Fleetinglife

The Muskovite syndrome: "But bro he looks just like me: 1. He is white 2. He had an ex gamer/girlfriend that colored her hair in bright colors 3. All my social circles and friends are fellow Muskies 4. He is like a younger, hip version of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates that wear Ts of my favorite anime and watches them!!! 5. You'll see like with Gates's Microsoft OS you won't be able to do anything without an AI operated and self-drive EV in the future (The Chinese mass consumer ones well they are probably sh#t cause they are made in China) 6. You'll see you better be grateful for his hyperloop underground tunnels that will ease public transportation strains (dude, who cares about high-speed railway trains it's all CPC money being paid to bribe corrupt kleptocratic officials to be pro-Chinese policies and protect their business and investment interests in developing countries and Gina), this is all free-market let the most innovative and ingenious company win with their proposals, sure as sh#t there are no special government grants and subsidies to keep their monopolies safe and at an edge over their rivals, who might have different ideas. 7. Elon warned us about the dystopic AI takeover in advance!!! If you are not ready for robocop police dogs tazering you in the street for protesting and AI walkers threatening you with lethal force. It's your fault for not prepping in advance dude! 8. So you better be grateful to Elon for all that he is done, made possible, and will do for humanity in the near future. You better be grateful!

Whatever floats your boat buddy and plays your flute.

He is of white Afrikaner descent and emigrated to Canada to avoid conscription and later America, whose family lived in a white settler British colonial enclave turned apartheid state which they benefited from both in the property business and has stakes in the exploitative gem and precious stone mining industry. ''That's why the West represents the greatest civilization in human history. Elon Musk is from Africa. We've allowed tens of millions of people to migrate into our Western hemisphere. We're helping a lot of people.'' What a way to suck your own d*ck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk

So I am sorry guys for not engaging with you or responding to you in this thread I thought I have successfully temporarily suspended my problems and engaged in actively trying to fix them but I thought now I might open up here again since this seems to be a reoccurring issue for which I am deeply embedded and reminded of because of the guilt I feel for wasting my potential as a teen and young adult in the past five years. I will open up here with the emotional, anger, and mood issues I am facing here with myself and some reoccurring psychosomatic issues for the past several years: ''I am currently engaged still and bound up in a very toxic codependent family relationship with my only dad (after my mother has passed away when I was a kid) without gaining a modicum of financial independence for myself or being currently unemployed since I am studying and trying to wound up some subjects at faculty and trying to decide and make a decision will I still be going to faculty after all or will try to enlist in a college for social work that recognizes the exams I passed up until now on sociology and to before that attempt to find some part-time job, so I can get a revenue stream that will be my own, and not relying exclusively upon a family pension from my deceased mother's work internship as a programmer at a bank in Canada and a brief part-time as an accountant at the postal service here in my home country that I get for being a regular student at faculty or any higher education institution starting that lasts until I turn 26 while I am still at faculty or college, that my dad uses to cover part of his life and apartment bill expenses, since he has an irreuglar not stable income (income by performance) as German and English teacher in a private school via his temporary several months renewable contracts. So I am trying to see to pass some more exams here in the winter period but my long term prospects for remaining on this state faculty are called into question, I am feeling that it would be a dragged out and wasteful affair only for the sake of keeping the pension income from the state and that I can retain for the next two years anyway by enrolling into this private college for social work. Anyways what worries me to most is the fact that I haven't changed my habits enough (I still have problems falling asleep at night late, even after I meditate, I would wake up at 3 or 4 am after having some nightmares (like insects, centipedes walking over my arms, biting and eating me) and wouldn't fall asleep till early in the morning when the sun comes up), and would feel casual fatigue and profound tiredness during the day at noon and would have to lay down and sleep for half an hour or an hour until I feel I've drowned into nothingness after the felt emotional fatigue, turmoil, and emptiness I would feel during the day and I feel sometimes so tired at that point that I don't feel I have the strenght to last meditating for 30 minutes and that during that I would just roll over or fall asleep afterward anyway. So the point of me writing this all is to ask should be guided by my feelings in pursuing a certain course of action for my life and not take into account the insecurities and the needs of others like my dad's (who would still receive the pension regardless if I would enroll into this private college for two more years) I have until summer when the entrance exam for this is coming up to decide and I feel I have to pass a few exams here in the winter period to prove I am really serious about this and to find some part-time job with a steady income to cover a part of my expenses left for this faculty and for the private college. Also, I haven't mentioned it in detail but I will the severed bonds and relationships with my other relatives and grandparents from my mother's side that I feel that I need to heal, rekindle and regain their trust again after I acted passively, uninterestedly and didn't call them to ask them how they are doing and how are they (didn't call my aunt to congratulate her on her birthday in the summer) towards them for several months now, which I feel an obligation towards especially my step sister to whom I feel a brotherly duty towards to somehow help her in the future, when she, for example, enrolls into a faculty here in Belgrade when she is old enough, and friends (one from highschool and two girls who I've met in faculty) who were kind and caring enough to offer me their assistance with a job and advice for my mental health problems this past and last year especially with the Covid outbreak lockdown situation, online courses have done independently, my grandfather who I've seen a role model and guide for life difficulties and independence passing away, and my mother's passing away fifteenth aniversary, that I betrayed and lost their trust by not calling them back and answering them while I was in a self-imposed isolation during the start of my autumn semester at the fourth year at faculty, that I am trying to see now to how to make it up with them, regain their trust in me and for them to forgive me and give a second chance (they are on the latest of the list of people I haven't called back and answered back for a long time now in some cases months in others a year has passed (them being my sociology professor from highschool and my other relatives sister) that I feel for my sake I should try to rekindle my relationship with and to ask them for their forgiveness and for them to regain trust in me by showing them I've changed and have overcome my selfish and unheatlhy patterns of caring and trying to love nobody but myself). Thanks for hearing me out this is just the tip of the iceberg of things I feel bad and guilty about and that I am losing sleepover, and others being my failed perception of my personal life purpose that I need to somehow repay a debt towards, the failure towards the perceived expectations of people who've I looked towards as role models and heroes through the in comparison to my own state, achievements and actions up until this point in my their own Herculean feats and achievements they made for their own lives for my own life as being an evolving continuation of their successes and ancestors who made possible and leftover for me the cushiness and relative financial securities that I enjoyed through their own strivings, achievements and successes in their own lives and the mission of my soul on this Earth, which I've been thinking and contemplating about and will discuss here more in detail if that thread wouldn't be more appropriate for the Life Purpose Issues Subsection of the Forum.''

I just need someone to hear me out, so I can have a feeling of explaining what I believe the causes of this are better to myself and the person involved. I appreciate and thank anyone in advance willing to separate and invest time and energy to listen to me and hear me out! Thank you! ?

I get your points and approximately where you are coming from at arriving at them, I think it's mute and unproductive at this point to continue arguing over these pedantics.

Thatcher did this also because of the busting of the powerful mining and industrial unions in the North, to distract the public from those domestic issues and the internal issues that came up with her privatizing of major industries and public services and gradual privatizing and stripping of public housing the giant unemployment rate it generated afterward. Look it up. Also, btw Falklands should be officially recognized as Argentinian territory, and not a base for British white settler farmer plants. There is a fine line between romanticizing the countries past and outright revisionism with the making up and no basis in historical fact. That can be dangerous and deluding stuff. In fact, I live in a country where that is a very dangerous symptom of many prejudiced, biased, and close-minded rigid and unenlightened uneducated minds who are sold myths about their countries past and immediate history by bad-faith actors and politicians in the interest of making them easily manipulable, dominatable, impressionable and influenced for them to gain and hold onto power and to keep lording over them physically and mentally .Sorry for writing it that way, I wrote in a hurry. I basically here agreed with your assumption that smaller countries in Europe have an easier time to spirally develop because of fewer contradictions in their history and polity in which they economically develop and govern themselves. I was being ironic. Sorry I got carried away with the analogy. Look up the trade problems leaving the EU caused for Ireland with Northern Ireland which is still in the EU. Scotland and the Scottish National Party say they want to do is, since they want to be a part of the EU, but somehow they always felt short to carrying on with the referendum and that they will try this again. I meant it primarily in the economic sense they suffer for their decisions and their consequences. I didn't mean it in the literal sense they were hostages, you took it literally, though I didn't express myself clearly so part of that is my fault as well and I apologize for making you think that I meant that in that way. Poland and Hungary are still liberal democracies in the theoretical political sense, though practically they don't function as ones and are usurped. But that's what I wanted to notify and point you on towards is a very discriminatory and biased way to use the term 'Europe' is sometimes used as to somehow noting these countries because of their political system dysfunction are no longer now Europe, even though they always were in the geographical sense and their shared histories been a central part to European culture and traditions. All the more sense for you to be critical of the way that concept is used, that primarily is used to discriminate against your former countrymen as not 'European' or part of 'Europe' any longer because of their political system and current values.

''If one is unwilling to talk about capitalism, one should remain silent about fascism too'' - Max Horkheimer, 1938., The Frankfurt School of Marxist thought.

Petty appeasement stuff to south British conservatives, most of the voter base of the Tories, as if Ireland and Scotland and their aspirations to be independent nations on their own from British hegemony and influence, in particular, don't exist in the British isle equation. Would have guessed as much, you need to constantly redraw boundaries against the not as civilized East of that concept 'Europe, or Fortress Europa', in order for it to work and have a semblance of the real-world existing actual rationale behind it. This is basically the Thatcherite line of reviving the myth and the glory of British nationalism that supposedly existed under Churchill, which was in itself flawed and based on a historical fantasy and in an already declined state and by Thacher's time non-existent physical empire. Many contemporary British historians admonish and criticize Thatcher for reviving this myth of a glorious British nationalism as supposedly existing under Churchill in contemporary pop culture for political purposes in order to use it as a cover and justify her policies hated by most people in Britain during the time she was in office and the Falkland fiasco, distraction, and diversion from internal economic strife and problems and unpopularity she faced at home. British conservatives: ''Well, we won that war, so we can still larp pretending to be like nationalists and conservatives of the past and drool over the prospects of reviving the glory and prestige we once had under our glorious empire! Strike the Falklands!'' Hey guys, when the Germans do it: ''Bad, bad, very bad! They are falling back into Nazism again and their Nazi past!!! Third Reich Aspirations!!! Germany hasn't reformed at all or redeemed itself for its sins!'' when the Brits do it (and only the South White Englanders, not their union hostages in Scotland and Irish in NI and Ireland, that suffer for their selfish and idiotic decisions),: ''Muh conservative values and nationalism. Ahh when need to be strong, respected, and have prestige again as our glorious world colonial empire! Global Britain!1!1!1! We will not listen to our unelected overlords and masters at Brussels, but our own public school elite educated, landlord and upper-class incestuous ones in Downing Street, Westminster, City of London, and Buckingham Palace!1!1!1! I am not intentionally being in bad faith here towards the British backlash brexiteers, nationalists, and conservatives and their reasons and consciousness stage motives, but I can't remain silent on the contradictions and inconsistencies within such an obvious gaping hole of a hypocritical thought. Of course, since you don't have a shit ton of these contradictions in your history, and in your societies present composition and what they did and their relationships in the past that shaped and influenced the present ones and what mark, it left today in running such a project to deal with and to deprogram people out of wishful thinking of their past romanticized fantasies. You just sat there and waited for the wealth of intergenerational capital to accumulate from the pillage and spoils of war of your bankers who hooked and plugged you into the international financial system these big guys plowed through for you with the dirty work that they did.

Have you checked on your Eastern border member states neighbors recently? Poland and Hungary. That there is a severely symptomatic upper Blue stage consciousness backlash against Orange (EU) and a hint of Green values (more inclusive, diverse, and tolerant post-modern version of liberalism). Also to the West, Brexit, which was very grounded in nationalist feelings and British xenophobia and newly created resistance towards upper stage Orange values of the EU.

Of course, Putin wants people to vote in a rigged election for his party in order to legitimize the otherwise fraudulent and corrupt election process in Russia. Btw This sketch is so grounded in fearmongering, phobias, and isms of all kinds it is basically the heart of its being, whoever put this through and compiled this together. Basically, the sketch can be summed up as a phobia of everything and of all kinds, deeply grounded in fears and human uncertainties about the future. The dark nightmares and fears of an ethnophiliac. This is a prime example of propaganda aimed at the ethnocentric discriminatory concern of care in society.

Prove your assertion on a concrete example before you accuse.

The question today is are you willing to be a vocal anti-war advocate and participate or build a movement around it in the type of culture that you are living against a political and economic class that holds power in the government that is constructing an ideology around and planning around taking a course in such an undertaking in the near future and in shaping the culture of the society that you are living in towards making waging a certain war against an 'other' acceptable, supportable or a societal norm. In my case, if the war preparationists here in my government and society plan on participating and undertaking in the near future in a war and invasion against the Albanians in Kosovo, I am personally considering and planning around in fleeing to Canada, which's citizenship I have, with my tail between my legs rather than participating in the culture celebrating and supporting and obsessing over that repeated irredentist and revanchist madness.

Tell that to the Serbian nationalists here in power and their supporters who are planning to start a Third Balkan War with the Albanians over Kosovo in the near future. They have nothing better personally to achieve in their lives and their heads are filled with a false toxic collective life purpose based on myths from the 14th and 19th and 20th centuries.

@DocWatts I watched and heard this perspective from Chomsky before right around the time I started learning and finding of libertarian socialism and socialism, in general, a few years ago. 1. I admit I feel a slight anti-white Western liberal cringe and bias when I hear this seemingly urbanite liberal white girl who just got into revolutionary theory and politics pose a question to Chomsky about Lenin's legacy in such a hyperactive and excited tone and voice. It's cute but I get LARPy vibes from her, though better that than nothing for her and other young people there starting to independently to learn on their own about the history of marxism and socialism to start deprogramming themselves and forming their own autonomous interpretative worldviews and more critical thought patterns based on their own reading, insights, and literature from the biases, prejudices, and assumptions that the mainstream western corporate media ingrains in its audiences. 2. I am not defending now or advocating in my understanding for the centralized version of the Soviet Union under Stalin and later others, though I think at the time it performed despite its many terrors and horrors that it committed on its population an overall modernization and civilizational uplifting of the people of Eastern Europe free from becoming victims of external exploitation, stagnation and the inability to develop and grow on their own under the international system of capitalist unequal exchange (Zizek quotes in the text I posted above that the Soviet leaders including Stalin viewed it this way, though Stalin performed it in a more autocratic, centralized and imperialist way towards other nations). 3. Much of the autocratization and centralization of the Soviet Union happened under Stalin: ''The direction in which Stalin was already heading is clear from his proposal that the government of Soviet Russia should also be the government of the other five republics (Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia): If the present decision is confirmed by the Central Committee of the RCP, it will not be made public, but communicated to the Central Committees of the Republics for circulation among the Soviet organs, the Central Executive Committees, or the Congresses of the Soviets of the said Republics before the convocation of the All-Russian Congress of the Soviets, where it will be declared to be the wish of these Republics. The interaction of the higher authority, the Central Committee, with its base was thus abolished: the higher authority now simply imposed its will. To add insult to injury, the Central Committee decided what the base would ask the higher authority to enact as if it were its own wish.'' 4. Zizek already addressed in the article where Lenin diverged from Rosa on the question of none necessity of progressive forces to lead the new states of some undeveloped countries and the inability of people to become libertarian right away without first: the idea of a modest, "realistic" project for Bolshevism. Because of the economic under-development and cultural backwardness of the Russian masses, he argues, there is no way for Russia to "pass directly to socialism": all that Soviet power can do is to combine the moderate politics of "state capitalism" with the intense cultural education of the peasant masses – not the brainwashing of propaganda, but a patient, gradual imposition of civilized standards. Facts and figures revealed "what a vast amount of urgent spadework we still have to do to reach the standard of an ordinary west European civilized country … We must bear in mind the semi-Asiatic ignorance from which we have not yet extricated ourselves," he wrote. 5. On this note that he said we should agree with the fascists that it wasn't socialism but the destruction of it to avoid their strawman's and projections, but I would remind him of this quote from Zizek what disservice that does for the progressive and humanistic legacy it did for some nations of Eastern Europe and what opportunism that supplies for the right-wing reactionary movements: ''One of the signs of this regression is a request often heard on the new European right for a more "balanced" view of the two "extremisms", the right and the left. We are repeatedly told that one should treat the extreme left (communism) the same way that Europe after the second world war treated the extreme right (the defeated fascists). But in reality, there is no balance here: the equation of fascism and communism secretly privileges fascism. Thus the right is hard to argue that fascism copied communism: before becoming a fascist, Mussolini was a socialist; Hitler, too, was a National Socialist; concentration camps and genocidal violence were features of the Soviet Union a decade before Nazis resorted to them; the annihilation of the Jews has a clear precedent in the annihilation of the class enemy, etc. The point of these arguments is to assert that moderate fascism was a justified response to the communist threat (a point made long ago by Ernst Nolte in his defense of Heidegger’s involvement with Nazism). In Slovenia, the right is advocating the rehabilitation of the anti-communist Home Guard which fought the partisans during the second world war: they made the difficult choice to collaborate with the Nazis in order to thwart the much greater evil of communism.'' I plan to read starting from the basics using Wolff as a reference in Understanding Marxism and Understanding Socialism when I get to it in my free time. 6. Also on the final note it was in then developed industrialized civilized countries such as Germany seen ripe for socialist transformation according to orthodox Marxists that the destruction of socialism also took place that the German Social Democrats voted on the war credits to send the German proletariat into an imperialist war on behalf of the German ruling class and arranged for the assassination of the leaders of the Spartacist Socialist Movement Liebknecht and Luxemburg.

Is there an Actualized.org clip-on Shadow Work? I've been mostly watching Actualized.org clips and taking notes on them and didn't separate and invest the time to watch a full hour or two hour-long episodes since I see this as a more efficient way of note-taking.

I've yet to watch Leo's episode How to Forgive Anyone to the full, but until I do does Leo there talk about how to forgive a nation, people who engage in denialism of genocide, murder, past sadism, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes against other people or the viewer's relatives, family or ancestors or at least its active revisionism, minimization, and justification or obfuscation? Also to rid the viewer of his active felt hatred towards those sort of people and a desire to enact some sort of revenge, getting back at or a desire for justice to befall upon them and for the victimized nation, people, and group you belong to be adequately compensated for this and being redeemed by the redemption of the oppressor, guilty people or group? Thanks to anyone who can give me advice for me on how to effectively combat these feelings and thoughts and overcome them a part of watching that episode in whole and taking notes on it.

Is watching the two Actualized.org clips On Forgiveness enough for practicing and exercising forgiveness onto others for the things that also exist in me as a human or is the exercise contained in the full episode?

Yes. There is a lot of dichotomies in Marxist circles between theory versus praxis. The ''othering'' is done for the sake of the unenlightened masses to point out some of the external causes of the perpetuation of their suffering since it is assumed implicitly that they can't awaken and realize that it is ultimately caused by themselves or circumstances currently beyond their reach of power, my interpretation at least. But this is not the only point of this text, it is just to show how much people's identity has become limited and weakened and degraded to a lower state of consciousness that they need ''others'' to form their own limited sense of identity with no individuality or personal stories to tell and more easily employed for tolerating severe exploitation and violence by their ''own'' in the post-Yugoslav space by the media contents they unconsciously digest through osmosis that is distributed to them by media oligarchs with close ties to political power and post-Yugoslav Serbian elite nationalist nomenclature who protect them from lawful regulation of their private media empires by existing institutional regulatory agencies since they propagate their own political exclusionary ideology which they use to control the minds of the masses and divert their self-loathing of themselves (paradoxically created by adopting uncritically that limited sense of tying directly their own identity to a collective ethnic one in a mentally rigid and reductionist way), bitterness with themselves and anger with themselves and their lives to the ''others'' and how that has weakened their sense of becoming unique and autonomous individuals free of any sense of ties to a primordial assumption of ethnic identity. Prime example: One of the more famous of the three media oligarchs with close ties to the ruling regime here is called out on a social media platform how does he not have any dignity in being a past war profiteer in the wartime when he built his media empire with the help of the ties of the then ruling regime and then proceeded to be a ''diaper fly'' (Serbian term used) to any political power change within the country in order to maintain the privileges and monopolies of his media empire? He answers bluntly without seemingly any sense of guilt, self-consciousness, or remorse: "Of course I am profiteer who builds his profits on your retardedness. If you weren't so retarded I wouldn't be making record profits now!'' referring to the ordinary folk consuming his entertainment content packed in propagandistic language to the ruling regime and the dominator ethnonationalist ideology here.

Except when it goes deep epistemically and dabbles in duality to prove how limited, transient, illusory, and dangerous strong identification are with a certain ''collective identity'' is. ''In this regard, considering why the difference is important in the construction of "otherness", British-Jamaican sociologist, Marxist and cultural theorist Stuart Hall makes several key arguments: 1. According to him, the difference is essential for the meaning because without it the meaning does not exist (the meaning is relational, and the difference between "us" and "them" is what carries the meaning). 2. Also, emphasizing the difference in relation to the Other is at the core of culture because it creates binary oppositions that are crucial for all classifications within culture, which further determines the symbolic boundaries that keep certain categories of culture "pure". 3. In addition to all that, the Other is fundamental for the constitution of the self, ie us as subjects, but at the same time, it can be added, "us" as a collective. nationalism [is] legitimized [...] by the difference in relation to the ‘other’. But not by any difference. The difference that is discriminatory, which "answers" the question: What is characteristic of "us"? How are we different from ‘others’? Self-identity is defined on the basis of characteristics that cannot (or cannot be) shared with ‘others’. If it were not so, then there would be no 'other', and no 'us', as different. More precisely, the absolute condition for the existence of "us" is the existence of "the other". The constant search for difference. That's why every nationalist discourse pays special attention to nurturing the image of the Other because it largely self-determines itself against that image. Thus, "That 'other' is a constant, it is often considered threatening, but, most importantly, it is constitutive of one's own idea of identity. That ‘other’ is the favorite That ‘other’ is the dearest enemy. The nationalist can most easily determine himself by listing the properties that are not "his", which determine "the other". Without that ‘other’, neither ‘we’ nor we would know ‘who we are. The difference, which the nationalist is tirelessly searching for, is what ‘determines’ us in relation to the ‘other’ - what ‘gives us’ identity ’ The relational character of the image of the Other in terms of the collective national identity became especially problematic in the post-Yugoslav space because the "fraternal peoples" had to be presented as others. This is exactly one of the specifics of the post-Yugoslav space in which is an ideological concept of brotherhood and unity (which implied international tolerance and cooperation) for a relatively short period of time replaced by the concept of national exclusivism, in which the newly formed non-negative Other became one of the key categories.'' source: Ideological Contents of Media in Post-Yugoslav Space, a doctoral thesis by Nemanja Zvijer

I would suggest you take this article into consideration, it's from 2014 by Zizek, it discusses Lenin's contribution in helping formulate the conditions for achieving Ukrainian nationhood, national self-determination, and sovereignty and also discusses Zizek's POV on the mistake of right and liberal viewing to the Ukraine problem which is now also again circulating in the mainstream news: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/10/ukraine-slavoj-zizek-lenin The golden era of Ukrainian national identity was not tsarist Russia – where Ukrainian national self-assertion was thwarted – but the first decade of the Soviet Union, when Soviet policy in a Ukraine exhausted by war and famine was "indigenization". Ukrainian culture and language were revived and rights to healthcare, education, and social security were introduced. Indigenization followed the principles formulated by Lenin in quite unambiguous terms: ''The proletariat cannot but fight against the forcible retention of the oppressed nations within the boundaries of a given state, and this is exactly what the struggle for the right of self-determination means. The proletariat must demand the right of political secession for the colonies and for the nations that ‘its own’ nation oppresses. Unless it does this, proletarian internationalism will remain a meaningless phrase; mutual confidence and class solidarity between the workers of the oppressing and oppressed nations will be impossible.'' Lenin remained faithful to this position to the end: immediately after the October Revolution, when Rosa Luxembourg argued that small nations should be given full sovereignty only if progressive forces would predominate in the new state, Lenin was in favor of an unconditional right to secede. I fail to see any ounce of stage Red consciousness thought in this policy. In his last struggle against Stalin’s project for the centralized Soviet Union, Lenin again advocated the unconditional right of small nations to secede (in this case, Georgia was at stake), insisting on the full sovereignty of the national entities that composed the Soviet state – no wonder that, on 27 September 1922, in a letter to the Politburo, Stalin accused Lenin of "national liberalism". ''But the Leninist undercurrent, though repressed, persisted in the Communist underground opposition to Stalin. Long before Solzhenitsyn, as Christopher Hitchens wrote in 2011: The crucial questions about the Gulag were being asked by left oppositionists, from Boris Souvarine to Victor Serge to CLR. James, in real-time and at great peril. Those courageous and prescient heretics have been somewhat written out of history (they expected far worse than that, and often received it). This internal dissent was a natural part of the Communist movement, in clear contrast to fascism. "There were no dissidents in the Nazi party," Hitchens went on, "risking their lives on the proposition that the Führer had betrayed the true essence of National Socialism." ''The resurgence of Russian nationalism has caused certain historical events to be rewritten. A recent biopic, Andrei Kravchuk’s Admiral, celebrates the life of Aleksandr Kolchak, the White commander who governed Siberia between 1918 and 1920. But it’s worth remembering the totalitarian potential, as well as the outright brutality, of the White counter-revolutionary forces during this period: Had the Whites won the civil war, Hitchens writes, "the common word for fascism would have been a Russian one, not an Italian one … Major General William Graves, who commanded the American expeditionary force during the 1918 invasion of Siberia (an event thoroughly airbrushed from all American textbooks), wrote in his memoirs about the pervasive, lethal anti-Semitism that dominated the Russian right-wing and added: 'I doubt if history will show any country in the world during the last 50 years where murder could be committed so safely, and with less danger of punishment, than in Siberia during the reign of Admiral Kolchak.'" Should we, then, simply support the Ukrainian side in the conflict? There is a "Leninist" reason to do so. In Lenin’s very last writings, long after he renounced the utopia of State and Revolution, he explored the idea of a modest, "realistic" project for Bolshevism. Because of the economic under-development and cultural backwardness of the Russian masses, he argues, there is no way for Russia to "pass directly to socialism": all that Soviet power can do is to combine the moderate politics of "state capitalism" with the intense cultural education of the peasant masses – not the brainwashing of propaganda, but a patient, gradual imposition of civilized standards. Facts and figures revealed "what a vast amount of urgent spadework we still have to do to reach the standard of an ordinary west European civilized country … We must bear in mind the semi-Asiatic ignorance from which we have not yet extricated ourselves," he wrote. Can we think of the Ukrainian protesters’ reference to Europe as a sign that their goal, too, is "to reach the standard of an ordinary western European civilized country"?

Simplistic, prejudiced, and biased understanding of the relationship of the West and the developing world. Probably comes from his traumatic scars of identifying as being a Syrian who saw his country spiral into a civil war, so he projects a lot of negative unintegrated shadow aspects in his psyche onto the motives and intentions of the West as a whole of being exclusively selfish and self-serving, while he himself has a lot of unconsciousness and biased selfishness stemming from his strong identification with the Syrian/Mid East identity. This is Stage Blue's absolutist dichotomy thought with an attempt of transcending to a rationalist veneer at Orange.

An interesting seemingly objective, informative, and nuanced take from DW once again on the topic. Africa will have a projected pop of 2.5 billion people by 2050 so it is seen as a big future investment and future resource extractive opportunity by both the major world economic players such as the U.S., EU, and China.

That is of course understandable that it left a deep Red traumatic shadow in the people's collective psyche but still, I see it as an excuse to justify some low consciousness actions, selfishness, fear, and ignorance at the point when they had a decent stage Blue to upper federal republic to separate in such a violent way, regressing to the past.

Brutal survival conditions produce ideas, ideas implemented change brutal survival conditions