PDA

View Full Version : A few of my solutions to social ills



Kim Jong Il
01-29-2005, 02:25 PM
Education becomes revolutionary, alongside the working peasants, not at school, but by the Party through activities. The true university is found in the farms, the worksites, the factories. The essential is neither Diplomas, nor Science, nor Technique but Worker's Consciousness, that of the poor, working-peasants fighting for the Ideas of the Party. On the basis of consciousness, one can do everything, acquire everything, succeed in everything.

Life becomes collective, not personal, in groups and to be conducted according to the Party slogans.

The family is abolished. The family represents a milieu favourable to all forms of inequality, to the reconstitution of different social classes and castes. Thus family life must be reduced to its simplist expression.

Labour becomes collective, accompanied with Revolutionary Education on all fronts. It is a question of labour based on human energy. Thus human labour replaces machines.

Cooperatives are the social and administrative unit, the economic political organism, the warehouse of the collective; the point of the centralisation of all powers, the concentration of property and for the distribution of foodstuffs, and thus the point of "to each according to his needs".

The population work in agrarian communes. These communes are separated into squares of ten units, with a ban on people moving from one square to another. A portion of the ground is measured off within which each person is authorised to move around.

Permanent deportations are done to uproot people from the social milieu to which they have started to become accustomed. The aim is to prevent the germination of any property instincts and the reconstitution of the family, castes, groups of all forms. The attachment to one's house, to one's wife, husband, children, parents -- is this not the root of all evil?

The only meetings authorised are the political education sessions, organised by the Party. The eternal self-criticism. Twice yearly, everyone becomes a candidate and must set forth the history of his or her life to uncover and to denounce the errors committed in the past, the present, and those intended for the future based on intentions or thoughts.

The only correct, pure and hard line is that of the Party.

Money, wages, and markets are abolished -- thus no budget, no problems of balance payments, of stimulating the economy, no inflation, no economic, social or political crises. Without money or merchants, with no remunerated labour, there exists no basis for such social evils as the cult of profit, individuality, personal conflicts, jealousy, rivalries, corruption, decadence, and so on.

What I envision is an immense apparatus of repression of all social parasites as an amalgram of Party, Government and State not in the usual sense of these institutions, but with particular stress on its mysterious character. It is a political-metaphysical power, anonymous, omnipresent, omniscient.

Total opposition to globalism, multiculturalism, the mixing of races, universalist ideologies, imperialism, and internationalism -- in a word, all forms of international integration. For to accept international integration is to accept a mechanism whereby the structural imbalance of the world will be aggravated, an aggravation which could end in a violent explosion, seeing that it cannot fail to become insupportable for an ever greater part of the population. Indeed, the latter is already aware of the contradictions which lock up the integration of the economy within the international market of goods and capital. A conscious and autonomous development (of a nation), essentially autarky, is thus objectively necessary.

I believe that the future society must be based on the peasant masses and that all other classes must be eliminated. I believe that the new society must be started from zero, basing it on the peasant masses. Everything from the old society must go. We must return to nature, based on the peasantry. However, I believe in the role of selected intellectuals. I believe they are best qualified to rule a country and to charter a shortcut to social and economic progress.

I do not propose to do away immediately with the classes which possess a major part of the revenues. The structural reform which I propose does not intend to elimininate the contributive capacity of these groups. I consider that we can and should try instead to release their contributive potential in trying to transform these landlords, these middlemen traders, these moneylenders into a class of agricultural producers, peasants. I think they should be diverted from unproductive activities and get them to participate in production. In the towns, there must be promoted a movement of reconversion of capital from the commercial sector, towards the agricultural sector.

I have a passionate hatred for cities, towns, industry, the commercial system, and modern civilisation. The establishment of commercial organisations can be compared to a large spider web covering all of the nation in which it is esatablished. If we consider the peasants and consumers as flies or mosquitoes which get trapped in the web, we can see that the peasants and consumers are prey to the merchants, the spider which spins the web. The commercial system, the selling and exchanging of agricultural production in a country, suppresses production and squeezes the rural areas dry and tasteless, permanently maintaining them in their poverty. What people habitually call the "cities" are pumps which drain away the vitality of the rural areas. Any type of goods that the cities and market towns provide for the rural areas are just bait. The large rural areas feed the cities and market towns. The cities -- the market towns with their fresh and up-to-date appearance - live at the expense of the rural areas - they ride on their shoulders. Hou Youn of the Khmer Rouge put it well when he said: "The tree grows in the rural areas, but the fruit goes to the towns."

I have a bit of an obsession with the Chinese cultural revolution: having the peasants re-educate the intellectuals, rather than vice versa; putting the peasantry on the top rungs of society; hounding down and physically liquidating the national bourgeoisie; and the belief that revolution has to be carried out by the peasantry.

The most basic notion of my philosophy is that man has been corrupted by civilisation. The more civilisation is expressed by an industrialised society, the more man is corruped. I consider education to be a source of corruption for the masses. Only a very simple social system is necessary in order to remian pure and preserve one's sanity. The more man is educated the more deceitful he becomes.

An intellectual elite will do the thinking, the masses will do the working. I inherited this idea from the old emperors, particularly the old Angkor Empire, and the doctine of the supreme authority of leaders. The emperor is closest to heaven and thus knows all. People and soil, sun and water, that is all that is necessary for a pure and tranquil existence.

wheelchairman
01-29-2005, 02:44 PM
I'm surprised there isn't more Juche in that. Although to think that the peasant as the leaders of the revolution is a path to failure.

What happened to the repititive mention of Chajusong?

The Talking Pie
01-29-2005, 02:46 PM
I must admit, I skimmed, but it seems like Marxism, lead by Plato, with a few ideals of the United Federation of Planets and all the tact of fascism thrown in for good measure. I like it.

Kim Jong Il
01-29-2005, 02:46 PM
Forget Juche.

Marshal Kim Il Sung's Koreans are on the wrong track if they wanted to make their country communist. Kim Il Sung had raised the standard of living and developed the economy too much. Now the North Koreans have fine cars and houses, and nice cities. The North Koreans are too attached to their new life. They will never want to start, or even fight in a new war, their only hope of liberating South Korean and reuniting their country. The Khmer Rouge regime showed the world that pure communism could indeed be achieved in one full swoop. They were very close to becoming the first nation to create a completely communist society without wasting time on the intermediate steps.

Kim Jong Il
01-29-2005, 02:48 PM
Although to think that the peasant as the leaders of the revolution is a path to failure.

Disproved by history. First of all, most revolutions occurred in backward countries, indeed the proletariat had never even developed in some cases (Korea). In most cases, peasants rather than industrial workers rallied the communist banners. In European countries, where the proletariat was proportionally stronger, socialist revolutions had failed dismally. The backbone of all socialist revolutions in history was the peasant masses.

wheelchairman
01-29-2005, 02:49 PM
*cough* access to Kampuchea Foreign Language Press?

Kim Jong Il
01-29-2005, 02:54 PM
I beg your pardon?

Kim Jong Il
01-29-2005, 05:06 PM
They are close to the ideas of the nationalist-racialist faction of the Khmer Rouge, headed by Pol Pot, Khieu Samphan, Son Sen and Ieng Sary. None of them were my fathers.

sk8ter-hater
01-29-2005, 05:19 PM
Oooh, bullets, it must be important.

Kim Jong Il
02-13-2005, 03:20 AM
My brilliant topic deserves more constructive comments.

RXP
02-13-2005, 01:01 PM
To me you sound like an anti-technolgist who wishes to live in a utopia that will never be because of the nature of social darwisnism. Your ideas will fail. No body cares. No body will listen to a Pol Pot apologist.

The more I read into Marxism the more I respect it now but my realist brain sees the world for what it is and what it will always be.

The best soultion to the worlds problem is for there to be no human beings. Kill everyone then there are no problems. What's the point of it all?

RXP
02-13-2005, 01:22 PM
he attachment to one's house, to one's wife, husband, children, parents -- is this not the root of all evil?

No it's the route of love. If loving someone is evil, then I for one would rather live in this evil world than your weird, dehumanised hell. It isn't even a socialist state. It's nothing. It's a backward hell.

The thing that appeals to me about Marxism is that it's constructive. It AIMS somewhere. It asks people to do things, to learn, to progress society it actually demands the economy be in good shape before the revolution.

Your system just puts it back. A Marxist does believe that what the average joe refers to as "human nature" is a mere reflection of the current capitalist system and this can be changed to improve society. I am falling in love with that idea and it's actually making me rethink alot of what I thought I had known. But the realist in me tells me things will never change because those who are the makers of society are there because they are better than us who think the way we do so they impose their will on us so we might as well make the best use of what we have.

Your system is a backward and dangerously deluded fantasy. It assumes that 'evil' is taking pride in something, owning something, having it even in human terms such as family or a woman. It denies the basic human calling.... to show our love and to be loved. A system that distorts our most basic instinct.... to be attached to the ones we love is bound to fail. A system that does both this AND destroy an economy is a hell that there would be no escape out of. There would be no progress of healthcare. In theory no itís likely that human society is to be challenged by killer virus', meteors etc. how would your peasant system deal with this? How would we survive?

A capitalist, technological, multi racial/cultural society would collectively utilise all our expertise to defeat any problems we will no doubt encounter.

Your system would mean the extinction of humans just like any other species because you degrade us back to being animals.

I have no idea if you're really serious about all this but I think you need to see more of the world, talk to people and live a little. Read some more then re-condier what you believe is 'evil' in society.

If you truly do believe as you do, the best thing for our race would just be to die. Death would mean no more suffering no more anything.

RXP
02-13-2005, 01:25 PM
The movie equilbrium should appeal to you


n a futuristic world, a strict regime has eliminated war by suppressing emotions: books, art and music are strictly forbidden and feeling is a crime punishable by death. Clerick John Preston (Bale) is a top ranking government agent responsible for destroying those who resist the rules. Whe he misses a dose of Prozium, a mind-altering drug that hinders emotion, Preston, who has been trained to enforce the strict laws of the new regime, suddenly becomes the only person capable of overthrowing it.

Kim Jong Il
02-13-2005, 05:14 PM
OK, to explain myself more clearly on the family issue.

I think all of those things are in the best interest of the individual, and would naturally be prefered by individual to get away from the sectarian oppressions enacted under the guise of "family", "property rights", "marriage", "religion", and "privacy". And most crimes against individuals are carried out under the banner of "privacy". And most of the physical suffering of most individuals is the unfairness of "property rights" and the inheritance rights that go with it. Marriage is a joke, because it is often broken and done over again like a game, and people have the innate propensity to make love to and be sexually attracted to an infinite number of members of the opposite sex.

To expand on the family part -- often it is one's family, especially the mother and father that are the source of depression, in that they deprive children of socializing as much as they want and whomever they want, and they deprive their children from learning on their own and the power of the mother and the father over children is too strong and hence has too much of a propensity to corrupt the father and mother, and often this leads almost always to child abuse and or child neglect. Hence the state and society has the natural right to rescue children from the authoritarianism, oppression, and prejudices of their parents, especially from psychological and physical abuse for children grow up to be adults and adults make up society, and hence it is the right of society and the state to do accordingly. And most of society is made up of young people ready to have their mother and father seperated from them in order to enjoy their life having sex and socializing with other young people.

The "abolition of family" and replacing it with the National family or "public family" just means that people do not have to live with their family, and that children have the right to live by themselves, and the state would provide the housing facilities for the children, for free. This, however, is not obligatory to say the least. The main point is protecting the children and mother from being harassed by each other and or by the father, like protecting the children from anti-social behavior and or psychosis from parental over-protectiveness, physical abuse, neglect, emotional abuse, verbal abuse, and etc. This is extremely important in order to ensure that the future adult members of society have a healthy state of mind and a body free from any damage/injury caused by preventable things (parents).

RXP
02-14-2005, 01:37 AM
and they deprive their children from learning on their own

Your system deprives people from learning on their own!

The world as it is isn't actually that bad. Just sort out the 3rd world with re-distro of income and it will be as good as you can get. WHo cares if there are poor and rich people in western society? Stop whining. There are people better looking than me, smarter, have hot girl friends etc. I just accept it. As long as you can get on with your life and be happy (unlike 3rd world people) stop your whining and accept the world for what it is.

You also don't realise how much suffering there would be without technology. Imagine no anti-depressants for one thing.

Lithuanian Offspring
02-14-2005, 12:37 PM
Education becomes revolutionary, alongside the working peasants, not at school, but by the Party through activities. The true university is found in the farms, the worksites, the factories. The essential is neither Diplomas, nor Science, nor Technique but Worker's Consciousness, that of the poor, working-peasants fighting for the Ideas of the Party. On the basis of consciousness, one can do everything, acquire everything, succeed in everything.

Life becomes collective, not personal, in groups and to be conducted according to the Party slogans.

The family is abolished. The family represents a milieu favourable to all forms of inequality, to the reconstitution of different social classes and castes. Thus family life must be reduced to its simplist expression.

Labour becomes collective, accompanied with Revolutionary Education on all fronts. It is a question of labour based on human energy. Thus human labour replaces machines.

Cooperatives are the social and administrative unit, the economic political organism, the warehouse of the collective; the point of the centralisation of all powers, the concentration of property and for the distribution of foodstuffs, and thus the point of "to each according to his needs".

The population work in agrarian communes. These communes are separated into squares of ten units, with a ban on people moving from one square to another. A portion of the ground is measured off within which each person is authorised to move around.

Permanent deportations are done to uproot people from the social milieu to which they have started to become accustomed. The aim is to prevent the germination of any property instincts and the reconstitution of the family, castes, groups of all forms. The attachment to one's house, to one's wife, husband, children, parents -- is this not the root of all evil?

The only meetings authorised are the political education sessions, organised by the Party. The eternal self-criticism. Twice yearly, everyone becomes a candidate and must set forth the history of his or her life to uncover and to denounce the errors committed in the past, the present, and those intended for the future based on intentions or thoughts.

The only correct, pure and hard line is that of the Party.

Money, wages, and markets are abolished -- thus no budget, no problems of balance payments, of stimulating the economy, no inflation, no economic, social or political crises. Without money or merchants, with no remunerated labour, there exists no basis for such social evils as the cult of profit, individuality, personal conflicts, jealousy, rivalries, corruption, decadence, and so on.

What I envision is an immense apparatus of repression of all social parasites as an amalgram of Party, Government and State not in the usual sense of these institutions, but with particular stress on its mysterious character. It is a political-metaphysical power, anonymous, omnipresent, omniscient.

Total opposition to globalism, multiculturalism, the mixing of races, universalist ideologies, imperialism, and internationalism -- in a word, all forms of international integration. For to accept international integration is to accept a mechanism whereby the structural imbalance of the world will be aggravated, an aggravation which could end in a violent explosion, seeing that it cannot fail to become insupportable for an ever greater part of the population. Indeed, the latter is already aware of the contradictions which lock up the integration of the economy within the international market of goods and capital. A conscious and autonomous development (of a nation), essentially autarky, is thus objectively necessary.

I believe that the future society must be based on the peasant masses and that all other classes must be eliminated. I believe that the new society must be started from zero, basing it on the peasant masses. Everything from the old society must go. We must return to nature, based on the peasantry. However, I believe in the role of selected intellectuals. I believe they are best qualified to rule a country and to charter a shortcut to social and economic progress.

I do not propose to do away immediately with the classes which possess a major part of the revenues. The structural reform which I propose does not intend to elimininate the contributive capacity of these groups. I consider that we can and should try instead to release their contributive potential in trying to transform these landlords, these middlemen traders, these moneylenders into a class of agricultural producers, peasants. I think they should be diverted from unproductive activities and get them to participate in production. In the towns, there must be promoted a movement of reconversion of capital from the commercial sector, towards the agricultural sector.

I have a passionate hatred for cities, towns, industry, the commercial system, and modern civilisation. The establishment of commercial organisations can be compared to a large spider web covering all of the nation in which it is esatablished. If we consider the peasants and consumers as flies or mosquitoes which get trapped in the web, we can see that the peasants and consumers are prey to the merchants, the spider which spins the web. The commercial system, the selling and exchanging of agricultural production in a country, suppresses production and squeezes the rural areas dry and tasteless, permanently maintaining them in their poverty. What people habitually call the "cities" are pumps which drain away the vitality of the rural areas. Any type of goods that the cities and market towns provide for the rural areas are just bait. The large rural areas feed the cities and market towns. The cities -- the market towns with their fresh and up-to-date appearance - live at the expense of the rural areas - they ride on their shoulders. Hou Youn of the Khmer Rouge put it well when he said: "The tree grows in the rural areas, but the fruit goes to the towns."

I have a bit of an obsession with the Chinese cultural revolution: having the peasants re-educate the intellectuals, rather than vice versa; putting the peasantry on the top rungs of society; hounding down and physically liquidating the national bourgeoisie; and the belief that revolution has to be carried out by the peasantry.

The most basic notion of my philosophy is that man has been corrupted by civilisation. The more civilisation is expressed by an industrialised society, the more man is corruped. I consider education to be a source of corruption for the masses. Only a very simple social system is necessary in order to remian pure and preserve one's sanity. The more man is educated the more deceitful he becomes.

An intellectual elite will do the thinking, the masses will do the working. I inherited this idea from the old emperors, particularly the old Angkor Empire, and the doctine of the supreme authority of leaders. The emperor is closest to heaven and thus knows all. People and soil, sun and water, that is all that is necessary for a pure and tranquil existence.

To think, it's the 21st century. Why does everything that has to do with communism first propagate it as full of liberty and then turn into a total dictatorship. At least this guy has the balls to admit that his little society is evil.

SicN Twisted
02-14-2005, 02:17 PM
Am I the only person here who realizes that this topic is a joke?

Paint_It_Black
02-15-2005, 08:52 AM
It's not completely a joke.

SicN Twisted
02-15-2005, 11:46 AM
There is no way someone who upholds Pol Pot could possibly be on the Offspring BBS. This dude is preaching a super exagerated form of militant communism but explaining it and using certain wording that are taboos amongst actual Marxists. Especially the whole thing of regulating where people stand.

Kim Jong Il
02-15-2005, 11:49 AM
Wheelchairman invited me. I met him on another BBS.

SicN Twisted
02-15-2005, 11:57 AM
You still can't possible uphold Pol Pot. He was a genocidal maniac, even Juchin followers acknowledge him as bullshit.

Kim Jong Il
02-15-2005, 11:58 AM
I will make a post about my feelings on Pol Pot, agreed?

SicN Twisted
02-15-2005, 12:00 PM
Has it ever occured to you that Marx theorized a dictatorship OF the Proletariate. The word is OF, not OVER.

Kim Jong Il
02-15-2005, 12:06 PM
Has it ever occured to you that Marx theorized a dictatorship OF the Proletariate. The word is OF, not OVER.

I am not a marxist; in my opinion the essential worker-class (that is opposite of the parasitic ruling-class) is the peasantry, however other opinions of what is the essential worker-class for National progress are: the mental-laboring class (white collar workers), the industrial laborers (proletariat), the physical-laboring class (blue collar workers).

SicN Twisted
02-15-2005, 12:18 PM
You've avoided the point completely. How do you believe in a closenit dictatorial party ruling OVER the peasants and dictating every aspect of their lives, instead of letting them represent themselves.

Kim Jong Il
02-15-2005, 12:24 PM
You've avoided the point completely. How do you believe in a closenit dictatorial party ruling OVER the peasants and dictating every aspect of their lives, instead of letting them represent themselves.

To maintain the intellectual ideological basis and power of the leadership without any competitor or challenger.

SicN Twisted
02-15-2005, 05:38 PM
You strike me as more of a fascist then anything. You use words like revolution in an empty way toargue in favor of absolute state power.

"Like a lovely generator"
02-17-2005, 10:27 AM
Totally agreeing with SicNTwisted. I hate the way people can claim to be Marxists or even left-wing and uphold blatent facist viewpoints. People who hold dictors as examples have lost the plot entirely, like the many "Socialists" who admire Stalin (How many people did he kill again?). I would call myself a socialist and am totally disgusted by someone idolising Pol Pot. The fact that you can do this on an Offspring forum as well is just crazy. It's totally against the music. I totally admire Marx and think that you are just going totally against everything he stood for. Ever read Das Capital? :mad:

wheelchairman
02-17-2005, 12:55 PM
Totally agreeing with SicNTwisted. I hate the way people can claim to be Marxists or even left-wing and uphold blatent facist viewpoints. People who hold dictors as examples have lost the plot entirely, like the many "Socialists" who admire Stalin (How many people did he kill again?). I would call myself a socialist and am totally disgusted by someone idolising Pol Pot. The fact that you can do this on an Offspring forum as well is just crazy. It's totally against the music. I totally admire Marx and think that you are just going totally against everything he stood for. Ever read Das Capital? :mad:
Stalin killed between one to five million.
Music is open to interpreation, is yours the only correct one? Perhaps All I Want, was about wanting the Khmer Rouge.
I've probably read more Marx than you.
And yes I did invite Pol Pot here. Interesting debate always follows him. I hope he posts his philosophy on tea-drinking.

"Like a lovely generator"
02-19-2005, 07:08 AM
Stalin killed between one to five million.
Music is open to interpreation, is yours the only correct one? Perhaps All I Want, was about wanting the Khmer Rouge.
I've probably read more Marx than you.
And yes I did invite Pol Pot here. Interesting debate always follows him. I hope he posts his philosophy on tea-drinking.

Fine. I accept what you're saying about the interpretation of music and shouldn't have brought that into this. Also, yes, you've most likely read more Marx than me. The Pol Pot guy is an interesting poster and seems to have caused a lot of debate here. I was just attempting to make a point about the extemness of his ideology on a bad day without having had much coffee so it wasn't particuarly fair or balanced. Anyway, i'm interested to here anything you or Kim have to say but I can't be guarenteed not to insult it. Afterall, we're all intitled to our opinions. What's this about tea drinking?

RXP
02-19-2005, 07:24 AM
If you drink tea it means you secretly want to be raped.

wheelchairman
02-19-2005, 07:38 AM
I'm drinking tea right now. Isn't wanting to be raped an oxymoron?

RXP
02-19-2005, 08:43 AM
Hahahahah no, women have to pretend not to consent even take it all the way to the court to maintain they don't like surprise sex.

JoY
02-19-2005, 09:58 AM
No it's the route of love. If loving someone is evil, then I for one would rather live in this evil world than your weird, dehumanised hell. It isn't even a socialist state. It's nothing. It's a backward hell.

The thing that appeals to me about Marxism is that it's constructive. It AIMS somewhere. It asks people to do things, to learn, to progress society it actually demands the economy be in good shape before the revolution.

Your system just puts it back. A Marxist does believe that what the average joe refers to as "human nature" is a mere reflection of the current capitalist system and this can be changed to improve society. I am falling in love with that idea and it's actually making me rethink alot of what I thought I had known. But the realist in me tells me things will never change because those who are the makers of society are there because they are better than us who think the way we do so they impose their will on us so we might as well make the best use of what we have.

Your system is a backward and dangerously deluded fantasy. It assumes that 'evil' is taking pride in something, owning something, having it even in human terms such as family or a woman. It denies the basic human calling.... to show our love and to be loved. A system that distorts our most basic instinct.... to be attached to the ones we love is bound to fail. A system that does both this AND destroy an economy is a hell that there would be no escape out of. There would be no progress of healthcare. In theory no itís likely that human society is to be challenged by killer virus', meteors etc. how would your peasant system deal with this? How would we survive?

A capitalist, technological, multi racial/cultural society would collectively utilise all our expertise to defeat any problems we will no doubt encounter.

Your system would mean the extinction of humans just like any other species because you degrade us back to being animals.

I have no idea if you're really serious about all this but I think you need to see more of the world, talk to people and live a little. Read some more then re-condier what you believe is 'evil' in society.

If you truly do believe as you do, the best thing for our race would just be to die. Death would mean no more suffering no more anything.
hahaha. I CERTAINLY agree on the first thing you said & most of your points that followed, too.
so that's amazing. I agree.

JoY
02-19-2005, 09:59 AM
I'm drinking tea right now. Isn't wanting to be raped an oxymoron?
yes, it is.

JoY
02-19-2005, 10:04 AM
& as for my last post here; Sky is on a roll. I give him two e-thumbs up for saying little, but all that is necessary. somehow I never know how to pull it off to make a point, without turning it into a dramatically long post.