Who is PROFITTING with the idiotatorship and socialism? - part 2: socialism and the dictatorship of stupidity

Abigail Pereira Aranha

The rightists already start wrong thinking that Communism is the opposite of Capitalism. If it were, the ideas of Marx only would circulate among very few sympathizers and at most would produce isolated communities that would be destroyed by the cruelty of the State in the medium term, as happens with anarchism. Margaret Thatcher said "socialism lasts until ends the money of others", sentence which circulates among conservatives. But the folks seem they not realized one detail: if this is true, it means that enters money from others in this thing, and big money. The answer of the question "from who?" is clearer: from some that have a lot of money. The Russian Revolution, which created the Soviet Union and took Marxism from the paper, was financed by banks. See, it's not just money taken by revolutionary in assaults, it is mainly money that the Bank gave to the Socialist cause. But then we got another problem: in what Marx's ideas would be profitable, even more for a bank? It's not that a multimillionaire don't think of anything besides getting richer than already is, or even that they cannot think about the well of a collectivity. But what the Communist Manifesto could have of interesting in terms of philanthropy, to think at least?

The leftists say that the elites want a people with little schooling for it being dumb and easy to master. Know enough to work and cannot think as great people. Talk of hemp-addicted studying in College paid by daddy. First, having more than a full second degree is no longer unusual in Brazil, as it was until about 15 years ago (and the chit even had to study to be approved), and they didn't change their speech. Second, who speaks in the oppressed people go to College generally is defending quotas for poors or non-whites. Then, they are not talking about liberation from ignorance and oppression, they have never been talking about it. Incidentally, we get 50% quotas of vacancies in federal universities for scarcely literate public school students and they celebrate as if the Brazilian education had been saved. More than that: for a leftist, the function of the University's income distribution, not knowledge distribution; is not make a physician who will not graduate until to understand enough of Medicine, is taking a Fang, son of a bricklayer and a maid, or a dolly from social and financial insignificance giving them a medical diploma for him or her to get a "hot job", even though the person is intellectually, professionally and morally of low class. And this ordinary graduated one must enter the public service, the fashion now is this, where he or she can get a nice position with competent employees or committed trainees to make the service as good as he or she should have done, probably knowing more than he or she, having an above average standard of living, working 6 hours per day, sometimes missing so much and still complaining about the salary. We still will go back in that part of the civil service.

And to top it off, the socialist countries or socialist-like democracies are marked by inefficiency, by incompetence, by low production and by patronage. Not so much in the private sector (where it still exists), but mainly in the public sector. Let's look at the case of Brazil. The Brazil invests a percentage of GDP in education of the highest in the world, and we still have educational programs of private initiative as the Todos Pela Educação (All For The Education), but only among those who are within the University or already have graduated we have 38% of functional illiterates (people who are literates but cannot understand well what they read). I.e., a guy with diploma of nutritionist, civil engineer or teacher (mainly the folks of Humanities) who can't see a table or interpret a paragraph of text, and with the quotas for public school students this will worsen. Campaigns against violence against women made with public money and denounces only increases, and with Maria da Penha law (equivalent of VAWA in Brazil) working. Oh, we also have police stations only to serve women, bad character male-like women wanting to make a false complaint, as well maintained with public money. Campaigns to reduce the number of traffic accidents made by the three levels of Government, public money spent, and the number of accidents increased. Discussion forums on urban mobility arguing over priority for public transport, public money spent even in campaigns encouraging the use of the bus, and the bus continues frightful and the traffic gets worse. A case of China: a newspaper presenter talks about contaminated food and instead of the Government put money and people to solve or prevent the problem, uses them to disappear with the guy (the blog Pesadelo Chinês - Chinese Nigthmare - account of this). Hey, but we wasn't talking about leftism making profit? In any decent private company, or even in a public department with a head that deserves respect, what happens when a team gets money (especially if it is a lot of money) to solve a problem, the team consume this money and this problem only gets worse? It's everyone at a meeting in the corner of the Board, starting with one what the f*@k is this which one who was 10 meters from the door closed heard and ending with heads rolling. But what we see in the Brazilian public service (and in other countries) is exactly the opposite. The performance review even exist in Brazil (article 41 of our Constitution), but it only removes an employee who does not get along with a cretinous boss and a teacher who don't approve bandits who don't study. What explains this?

What funders of Socialism gain with it? A farm of national proportions.

If you've read the Communist Manifesto, saw that the proposal of Communism is a worldwide capitalist oligarchy exercised by the State, even because for the owners of the world wouldn't make sense to pretend that the political power and the economic power are separated. What appears in the Communist Manifesto is not, of course, a monstrous type "1984", by the way that George Orwell was anarchist and something similar has already been foreseen by anarchists before the Russian Revolution. Everything is mixed in the middle of an idea of Anarchist social justice, as if Communism was a State-protected anarchy until winning the world and this State dissolve itself. Or, at least, it would be a benevolent totalitarianism. But keep an eye on all citizens, even if not at the same time, it would be impractical, unless the Government conquer almost all people and they finish the minority that disagrees.

And let's take a quick peek at where socialism was deployed? Among others, Cuba, second American economy shortly before, China and Russia, which were Empires for centuries. Why did not the Soviet Union start with some few failed countries that had nothing to lose? And it is not curious that half-communist China is the supplier of components for large companies in the West? And the Brazilian reader noticed that even an umbrella that is not made in China is no more seen? And why the "leftopath" who speak bad of public school teacher's salary where the Government is not of Workers Party praise Cuban socialism where nobody gains our minimum wage? ("leftopath" is a translation for "esquerdopata", term created by the Brazilian journalist Reinaldo Azevedo that mixes "leftist" and "psychopath") Or, changing the question to the lulists ("fans" of our former president Lula), who gains in Cuba or China today more than a driver of public transport in the Fernando Henrique Cardoso Government (1995 - 2002)?

It's funny, the leftists say that capitalism wants birth control among the poors, promote the genocide of the poor population, kills multitudes of hunger, kills multitudes of laboral accidents, kills excess manpower, but did not comment on the deads of socialism, 100 million per low among their own people. And how many leftists are against abortion? The similarity of socialism with capitalism, when no difference for the worse, it is not just hypocrisy of Socialists, looks like confidential information.

Oh, and (in Portuguese) Communists really ate little kids? The macabre events that led to that phrase! (Thanks to blog Contra o Coro dos Contentes - Against the Chorus of Happy People)

To complete, we indicate the text by Olavo de Carvalho, of 2004, "História de quinze séculos" ("History of Fifteen Centuries").

And what the people get with it? Socialism won the lower-class people by creating entire countries to envious, crooks, incompetents, idiots, and it's up to redundancy, folks from mediocrity to low.

I said that Marxism has won the people, but we do not see idealist or politicized poor people in significant number, most of the poors do not even know pronounce "Marxism". But when it comes to quota at the University for those who only studied in public school they like, right? The people may even be reactionary, a real Socialist of today could be handed over to the police by some toothless in the 60's (time when Brazil had a military Government), but that when it seems appropriate to keep quiet, because the typical person of the people besides coward is poor of imagination of good thing. But after the honey, they don't want to exchange for molasses. They already have how to make the comparison, even if they make mistakes on the grocery store that sells the molasses and the supermarket that sells honey. Got better explained? The Red gang says they brought racial equality (Nazism reversed), gender equality (lesbian supremacy), freedom of sexual orientation (of course, since you are not heterosexual, even more non-monogamous). The credits for the economic stability of the Real Plan they couldn't steal. But, surely, the leftists have given us the at least 10 million posts in public service in three levels (and imagine if we hadn't outsourced employees), the quotas for the barely literate bandits from suburb to enter the public universities with a lowest note, the laws against the good man on behalf of combating violence of man against woman (women rarely let the really violent men be or stay arrested) and stuff like that. Were people's achievements? Perhaps, of lower class people (morally). Now let's take the meat of alimony or the sinecure of public service from big dog's mouth.

And to win the lower mind class, the State sponsors the baseness.

The antifeminists have already seen that the lesbofeminists female can have college course paid by their father, a position in the public service gained from preparatory course paid by her sweetheart or cuckold hubby and career facilitated by manginas and pussy slaves, hide all the past of dirt and easy life to almost everyone and they still get angry because of any Facebook post by a frustrated fucks-nobody misogynist. Some African descents may have graduation via quotas and postgraduate with indication of professors who they bootlicked in College, and even have some social projection, but they still cannot be criticized or read criticism of African descent without puking buzzwords and personal attacks. Even a joke not complimentary, that may even be dull, with blacks, women or homosexuals may be a complaint. Just to give an example, Alex Castro of the Brazilian website Papo de Homem wrote an "Open letter to Brazil's comedians" ("Carta aberta aos humoristas do Brasil"), with the subtitles "Machismo kills", "Racism kills", "Homophobia kills" and "Don't complain of 'patrol'" ("'patrol' are armed soldiers that can kill you if you disobey"). That is, displease lesbian or blacks turned police case. I speak with more depth on this (in Portuguese) in "Por que políticos são levados na brincadeira e humoristas são levados a sério" (Why politicians are taken in jest and humorists are taken seriously). Alex is right when he says that "for the humor exists, it takes a series of collective cultural assumptions". That's why mockery, apology to hatred and violence against MEN is up Facebook joke.

Win imbeciles with valid arguments and honorable stance have almost no use any more. And I do not talk only of physical assaults, absurd texts on the loose as if they were ours, slander, layoffs, death threats. The demonstration of intelligence itself can disappear or simply be ignored by the masses. I was preparing this text and we saw the participation of a psychologist in a public hearing on Social Security and Family Commission (CSSF) of the House of Representatives to discuss the draft legislative decree 234/2011 by deputy João Campos (PSDB Goias), that repeals articles of resolution No. 1/99 of the Federal Council of Psychology that prohibit homosexual cure. He argued inside the subject, denounced the publication of advertisements of the LGBT movement in a Council magazine, presented some scientific and statistical data belying some lies of gayzism. The psychologist is pastor Silas Malafaia. See the 33-minute video on Youtube.

Cutting everything he spoke, interruptions of gayzists from the audience (only when he spoke of "scientific method" were three times), the poster showing the doctor Silas Malafaia with Nazi symbol seized with police report, the debauchery of the Chairman of the Council of Psychology and the Chairman of the section sending the gayputy Jean Wyllys go out from the Auditorium after calling his attention three times, rests a 6-minute video where the faggot of Brazilian reality show Big Brother Brasil beats the psychologist, not the opposite.

Dadinho fiddlesticks, I'm Rupert Murdoch. And the "beating" was to ask what was the Commission criteria to call a psychologist, but pastor, who has no Lattes curriculum and what the interest of a deputy member of the military police to present such a Bill. In other words, the freak fag activist was a deputy, but the psychologist speaking as a psychologist turned pastor and his colleague deputy author of Bill turned policeman. Personal attacks of the fifth category of people who can't face opposing ideas on what should be a debate in the House of Representatives!

Nowadays, when someone says who dresses as want, publish what want on Facebook, do whatever want, usually is not a citizen claiming a fundamental right, is a fool invoking a privilege reserved to idiocy. They can do what they want. We do not have the right to oppose the reigning foolishness.

Defenders of leftism or a leftist government are not only foremen of private interests of money and power. They are also fighting for themselves. If we end up with antimale laws and the "hangers" of employment or academic promotion of lesbian Nazism, most women will be a nation of half-primates (in physical and in the modes) intractable lesbians, many of whom have never done something productive or worked with more than 30 years of age, and another nation of babes which do not deceive anyone with their curricula vitae. If we end up with laws anti-white rice, most afrodescendants will be graduates with notorious functional illiteracy and lack of ethics, beside pure losers. If we end up with the "inclusion" of disabled people, most of them will be dependent on other defeated, without quotas in the procurement. They have no place where ethics, wisdom and expertise are valued. But a nation is not made with parasites and cheaters. I'll cover this in part 3.

The series "Who is PROFITTING with the idiotatorship and socialism?"