Research and Translation by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD Author’s Note: US Cold War rhetoric is premised upon the machinations of US anti-intellectualism. This routine distortion and
The Part played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man (1876) Between 1964 and 1968, Stanely Kubrick (operating out of the Socialistic UK) initiated a
Prior to all this, however, in 1959 there was developed the Civil ‘National Automated Information Accounting and Processing System’ (OGAS) – a project designed as an automated control system for the economy of the USSR based upon the principles of cybernetics, including a computer network connecting data collection centres located in all regions of the country. From this the Central Government of the USSR could micro-manage the Soviet economy and ensure a smooth trajectory of progressive (Socialist) development. Any threat of the development of the usual ‘booms’, ‘busts’ and ‘troughs’ associated with predatory capitalism could be easily identified and eradicated at source BEFORE manifesting within society and causing the usual suffering throughout the populace. This unique Soviet development should probably be interpreted as the basis for the ‘modern’ internet as eventually developed in the West.
The Lumpen Proletariat in the US, operating as it does through a ‘false consciousness’, falsely believes that it is ‘standing up’ to the bourgeoisie (which is limited to notions of the distant and faceless ‘Authorities’, but seldom the business structures around the workers), whilst in effect generating bourgeois mirroring structures within its own ranks, that are slightly out of focus, prone to illogical or erroneous thinking, and tending toward theistic theology.
The Soviet Authorities devised a plan to remove Sergey Korolev from public view until the threat of fascism was removed – by 1944 – that situation had arrived as the forces of Nazi Germany were being driven back to Berlin. Sergey Korolev was a staunch supporter of the Soviet System, and he used his genius to beat the US during the early Space Race.
The point is if Bart Sibrel can be so spectacularly ‘wrong’ about China, how can the rest of what he has to say be ‘trusted’ as fact?