The minority rich control the political system. As the minority rich controls politics, this wealthy class also dictates the cultural direction of civil society and the use of its military. To maintain this physical power and psychological dominance, the population that comprises this society must be kept docile and in a state of unquestioned and unchallenged arrested intellectual development. This is accomplished by the minority rich retaining an iron-like grip upon the police, the legal and judicial systems, the education system, and the media. Thrown into this mix of a socio-economic control mechanism, is the cynical use of religious ignorance to hold everything together (as even bourgeois secularism is ‘religion’ stripped of its most obvious, outer religious garb). Western secular society has grown out of a staunch ecclesiastical dominance, and is premised upon a judeo-Christian theology that nolonger directly relates to the church (unless of course, one happens to believe in Christianity). Any attempt at breaking free from this bourgeois dominance (using Socialist thinking) is immediately attacked, decried, and misrepresented as being against the best interests of the majority poor. This is rather like stating that it is not in the best interests of slaves to be ‘free’ of the oppressive, material conditions of their enslavement. As long as the majority poor are brain-washed to interpret their own freedom from capitalism as ‘enslavement’, the minority rich will continue to control society unopposed.
Notice how the minority rich maintain their power through ‘inverted’ or ‘reversing’ reality by turning it inside-out, and back to front. Although the minority rich control a science that uses the ‘non-inverted’ observation and measurement of matter and material processes, its scope remains deliberately ‘narrow’, and is never allowed to formulate theories that contradict the dominance of capitalism within society. This type of science is premised upon generating monetary profit from innovation, and so humanity’s progress is continuously hindered by market share and projected income, etc. Outside of science, however, the inverted mind-set of religion is retained to keep the docile masses afloat in a morass of religious ignorance, and unable to see ‘beyond’ the limitations of its own conditioning. Above all, this psychological and physical enslavement must be viewed as ‘freedom’, and any attempt to end this enslavement must be interpreted as ‘tyranny’, ‘dictatorship’, and ‘the loss of freedom’. The minority rich also divide the international working class into competing camps of industrial out-put, and through the fabrication of ‘nationalism’, encourages workers to fight amongst themselves using the false constructs of ‘race’ and ‘racism’ as justify causes. We can see this today in the continuous misrepresentation of China’s history and its exercise of self-determination since 1949. Racism is aimed at China (and other non-White – non-capitalist countries), because of its rejection of predatory capitalism and Western dominance.
The same process of incorrectly depicting the purpose and history of the Soviet Union can also be clearly seen, not only in the capitalist West, but also within certain sectors of modern Russia’s intelligentsia. As this essentially ‘racist’ misrepresentation of the history of the USSR does not have its interpretative roots within Russia, it is obvious that it has been ‘imported’ from an antagonistic West. Although capitalist today, Russia’s post-Soviet leaders have refused to allow a Rothschilds controlled central bank to be established in Moscow. This irritates the US leadership which wants to control Russia by establishing such a financial institution. Another issue is that many people in Russia do not want capitalism, and prefer Communism – a fact confirmed by the fact that the Communist Party of Russia holds around one-third of the seats in the Russian Parliament. The US government is anxious to stop a ‘Communist’ government being democratically elected in Russia, as this would take away a major plank from US anti-Communist disinformation – namely the false assumption that Communism is despotic and imposed from above. The US tried to commit genocide in Vietnam during the 1960’s and 1970’s, just on the strength that it was believed that Ho Chi Minh (and the Communist Party of Vietnam) would win 90% of a democratic vote, in a free election. This is why all capitalist countries have adhered to US Cold War Anti-Soviet propaganda since 1945. This is a religiously inspired and racist ideology that seeks to denigrate any attempt by the working class to establish self-rule. As it is religious in nature, the Soviet Union, its leaders and all its actions are rather childishly presented as ‘evil’, and ‘dangerous’. Every step-forward which improved life for the Russian people is interpreted as being ‘at a great cost’, and every technological advancement viewed as being essentially ‘sinister’ in origin. At no time is the reality of Soviet progression and ingenuity permitted to be recognised, as this would be seen as a challenge against the dominance of capitalism. Instead, the US-dominated capitalist system holds to the highly illogical position that although the USSR is politically egalitarian, culturally progressive, and scientifically advanced, it is also ‘backward’ because it is ‘evil’. This ignorance is astounding, and can only be held in place by apathetic sections of the working class that are unable to break free of the educational brain-washing they have been subjected to.
The following bourgeois documentary informs as it disinforms about a) the history of the Soviet Union (i.e. ‘evil’ and yet ‘advanced’), and b) about the development of the T-34 Soviet tank used to good effect during WWII. There many historical points that are untrue. Lenin founded the Red Army and not Leon Trotsky. After the October Revolution of 1917, a ‘volunteer’ Red Army took to the field to try and stop the imperialist Germans invading Russia, but suffered heavy losses due to inexperience. Lenin began the industrialisation of the Soviet Union – not Stalin (although under Stalin’s guidance, Lenin’s project was completed). No one died in the Soviet Union due to the industrialisation process, on the contrary, life improved dramatically for millions of Russians. The Soviet Union had no plans to invade the West using the Red Army. The strictures of Scientific Socialism demand that the working class, wherever it happens to exist within the international capitalist system, must strive to free itself from that system. Notice also, where Soviet advanced technology is very much viewed as the ‘devil’s work’ by contrast, there is a sneaky admiration for the advanced technology of Nazi Germany, despite that regime murdering 11 million people in the holocaust, and inflicting casualties of between 27-40 million men, women and children in the USSR.
Having seen T-34 Soviet tanks in UK military museums, it is obvious that the basic design was effective, but that during WWII they were hastily assembled in large numbers due to the huge casualties in troops and machines suffered by the Red Army in the early stages of the war. Add to this the fact that as millions were being killed and wounded in the USSR, it was difficult to train and maintain experienced construction crews. As a consequence, crude welding is often evident on many models of T-34 – but the Soviet System prepared for all these problems and set about designing a standard tank ‘blue-print’ that even a poorly educated peasant could help to assemble with the minimum of training and experience. The parts were mass-produced and the T-34 tanks were assembled quickly in factories. From what I gather, the Nazi German tanks were better-made and generally more effective per individual tank, but the Soviet System countered this ‘capitalist’ advantage by ‘out producing’ the German manufacturers. In effect, the Nazi German tanks were outnumbered and destroyed by adequate Soviet T-34 tanks used effectively en mass. The Soviet designers produced a good all-round machine capable of defending Russia, but which was also able to operate outside of Russia as the Nazi Germans were pushed-back. The crews were adequately protected (within design parameters), as were the Red Army infantry that advanced behind the tanks. The Soviet System did not eulogise warfare, or make a fetish out of mechanical devices designed to achieve a specific function. From a Soviet perspective, the T-34 did the job is was designed to do, and there was no mystery surrounding its success on the battlefield.