Quote of the day—Brinda Karat

The tremendous achievements of the first Socialist State beckon us to understand what was possible and what is possible to create today. The Soviet Union created records, equally relevant today in wiping out poverty, backwardness, and illiteracy, in establishing equality among peoples and nationalities, between men and women. It is an inspiration of what was and what can be, and that is why we say that the era it established of the transition from capitalism to socialism is as relevant today. Capitalism is not the end of history.

Brinda Karat
November 9, 2017
The Russian Revolution Is Still Relevant Today
[Via email from Chet.

Delusions are often functional but I’m struggling to find the function in this whopper of a delusion. Perhaps Karat thinks they would be one of the leaders who would be in control.

I can’t imagine they believe conclusive evidence supports the claims they made. Just reading a few chapters of The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) would dissuade anyone of sound mind that this is a path a society as a whole would knowing and willing venture.

And yet, via another link from Chet, we have Teen Vogue discussing the differences between resistance, rebellion, and revolution while speaking fondly of the Russian and Cuban revolutions.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]


15 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Brinda Karat

  1. At first I thought this was going to be sarcasm, with the punch line being that the Soviet Union set records in genocide, murdering suspected dissidents, and joining Nazi Germany in invading Poland and starting WWII. Then she(?) goes batcrap crazy. The sad part is that she(?) really believes this, just like the Obamacare sycophants believed that Cuba had better healthcare than the U. S.

  2. To be fair… it really is quite difficult to BE ‘poor, backward and illiterate’ when you are dead. Dead people generally aren’t counted when tallying the ‘rates’ of such statistics.

    Of course she(?) also fails to note whether those ‘records’ were of success or failure at the attempts.

  3. Astounding. This is epic level delusional thinking. I can’t help but remember back in the 60’s when long lines of Americans would patiently wait for their papers so they could emigrate to the CCCP in hopes of a better life. Meanwhile, the Soviet citizens were all happily flipping pancakes and having honey fights with the excess food they had to enjoy. While, in Berlin, the East Germans had to erect a wall to keep all the starving West Germans from flooding their Socialist utopia.

    What’s even more astounding is that people like this aren’t shamed back under the rock from which they emerged – instead, they echo loudly in the chamber with their fellow travelers.

  4. A Russian immigrant to the US explained to me 40+ years ago that the educational system of the Soviet Union emphasized that during the Revolution, serfs living in sod huts were moved into the recently collectivized houses of their former masters, an improvement in living conditions beyond their prior dreams. That so many millions were subsequently starved to death on purpose by Stalin was not emphasized. So select your facts to farcically support your desired but incorrect conclusion, or use all the facts and achieve a rationally supportable conclusion. Your choice makes a difference.

    • These are Robert Heinlein’s “Crazy Years” from his “Future History.” Whom gods destroy they first make mad..
      Every time I read of someone saying how wonderful socialism will be, I think of Tom Hanks’s character from a movie he made early in his career, “Every Time We Say Goodbye”: He proudly announced to the sister of his love interest that his father, a Protestant minister, was a socialist. The sister says with a smile, “So, we can all be poor together?” It is amazing how many people who are pretty well-off in life think that socialism can be an improvement. Serfs moving into palaces, I can believe, at least until the next population “adjustment”. But Brinda Karat? She was never a Serf, Neither was Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. “Red Bernie” Sanders, Nancy, “Equality for thee but not for me” Pelosi, or others so numerous it seems that the only nickname can be “Party Member.”

  5. “Delusion” is difficult to pin down and define here. If one begins with the common and very popular conviction which says that a hierarchical, top-down, coercion-based Central Planning system is the only way to go, then one rationalizes based on that conviction.

    Couple that with the readily observable fact that the most arrogant people on the planet do not see their arrogance as arrogance at all, but as simple, obvious common sense, and you get quotes like that. Much of the “scientific community” operates like this. Nor do you get to have an opinion on what is obvious and what is common sense. It just is, and you either see it and embrace it or you’re a “denier”, or, as the papacy calls it, a heretic, and thus a danger to the system.

    Merely speaking against the system is an act of “violence” because such speech, possibly leading others to question, or even rebell against, the system, threatens the system’s very survival. Such speech will be, should be, must be met with violence. You started it, after all; you pose a threat to the very existence of the system they see as as the only hope for Mankind. Unpleasant and unfortunate as it may be, you must die. It’s for the betterment of Mankind.

    If millions of people have to die to achieve the dream of socialist/authoritarian paradise, then so be it. What must be must be. They only need to be killed if they’re in denial of the obvious, and so they’re no good for anything anyway. They’re mentally unfit.

    And let’s never forget that the left has had the notion of “over-population” in their heads for generations. They began foisting this idea on us en masse in elementary schools back the 1960s. Too many people on the planet are actually killing the planet, they all say, over and over again, and so the notion of killing millions doesn’t not faze them in the least, except for the fact that millions aren’t enough. Billions must die. A mass die-off then, or kill-off, will be seen as a feature, not a bug.

    Everything you see as condemnations of socialism, they see as selling points. Gulag archipelago? That’s no problem at all, other than that it requires resources. Better to kill than to imprison. It reduces the overall carbon footprint and allows resources to be allocate elsewhere.

    This is basic Progressivism. They’ve talking about this stuff for over 100 years now. The papacy practiced it in the Old World for over a thousand years, and they haven changed their minds one bit. And by the way, the papacy has just signed a joint declaration of cooperation with Islam. Two of the most murderous organizations of the last fifteen hundred years are now openly cooperating (all for peace, freedom, prosperity and “fraternity” of course);

    I expect the left to embrace every bit of it (with some meaningless “protest” regarding abortion). Look for VP Pence to form a Vice Presidential Panel, or Committee, to help further that message.

    • I recall Pelosi recently alleging that lowering taxes qualifies as violence too. If lowering taxes falls in the same category as homicide, rape, and assault, then no doubt speaking out against communism is also considered violence.

      • Remember, Leftist violence is speech, protected by the First Amendment, and Conservative speech is violence, to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
        First (to my knowledge) articulated by Tam of the View from the Porch blog.

    • I joke. But she is right, they did believe in equality. All Ukranian Kulaks were equally starved.

      • No, but if it fails, or even has bad effects that cannot be ignored, then it never is “real communism”. It just needs the “right people” in charge. As it turns out, these “right people” were the beings James Madison referred to as angels. ““If Men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”

  6. Munchausen by proxy is what Progressives do to nations. Progressivism is verily a mental disorder.

  7. It’s true, they taught a lot of people how to read…but then told them what to read. They didn’t want free thinkers.

Comments are closed.