in "The IQ Racket" (copy given to Gilmore). The genetic view doesn't even have anything to do with GENES! It's like RELIGION. They replaced the soul with the DNA is all they did. The flesh is still viewed as non-immortal!, and irrelevant! The environmentalist view is the CARNAL view: that makes it satanic. LaVey is ALWAYS getting into the cultural things the herd react to or what loners are NOT reacting to, LaVey taked a lot about how the cons dupe the rubes. That's PURE environmentalist thinking! LaVey talked HEAPS about how people are made to think they are 'supposed to like this or that, supposed to do this or that' and he talked about HOW they are duped into BEHAVING in predictable ways. That's PURE PAVLOV and environmentalist view. It's NOT genetic. A person is not genetically programmed to like this or that car. But a baby IS genetically programmed to prefer BEEF over other meat we eat here in the west and to prefer ANY MEAT over any vegetable! The enviromentalist proponents do not deny genes exist, but they have a much more CORRECT PERSPECTIVE on what genes DO and/or do not do. The most SIMPLE the phenomena, eg, "how tissue repairs itself" "how the eye focuses" is genetic, so is blood type. But even the rate of heart beat differing between individuals is PURELY ENVIRONMENTAL. The most SIMPLE of things about humans turn out to be genetic. But the minute you get into more complex things, even how one sees perspective, it becomes environmental. The genetic proponents want to make EVERYTHING genetic and disregard the BODILY development as the body is a living organism INSIDE OF an environment. Even fertility is not purely genetic, DIET can wreck it. Even RATE OF how we heal is not genetic. HOW we heal is, but the rate of how fast or slow is environmental. Meat eaters heal FASTER. Here is one: how genetic is musical ability? Well, it's definitely physiological and dependent on how hairs on the inner ear are grown. But they develop in the uterus and continue to develop with the brain after birth. You can't make a tone-deaf person hear harmonically and many KIDS seem to be tone-deaf - so this MUST BE something that develops inside the uterus. PERHAPS due to expousre inutero - TO MUSIC. No one knows. We can't experiment on humans like this, as Lewontin points out when HE talks about twins. By the way, another subject and I need to clear it up because DUALISTS CANT FUCKING READ. I know that the NEP was a necessary thing because of WHAT HAPPENED in a war torn place, and people that HAD market experience (such as the kulaks and the whole boorjwazi and others from the past Czarist regime) had to be put in charge to get the economy going again. NOT MY POINT. I'm not dualizing this. It STILL DOES NOT negate the FACT, COLD FACT, that the NEP was the CORE AND ROOT of the later Bukharin problems involving Yadoga and 10's of thousands of men in an OGPU that was once the GPU that was once a MULTI PARTY CHEKA and NOT a purely Bolshevik organazation (AS WAS the NKVD, BACK IN 1917 all the while that multi-party organization existed which, from what I can gather, NO ONE KNEW BEFORE I dug this IMPORTANT info out. OK?) The fact does NOT negate the FACT that NEP had to be done, at least for awhile. But had someone KNOWN MORE ABOUT the inner workings (not just outer, I mean inner, i.e., klippothic consumerism/greed) of 'ANY profit motive' system, LESS would have suffered and more importantly, LESS would have been WRECKED by people wrecking shit in order to RAISE PRICES by making things scarce (THRU WRECKING or: WITHHOLDING THINGS....hmm hmm hmm I believe that's called extortion?). DUH. The one FACT is a fact, the other fact I throw at Mim is ALSO a fact. BOTH facts exist. ....And without BIRTH, no one would ever die either, tho no one thinks "hey, death is GREAT" nor does anyone normally look forward to GROWING OLD AND DYING; yet in LIVING one is DOing exactly that!... Of course, the SAME war ravaged conditions existed AFTER WWII when these GUGB/KGB Bukharanites with Krushchev and his clique got their claws in and then STAYED in. STOP DUALIZING. There is just NO communication with dualists. I can CRITICIZE my actions logically, eg. It DOES NOT negate the fact that I personally might not give a fuck about the criticism or care about changing ONE THING I did, say on a job, or in a fight I had when I "went too far" (whatever the fuck THAT is supposed to mean - too far by WHOSE JUDGEMENT?...). I can criticize the system, but I have to live IN it just the same. I can say I did an objectively awful thing. But did I FEEL awful about it? FUCK NO. NOT AT ALL. I didn't feel anything about it -I might even have felt GOOD about the RESULTS of that action. But it doesn't change the FACT that it might have been awful. I don't have a CONFICT with my own feelings, which means that I can easily use LOGIC to analyze some action, no matter if I did it or someone else did it, and say objectively if this is "awful within this given society and it's cultural norms" or not. To western dualists like Vad this is "making an excuse" or doing the "xtoid justification shit" which I am NOT DOing or WILLing or even remotely feeling; I can't even RELATE to it. I may as well BE an alien to HIM. People IN PERSON know this about me: NO EGO, there is just NO EGO. Another way of saying it is that I don't have a CONSCIENCE. I wasn't born with one, nor was I born with an EGO. These stupid clutterances never developed in me. Nor do they develop in a cat or wolf. There are certain things a NORMAL animal WILL NOT do - I fear that NONE of you know the differnce - I KNOW you don't. You are all FILLED, CLUTTERED, with emotional glued up SHIT, conficts, inner emotional bullshit, guilts, escapist desires. I don't have ANY of that. NEVER DID. Back to Bukharin and that: Bukharin and the WRECKAGE, the whole Purge trial, none of it would have happened IF NEP DID NOT HAPPEN. But would the society have been able to DO ANYTHING if they did NOT do the NEP? No one knows. It was all in chaos. SOMEONE with organizing ability with economy had to take charge and the ONLY people there that knew this stuff were CAPITALISTS. Marx never gave anyone a step by step rule book or recipe on HOW TO DO economy or how to FIX economy after a war in a NON-profit motive, incentive manner. What aren't you seeing? That STATE CAPITALISM almost got into the system and that this is what the Bukharin business was all about? And that state capitalism DID get into business because this time around, Krushchev KNEW to get the army on his side and get the core of those Bukharainite GPU men on his side and, a new move: at the same time, GET RID of the NKVD? He KNEW because it was the SECOND REPLAY. POINT OF PAIN for Comrades: NO ONE will be able to REALLY figure out what I figured out with JUST HOW Krushchev took over unless they LOOK at what I dug out for them on this, with the Checka/GPU/OGPU/Yadoga-Bukharin and then Trotsky (some Trotskyites, not Trotsky in person) connection and yes, it is PAINTUL for some Comrades to admit that the core/root of it started with NEP. I have no problem seeing this clearly - and it is all TOO clear to see - you'd have to make yourself deliberately BLIND to NOT see it. Krushchev made two SIMPLE, LOGICAL moves: 1. put the old NEP MEN and their allies in power in the KGB and and army 2. destroyed the NKVD which had ALWAYS BEEN a purely BOLSHEVIK organization and PRO-collectivization and which was THE organ patrolling ALL economic sectors! THERE IT IS. It's all a matter of EGO with these Comrades to put some criticizm on the Great Lenin. Don't bother me a bit. He's HUMAN, not a god. He had no other choice than to do NEP. MAYBE. We'll never know. The smartest economists of the time and in the world were right there during that time and they opted for the NEP. I can TRUST (but not KNOW) that they made the right choice for the TIME. Nothing anyone else advocates (including what MIM _WRONGLY_ thinks I advocate merely because I POINT TO THE NEP as the core of the problems) makes any kind of "do-able" sense to me. The peasants of the time were not revolutionalized or educated, they saw Lenin and then Stalin as a Czar or something similar, all they knew was SERFDOM to some kulak and/or how to MIMIC the boyar or kulak. They didn't "know" cooperative action at the time so I don't see HOW they could have done it and capitalist kulaks wouldn't KNOW HOW to do it either but at least they DID KNOW how to quickly fix up the economic MESS that existed there. But: It was no longer the right choice to CONTINUE IT later on and Stalin didn't continue it and, BY THEN, TIMING, the peasants WERE revoutionized/educated. But Krushchev, when he brought it back after ANOTHER post war period of economic chaos, and then finagled it permanently into the system, the whole place turned slowly to shit and now, well -it's pure shit now. I'm not the one who DUALIZED it when I criticized the NEP. ALL OF YOU who flamed me for saying it dualized it. You know, two opposing things can often be BOTH RIGHT. Just because I point to the NEP and the rest doesn't mean that Lenin should NOT have done it or that he COULD have done something else, tho it's a good idea to THINK IT OUT: MAYBE HE COULD have done something else. Lenin himself, of boorjwah background, DID NOT KNOW what collectivization was! I mean KNOW, in the flesh KNOW. He was never even POOR! OK, he could have gone all the way with Dzerzhinsky and REALLY PURGED OUT the Checka. It still doesn't negate the possibility, the potential, for state capitalism and profiteering to come BACK after WWII and the economic chaos. Alls you need to do is change the character of the people and that easily happens when there is NEED. Alls you need to have to set brother against brother when they used to be good friends and fine siblings is to create NEED and then FAVOR one over the other. Greed and jealousy are then MANIFEST where there was NONE of that before. The Civil War was the first stage that set this up with the NEPmen. Then Stalin fixed it. The second stage was WWII and the same NEPmen with MORE KNOWLEDGE about how to profiteer and exploit and NOT GET CAUGHT. You know, eventually the rat figures out that left door gives him a shock and right door gives him food. It quickly learns to avoid the shock. But NO ONE wants to ferret this out, meanwhile the NEO NEO revisionists want to cite Stalin's worst crime as the Bukharin shit. The ONLY way to expose this is to EXPOST WHAT NEP BECAME, the GPU, the OGPU, GUGB and KGB later. In order to do that, you HAVE to tell what I told on Lenin and STOP taking it as some kind of negation. Lenin had NO CHOICE as deduced from the best economic minds that existed in the world. Stalin also had NO CHOICE other than to pact with Hitler either. NO CHOICE. It's not like Lenin OR Stalin were the ONLY players in this drama. But Lenin DID DO things, so did Stalin and that CAN BE looked at IN ISOLATION as the "Deed Itself" apart from extenuating things (deconstruction, I do this a LOT, Mim don't get it). IF you want to figure out HOW Krushchev did it, you have to KNOW ALL ABOUT BUKHARIN and THOUSANDS OF OTHERS and just WHO and WHAT they were, what positions they were in. You have to know WHAT IT WAS Bukharin was against (collectivization) and what he was for (continuance of NEP) and that leads back to Lenin. You have to know what I dug out about the ORGANS of security, INTERNAL security! Dzerzhinsky and Stalin together. Bukharin and Yagoda together. Beria and Stalin AGAINST the new profiteering APARATCHIK that welled up, predictably, AFTER WWII or even DURING. Krushchev and Ryumin together inventing plots and deceiving Stalin who was OLD by this time and who, IN FACT, tried to resign a few times! This is IN the archives. Malenkov and Beria after Stalin's death, against Krushchev's KGB and GRU alliance, the SAME EXACT SHIT that was purged during the Bukharin trial which INCLUDED those Army Generals. Army, OGPU formers and Yagoda and Bukharin. Army, OGPU/GUGB/KGB and Ryumin and Krushchev. Same PLAY - different channel! SOME new players. The Old players got murdered or cast down and out. (Yes Dear, sorry to inform you that Lenin also laid farts and when he was a tiny baby he also pissed and shit all over himself. Lenin was also born from a woman's womb all slimy and wet and gooey and that he got born because his mother got laid, and he cried just like a baby. I realize that these details don't apply to JEEESUSSSS who never did such things.......uh huh....point made.) What's this? the first communist? Say what? WHO? I might could make a case for Buddha being one - don't know much about him. end post.