Report on the Work of the Central Committee to the Eighteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.), Delivered by Joseph Stalin –
“A country which is surrounded by a capitalist world, is subject to the menace of foreign military attack, cannot therefore abstract itself from the international situation, and must have at its disposal a well-trained army, well-organized punitive organs, and a strong intelligence service consequently, must have its own state.”
Yes North Koreanization of USG would be an improvement.
Assuming he bothered to humor a transgender rights activist for a few minutes instead of having ‘it’ dragged away to a reeducation center, Chairman Mao would interrupt and ask “… what the fuck do these perverts have to do with COMMUNISM!?“.
These transvestite perverts have nothing to do with Communism, Chairman.
These perverts have to do with Comte, the founder of Sociology, Bureaucracy and what turned into Technocratic Progressivism.
Comte did not create the pussyhat.
What Comte did create is our real problem: Government of the Bureaucrats. Note that I include as members of the Bureaucratic/Technocratic class all of the institutions that are not directly part of the FedGov machinery, but which are always demanding FedGov (or Brussels for my European readers) be given more power to socially engineer the rest of us into oblivion –
It cannot be emphasized enough that history before 1932 is without precedent for an aristocracy of bureaucrats; Comte’s priesthood is a complete historical aberration.
The classes making up the Technocratic elite were more able than the proletariat, yet still only dull, gray, members of the bourgeois and upper classes. However numerous were the advantages Technocracy held over Communism thanks to drawing leadership from the bourgeois, these were overwhelmingly the mediocre or even failed portions of the bourgeoisie. They consist of sociologists, academics, scientists, pseudo-scientists, government bureaucrats, media hacks, ‘artists’, ‘experts’, celebrities, non-profit workers, quacks of every type, writers, philosophers, economists, environmentalists, feminists, public and private sector unions, and international organizations.
Little though they would agree about anything else, both Engels and conservatives of any type would agree that these elements of society were unfit to serve as a ruling class. Traditional conservative ruling classes were drawn from the aristocracy, military, priesthood, and merchant classes (the class that met Alexander Hamilton’s ideal of a ‘natural aristocracy’), and, to varying degrees of flexibility, with room made for admission into the elite of the occasional parvenu of great ability.
The leadership of Soviet Russia, as well, did not consist of Technocrats. Soviet rulers overwhelmingly came from the founding revolutionaries, the military high command, economic management, and intelligence agencies. As in Conservative systems, the Civil Service in Communist nations served a purely advisory role to the Communist elite.
In times past there have always been bureaucrats of some kind. But not until Comte was there any concept of Bureaucracy as a form of government.
A dictatorship of Bureaucrats (which is what the governments of Western Civilization have become) is necessarily a dictatorship of unsupervised and unaccountable Bureaucrats. Bureaucrats left unsupervised and unaccountable and who have had the mainstream crackpots of the Sociology departments indoctrinate them with the absurd notion started by Comte that Bureaucrats are royalty inevitably leads them to socially engineer every conceivable aspect of life, aspects that not even the Soviet Union thought for a moment should be regulated.
Almost two centuries after Comte, the professional Civil Service has now devolved to a point where it presumes a right to regulate gender; granting them legal jurisdiction over gender is as certain to be successful as their management of the Oroville dam.