Fanny Kaplan; mystery woman
With the end of the war, victorious imperial powers wanted a return of the Romanovs; something they call Regime Change nowadays. The Romanov's may have been congenital imbeciles but at least they paid off their debts, or promised to. That was infinitely better than what godfather Lenin offered, which was nothing at all. Lenin was a man of the people who lived in small apartment near the Kremlin with his wife Krupskaya. They usually walked to work or else took the streetcar to the Kremlin. He never used his position of power to accumulate wealth, nor did Trotsky who commanded the ad hoc Red Army, nor Stalin who was primarily a heavily armed activist who robbed banks to finance the revolution. They, and all the people around them, were committed revolutionaries keen to dismantle the capitalist monarchial system. Lenin is demonized in the west as the author of the Red Terror but it was the Tsarist White Terror that struck first. There were two attempts on Trotsky's life with dynamite. Tsarists and disgruntled socialists assassinated Bolshevik leader Moisei Uritsky, a Cheka (secret political police) leader in Petrograd. Then they went after Lenin himself. The Social Revolutionaries (SR) had won the election of Nov-Dec 1917 when 75% of Russia voted socialist in one form or another. With 37% of the vote, the SR Party won the most seats in the Constituent Assembly. Lenin's seizure of power wasn't from Kerensky but from them and the anarchists. That's why they were out to get him. Lenin was shot twice in the chest and neck by Fanny 'Dora' Kaplan, in August 1918. But was it her? Maybe it was Lydia Konopleva, who was a crack shot and involved in other plots? What of Grigory Ivanovich Semyonov? He was the ring-leader of the so-called Central Battle Unit; a Petrograd death squad that killed a number of Bolshevik politicians. Seems like he knew everybody; did he know Stalin too? He certainly knew both Lydia and Fanny. Lydia gets away and disappears from history, perhaps lost in one of the endless purges. Semyonov got away too, was welcomed into Stalin's Communist Party, and testified against his former comrades in the SR. It was Semyonov who armed Kaplan. The story is Fanny was born in the Ukraine but nobody knows where or when. They say Fanny's eyesight was too poor to have been chosen to be the shooter. But did she already know Lenin very well enough to easily recognize him? She was friends (lovers?) with Lenin's brother, so why wouldn't she know him too? The day she shot him, Lenin was among the crowd as he always was, unarmed and unprotected because he was fearless. He stopped to talk with a worker about bread shortages and then turned for Fanny who called out to him. In the end, you don't need the eyes of an eagle to shoot someone you already know point-blank with a Browning 45. After Kaplan gunned him down, Lenin began riding to work in an armored car and who could blame him? They killed Kaplan right away, urged on by Krupskaya, who wanted Fanny dead. You might say they were all pretty cozy.
Lenin and the Revolution demonized
As the years went by, it became important for the West's political managers, and the media they control, to demonize Lenin as the instigator of the Red Terror. The capitalist war machine always needs an enemy. Academicians at all the finest schools are utilized to legitimize the hate even though the Tsar's terror killed 20 million Russians in the wars and urban misery he condoned and promoted while he lived in splendor. Lenin was 48 years old, vigorous in the prime of life when Kaplan gunned him down. He died 6 years later; pale and shrunken, emaciated from strokes. The greatest scholars of our time wonder why Lenin was in such poor health. There is little or no mention of his assassination in typical encyclopedic entries or scholarly articles and books. Some go so far as to say the shooting was good for him. Modern historians lament that Lenin was so sickly when he made Stalin General Secretary of the Communist Party in 1922. If Lenin weren't so enfeebled they say, he may have made a more astute decision! Stalin must have somehow tricked the poor old guy! The actual explanation is pretty simple: Lenin was too weak to do the job anymore: so he appointed the one thoroughly committed communist who could. Professors of Russian history can't talk about Lenin's assassination because they are forced to adhere to the bizarre standards of the utterly corrupt academic machines that employ them. They must support the notion that communism under Stalin and Lenin was doomed from the start and not in accord with the natural arc of history that inevitably leads to the wonders of liberal democracy. If they don't present facts to support this, the door to success in the academic system is permanently closed to them. The truth is, Lenin suffered lead poisoning literally and figuratively from the day Kaplan shot him. He was forced to cling precariously to life, in pain, every moment for the rest of his days. The ensuing strokes killed him not because he was generally in poor health, but because the two 45-caliber slugs that Kaplan pumped into his neck and chest ruined his life, as it would any man. The bullets were not removed until Lenin was on his death bed. The Bolshevik revolution succeeded not just because of Lenin or Stalin, but because socialism in general was supported by the vast majority of Russian people. The Bolsheviks controlled St. Petersburg and Moscow and all points in between. They had majority support in the Russian Heartland; that area that makes up the land mass that is historically Russian. The Tsarist Whites, who fought for the return of a crooked, decrepit and murderous monarchy, lost because they did not. Today, Russia has discarded those regions that supported the Whites and Putin's overwhelming internal support comes from the historical Russia that also supported the Bolsheviks.
The imposition of the American Collective
The major difference between revolutionary Russia and the USA today is that the Russian Revolution came from below: it began with and was sustained by a vast army of workers and soldiers. The present American socialist revolution is imposed from above by the bureaucratic class. In 1917 Russian workers and soldiers were all traumatized by the catastrophe of world war. American society hasn't suffered a similar catastrophic event since the Great Depression (1929-1955). They now (generally) enjoy probably the highest standard of living in the world with large pockets of astounding urban poverty and misery. It is this dichotomy that gives American collectivists impetus; for in truth American capitalism is a social experiment run completely amok. This is evident and, for collectivists, the root of this evil is the American family.
Cultural Marxism
After the 1st World War-phase (c.1912-23) and its astounding brutality, a group of sociologists in Frankfurt Germany, called appropriately The Frankfurt School, determined that the Germanic patriarchal family, with its strict hierarchical male-dominated structure, was to blame for it all. Their source was one of the original Marxists; Friedrich Engels in his 1884 Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigenthums und des Staats (the origin of the family, private property and the state). Most people believe that Das Kapital, the source of Engels' ideas, was only economic theory. It was that, but as an absolutely necessary corollary, Marx demanded the destruction of not only the family but the religious and national structures that support it. Finding European fascism not to their liking, members of the Frankfurt School immigrated to an America that had taken a sharp left-turn with Franklin Roosevelt's election and inauguration in March 1933. Their course in the infiltration of American society was configured by Antonio Gramsci, an Italian communist who was murdered by Mussolini's Blackshirts in 1937. Gramsci was a delightful fellow with a keen sense of humor who liked red wine. He felt that Communist Russia's experiment in socialism had evolved into state capitalism and had failed miserably. He also correctly recognized the deep flaws in the western bourgeois social order that he was a part of. He saw that war would come again (it did), and proposed that the only way forward was to overthrow bourgeois society from within. He knew this would be a long process, one that he would never see culminated. For the Frankfurt School, their members got jobs in the American university system, promoted their friends and weeded out their enemies. With a play on words mimicking Mao Tse-tung, cultural Marxists Rudi Dutschke, Herbert Marcuse, and Ernst Bloch named the process The Long March through the Institutions. Taking their cue from European Reds, American education stressed Critical Theory: the notion that America was all wrong and in need of re-evaluation and re-structuring. For American academics, the primary cause of all social ills, both presently and historically, was the American family that needed to be dismantled and destroyed in its present form. This is why prepubescent children in American public schools are now taught dildo use in what used to be playtime. American Collectivists know the way forward is not standing on a street corner selling copies of the Daily Worker. The method is to attain success in government, media and academia, insert themselves there and assist a revolution that is barely perceptible in its stages. Americans discovered Gramsci in the 1960s. What he presented was a path towards a shift in consciousness away from a Christian-structured family that had been the norm of American culture. Gramsci proposed that when these cultural norms are first challenged and then changed, the composition of the old bourgeois familial order will collapse as the society adopts new norms. So for example, attitudes about homosexuality and same-sex marriage shifted from 80% opposed in 1980 to 80% in favor by 2015. There is a moral rectitude about this shift in opinion because one's sexual identity ought to be individual and inviolate. But it places Christians and Jews into a moral bind as the Laws of Moses leave no doubt about it: Hegel's synthesis in action. However it is, over such a relatively short period of time, this sort of dramatic reorientation in traditional norms doesn't take place by chance. It can only happen as the result of a sustained, intensive and centrally controlled campaign directed at the entire populace by media, academia and governmental institutions. Modern revolution doesn't have red flags and Kommissars marching in the streets. It instead stifles dissent and requires uniformity of thought in a quiet but intensely sustained cultural and social revolution. Any deviance from the preferred ideology is a thought crime that can and does lead to political and social ostracism.
For the bureaucrat, the world is a mere object to be manipulated by him. Marx
Cultural relativism, the idea that racial and cultural differences are artificial social constructions, is the filtering system all government employees must pass through on the way up the academic, bureaucratic and political ladder. It is they who direct the capitalist war-machine that always needs an enemy, the more the better. They are assisted in this by the euphemistically entitled United Nations. In their Department of Economic and Social Affairs you can find the outline of a plan called Replacement Migration. The Germans tried this in the 2nd World War phase (generally 1931-1945) when they wanted to replace Poles, Ukrainians, and Jews with German settlers. It was a vast colonial experiment that would expel 65 million people eastwards into Siberia. It didn't end well. Oblivious to the past, the "United Nations" is at it again. According to them, the people of European heritage (and Japan) do not reproduce sufficiently and need to be replaced with Africans who do. All you have to do is connect to any unaffiliated news program to see the plan in action. It's a genocidal arrangement but the target populations are too befuddled by state media propaganda, materialism and a smorgasbord of recreational drugs to see it clearly. But for the modern bureaucrats in Washington, Brussels and Peking, replacement migration is a wonderful opportunity to implement what is essentially a racist demographic-extinction program with no personal ethical qualms. For the modern bureaucrat to whom racial differences don't exist, nothing that they themselves do can be racist. The racists are confined to the target populations whose resistance to their own destruction is based upon simple ignorance. Those farmers in the Amazon rain forest are just squatting there in the way of progress. Those dirt-poor coal miners in Appalachia should learn to code. Ignorant Uyghurs don't belong in China anyway; let's harvest their internal organs (while still alive to ensure freshness) and dispose the bodies in trash bags. It's all so easy for the bureaucratic mind. Those ill-mannered baskets of deplorables are too uneducated to properly understand the wonderful world of inclusivity and diversity that awaits them. For the ruling elite, cultural relativism and replacement migration are perceived as sociologically beneficent, validated as science and good. Vicious and ruthless in their urge to purge the old and create a new and better world, they do not and cannot comprehend that their modern ideas are exactly the same as German Lebensraum policies. The only difference is that the victim's identities are shifted from one racial group (Slavs and Jews) to other racial categorizations. The target populations are demonized so that their removal and replacement becomes sociologically acceptable.
If you take the most ardent revolutionary, vest him with absolute power, in one year he would be worse than the Tsar himself - Bakunin's Maxim
You can say what you want about the great communists and anarchists but none of them ever used their positions to accumulate personal wealth. They didn't care about it. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Mikhail Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, Joe Hill, Frank Little, Eugene Debs; the list goes on. They were giant intellects and committed revolutionaries. The revolt they envisioned came from below; among the masses of oppressed wage-slave workers. Even when Stalin and the Politburo assumed dictatorial powers (as Bakunin predicted they would), none of them amassed lucre. The same can't be said about today's American revolutionaries. Bernie Sanders is a committed communist who spent the last 30 years in government service lining his own pockets. He would have been elected President were Democrat primaries not rigged against him. Joe Biden hasn't worked a real job in his life but is a multi-millionaire nonetheless. Nancy Pelosi's net worth is 120 million dollars on civil-servant salary. Barak Obama owns a 125-million-dollar palatial estate on the Martha's Vineyard waterfront: apparently the rising sea-levels from Climate Change won't affect the lifestyles of the rich and famous. Yet, somehow, and laughably, these people want to overturn the social order. The keenest revolutionaries among them are members of The Squad; all photogenic, well educated, coldblooded cynics who, philosophically at least, are anarchists, their personal greed notwithstanding. But The Squad, as well as an ever-present gang of bundlers, handlers and bag-men, has no ideology they can profess to as anarchism (justifiably) has a bad name. So does Marxism thanks to fifty years of Cold War demonization. Therefore they need to impose revolution gradually; in the schools and criminal justice system. In Das Kapital Marx was wary of the criminal class, especially grifters and career criminals. He named them a "dangerous" Lumpenproletariat. He saw this criminal class as counter-revolutionary primarily because they don't work and do nothing to enhance society. In a twist, modern neo-Marxists see the criminal class as victims of the predatory capitalist system. While there is some justification in that analysis, problems arise when violent career criminals supported with bail reform and reduced sentencing generally, are set free with little or no state interference. What emerges is the urban anarchist-terror state typified by riots, looting, and organized theft (smash & grab) where laws no longer apply to the criminal class but only to the terrorized working class who are perpetually penalized and harassed for any number of reasons; primarily revenue enhancement. As traditional society disintegrates, the norms that held the United States together dissolve into the law of the jungle. The bureaucratic class will then step into the chaos they create to restore a new order where the middle class no longer has property rights or bank accounts. You will own nothing and be happy is the mantra. It happened quickly to the Kulaks and it can happen just as rapidly to Ma & Pa Kettle. The only difference is the American Kulaks in flyover country own AR-15s and know how to use them.
The American Cultural Divide
There are 3,142 counties in the United States. In the 2020 election Joe Biden won 509 of them while Donald Trump won 2,633. Biden's vote came almost entirely from heavily populated urban counties. The 509 he won also hold 60% of the wealth. His handlers now speak of transforming America. By this the bureaucratic elite class means the collectivization of America. But they dare not say it out loud. Lenin and Stalin faced an easier path as they had a known ideology. They presented it to people who were in accord, and after 300 years of Tsarist rule, 75% of the Russian people (at least) were ready for something new. This is not the American experience. The bureaucratic class need to disguise the truth with United Nations phrases like Build Back Better because the American people do not support collectivization. At most, only 35% of Americans do; they're typically college-educated urban youth and their elders. With control of American urban areas, the ruling managerial elite feel the Lumpenproletariat, closely controlled by drugs, media, federal police and the promise of free stuff, will sufficiently intimidate the working class into permanent submission. They might have another thing coming. There is a vast American hinterland of 2,633 counties; with their own police, judiciary, and military forces that are not in accord. Obviously those counties will need to be politically transformed by force. Stalin tried that too. But Stalin's revolution was initiated from below by the workers and soldiers of the Petrograd Soviet. Later on collectivism was implemented from above by the Politburo. Today's socialist bureaucrats want to both initiate and implement the destruction of the old order from above; a revolution by the bureaucratic class that necessarily needs to be pitilessly enforced. With 60% (or more) of the people against it that's probably not going to happen without civil war.
(Article changed on Dec 10, 2021 at 6:50 PM EST)
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
