In Marx’s view, this new order is supposed
to come about through natural historical processes, whereby the capitalistic stage of
society is replaced by the socialistic stage and, eventually, the communist stage in which
the state withers away.
Lenin, however, believed that capitalist forces would suppress
revolutionary notions and that a revolutionary vanguard needed to seize power by force
and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat.
Not quite. Lenin believed that the time for the revolutionary vanguard was now and that the vanguard should be led by Lenin. To the point that it’s very easy indeed to believe that Lenin worked out that necessity of the vanguard becaue that was the only way that Lenin got to tell everyone what to do and right now.
In this Lenin was partly all too many prophets and eschatologists. That this will happen is not enough, it’s that this is going to happen right now so give me all the virgins. It being obvious enough in at least some cases that the prophecies are only the excuse for the virgin collections.
Now, I’m not saying that George Monbiot is trying to get a collection of Greta Thunbergs but he is performing a part in such a tale. Everything he talks of is about to happen right now. So we must do as George says right now. It maybe Gaia keeling over rather than the Lord returning on the millennium but it’s exactly the same in this one manner – the redemption comes only from changing today for the punishment might not even wait until tomorrow if you don’t.
Much the same with climate change more generally. If the western world carries on as it is right now (that is, building out renewables, fossils being only the necessary balancing and dispatchable parts) the developing world largely develops with renewables and coal or gas only as the necessary dispatchable power for a grid then climate change is, pretty much, and by the measurements of the standard models, solved. It’ll all fade away by 2100. We’re, roughly enough, on the old A1T model and scenario. Where that is exactly what happens. And no destruction of markets and capitalism required.
Which is, of course why all the shrieking because the destruction is the thing desired.
But back to Lenin. Or Monbiot, Greta, anyone really. Anyone at all who says blah,blah, action required right now, may well have argued themselves into that blah blah for the joy it offers of directing all that action right now.
It’s all supposed to happen naturally. But let’s help it along just in case. Let me tell you what to do.
The basis of Marxist Theory.
In Lenin’s case though it wasn’t virgins (have you seen his wife). It was shooting all the people you don’t like.
Which Stalin then took a step further.
Greta is, er, more up ol’ Jeff and Randy Andy’s street, no?
I of course feel that the renewables are a useless socialist experiment. If you want to decarbonise the power supply, you need lots of nukes. Which of course means deregulating all the fuss about radiation.
You could then also make synfuels. Using CO2 extracted from the air or ocean surface. This is perfectly practicable, but costs a lot more. Even before you add the cost of the nukes.
You then have a CO2 neutral economy. With lots more pollution than today, since we can’t afford all this expensive anti-pollution gear. No doubt there’d also be more nuclear accidents and more radiation spilled around. And perhaps even more nuclear weapons floating around or blowing up.
In other words, the greenies would have produced precisely the sort of world they claim to hate so much.
But since I don’t take climate change seriously, I feel we should simply do nothing. Cheap, simple, and I don’t need to get up off my arse and do anything.
This is what they believe:
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy at this point would be the moral equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun. With cheap, abundant energy, the attempt clearly would be made to pave, develop, industrialise, and exploit every last bit of the planet”.* P. Ehrlich 1975.
The fact that Ehrlich has been wrong on pretty much everything he has ever said doesn’t stop Moonbat et al from believing him for some reason (insanity, probably).
* By a strange co-incidence, this morning I discovered ‘Jevons Paradox’……
The fact that Ehrlich has been wrong on pretty much everything he has ever said doesn’t stop Moonbat et al from believing him for some reason (insanity, probably).
They share a hatred of humanity and civilisation.
I’ve never noticed Jeffrey Epstein or Prince Andrew’s taste in younger girls including fat, autistic retards with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.
They seemed to prefer rather skinny, mousey blonds.
Addolff – “Giving society cheap, abundant energy at this point would be the moral equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun. With cheap, abundant energy, the attempt clearly would be made to pave, develop, industrialise, and exploit every last bit of the planet”.* P. Ehrlich 1975.
It’s a truly despicable quote isn’t it.
Marx’s view was that Capitalism would destroy itself, and in the process grind the masses down impoverishing them who once they understood this would rise up and revolt and embrace Socialism.
He expected Britain to be the first place where this would happen, but to his dismay Capitalism made the people richer and they embraced it and rejected Socialism.
Lenin realised Socialism(Communism would not just evolve and spread, it needed to be imposed.
Socialism/Communism is most successful in agrarian, feudal societies used to top down authoritarianism, totalitarianism and despotism – so it brings little structural change, and widespread poverty remains the default.
The question to ask of all would-be Lenins is “if the change you champion was to be brought in but you were merely a minion following direction by others, would you still be so keen to see the change?”