Man a whole week? Why do psychology courses even exist when you can learn all you need to know in just a week?
Reds fanfic
- Thread starter E. Burke
- Start date
Bookmark1995
Banned
As another autistic person, I'm also inclined to be annoyed by people who claim to cure autism.
Autism isn't something you get from living in a sewer, it is the way your brain is wired to respond to stimuli.
I already deleted my part. I hoped to raise the problem and defend my views, but in the end I just broke the harmony. I appreciate everything harmonious and beautiful.
To the same, I painfully perceive my mistakes (I know - this is not normal).
Bookmark1995
Banned
One of things we've discussed on this thread is how people can be changed by butterflies. I'm going to take an OTL infamous person and make her more infamous.
I'm also going to make a reference to this post by @Mr.E .
Excerpts from Robert Kirilov, From Red The Blue: Profiles of American Defectors (New York, Metropolis Press, 2010)
Anita Bryant
Year of Defection: 1977
Anita Bryant's dramatic shift from die-hard patriot and beloved entertainer to reactionary activist and turncoat has made her one of the most infamous defectors.
Background
Anita Bryant was born on March 25, 1940 in Barnsdale, Oklahoma SSR. The Bryant family, like most heartland families, were often hostile to the social changes wrought by the First Cultural Revolution, despite their nationalistic loyalties to America itself.
Having been raised by her grandparents after her parents were divorced, Bryant developed an aptitude for singing as early as the age of 2. By the age of 10, she was an active member of the local DFLP youth chapter, singing at hospitals, military centers, and retirement communities.
"She always combined a mix of tenderness with a desire for fame and attention," said one of her former comrades.
Rise to Fame
At 16, she volunteered for the Oklahoma Militia, being among its first female members and one of its youngest. Through contributions to major military magazines, such as Vet, she became a local symbol for women's rights and built up notoriety.
After doing two years of service, in 1958, she was recruited by the Soldier Unity Collective or (SUC) [1] as an entertainer for soldiers. From 1958 to 1961, she performed at shows across military bases in the UASR, Rossiya, and Argentina [2], which allowed her to gain both recognition and connections among influential voters.
After her retirement from the SUC, she began a solo career using her fame among military and woman's rights groups.
In 1962, her first album "Red With Love", while receiving mixed reception [3], quickly sold gold due to her reception. By 1966, she received one of the greatest honors of any musician in the UASR when she performed the International on May Day at the Debs in front of an audience of nearly 200,000 people, and was a spokeswoman for many veterans groups.
Beginnings of Descent
By 1970, Bryant had become an influential figure in local training militias. But she became increasingly alarmed by what she described as a "permissive environment that is weakening the drive of our fighting comrades."
By the 1960s, the Second Cultural Revolution was undoing countless taboos, including homosexuality, polyamory and legal prostitution. Bryant saw such behavior as godless and detrimental to the national soul, saying "the libertine agenda will inevitably give greater moral ground to the capitalist." [4]
By 1971, Bryant, along with more conservative members, founded the Collective for Decency, an organization dedicated to opposing the spread of libertine values. She led a campaign in her native Oklahoma against laws that would decriminalize polyamorous relationships in 1972. While her campaign prevented the law from being passed that year (Oklahoma did pass another version of it in 1978) it led to severe criticism from youth militia groups and veterans' organization.
Michael Lee, an openly bisexual militia member, founded the Freedom for Militias, organizing boycotts and protests of any venues that hosted performances by Anita Bryant. Despite her confidence that her viewpoint would be respected, by 1974 all major militia groups refused to hire her for anymore appearances. [5]
Defection
By 1977, her singing and political career had largely been destroyed. Her ten year marriage to Steven Harris had ended in divorce. Despite the blow to her personal and professional life, Bryant refused to part with her beliefs, seeing her setbacks as the fault of communism. She became opposed to even the gains of the First Cultural Revolution, echoing the ignorant statements of her mother.
On December 10, 1977, she boarded a ferry to British Jamaica from Miami. From there, she boarded a plane to Americuba. At the airport in Havana, she burned her UASR passport and announced her defection to Cuba.
After 1978, much of her music was blacklisted from major stores, and was banned entirely from the armed forces.
She quickly adopted ultra-conservative political positions. Not only did she denounce social liberalization, but even reproductive rights and woman in the military. She quickly became a spokeswoman for right-wing causes, and worked for right-wing Cuban groups, like Society for the Rights of Families and Christian Freedom. She has been derisively called a sock puppet for the yuma class.
Despite her fame a conservative spokeswoman, she never was able to resurrect her singing fame, as she was sidelined by younger musicians, and none of her previous work, laden with communist themes, ever found popularity among Conservative Cubans.
In 1981, she married Harold Johnson, a yuma businessman. The marriage ended in divorce in 1988, which only weakened her reputation among the conservative Cuban class. She currently lives in a small house in suburban Havana.
Revmira Malekov, another infamous defector, met Anita Bryant once during her ill-fated time in Cuba and described her as "a woman who sounds like a lamb, but has the facial expressions of a wolf."
[1] ITTL version of the OSU
[2] I figured that in a non-consumerist society, this is one way to gain attention.
[3] Her music wasn't considered THAT great.
[4] ITTL, she has to put her criticism along left-wing lines.
[5] ITTL, it was protests against orange juice that led to the Florida citrus growers dropping her as a spokeswoman.
I'm also going to make a reference to this post by @Mr.E .
Excerpts from Robert Kirilov, From Red The Blue: Profiles of American Defectors (New York, Metropolis Press, 2010)
Anita Bryant
Year of Defection: 1977
Anita Bryant's dramatic shift from die-hard patriot and beloved entertainer to reactionary activist and turncoat has made her one of the most infamous defectors.
Background
Anita Bryant was born on March 25, 1940 in Barnsdale, Oklahoma SSR. The Bryant family, like most heartland families, were often hostile to the social changes wrought by the First Cultural Revolution, despite their nationalistic loyalties to America itself.
Having been raised by her grandparents after her parents were divorced, Bryant developed an aptitude for singing as early as the age of 2. By the age of 10, she was an active member of the local DFLP youth chapter, singing at hospitals, military centers, and retirement communities.
"She always combined a mix of tenderness with a desire for fame and attention," said one of her former comrades.
Rise to Fame
At 16, she volunteered for the Oklahoma Militia, being among its first female members and one of its youngest. Through contributions to major military magazines, such as Vet, she became a local symbol for women's rights and built up notoriety.
After doing two years of service, in 1958, she was recruited by the Soldier Unity Collective or (SUC) [1] as an entertainer for soldiers. From 1958 to 1961, she performed at shows across military bases in the UASR, Rossiya, and Argentina [2], which allowed her to gain both recognition and connections among influential voters.
After her retirement from the SUC, she began a solo career using her fame among military and woman's rights groups.
In 1962, her first album "Red With Love", while receiving mixed reception [3], quickly sold gold due to her reception. By 1966, she received one of the greatest honors of any musician in the UASR when she performed the International on May Day at the Debs in front of an audience of nearly 200,000 people, and was a spokeswoman for many veterans groups.
Beginnings of Descent
By 1970, Bryant had become an influential figure in local training militias. But she became increasingly alarmed by what she described as a "permissive environment that is weakening the drive of our fighting comrades."
By the 1960s, the Second Cultural Revolution was undoing countless taboos, including homosexuality, polyamory and legal prostitution. Bryant saw such behavior as godless and detrimental to the national soul, saying "the libertine agenda will inevitably give greater moral ground to the capitalist." [4]
By 1971, Bryant, along with more conservative members, founded the Collective for Decency, an organization dedicated to opposing the spread of libertine values. She led a campaign in her native Oklahoma against laws that would decriminalize polyamorous relationships in 1972. While her campaign prevented the law from being passed that year (Oklahoma did pass another version of it in 1978) it led to severe criticism from youth militia groups and veterans' organization.
Michael Lee, an openly bisexual militia member, founded the Freedom for Militias, organizing boycotts and protests of any venues that hosted performances by Anita Bryant. Despite her confidence that her viewpoint would be respected, by 1974 all major militia groups refused to hire her for anymore appearances. [5]
Defection
By 1977, her singing and political career had largely been destroyed. Her ten year marriage to Steven Harris had ended in divorce. Despite the blow to her personal and professional life, Bryant refused to part with her beliefs, seeing her setbacks as the fault of communism. She became opposed to even the gains of the First Cultural Revolution, echoing the ignorant statements of her mother.
On December 10, 1977, she boarded a ferry to British Jamaica from Miami. From there, she boarded a plane to Americuba. At the airport in Havana, she burned her UASR passport and announced her defection to Cuba.
After 1978, much of her music was blacklisted from major stores, and was banned entirely from the armed forces.
She quickly adopted ultra-conservative political positions. Not only did she denounce social liberalization, but even reproductive rights and woman in the military. She quickly became a spokeswoman for right-wing causes, and worked for right-wing Cuban groups, like Society for the Rights of Families and Christian Freedom. She has been derisively called a sock puppet for the yuma class.
Despite her fame a conservative spokeswoman, she never was able to resurrect her singing fame, as she was sidelined by younger musicians, and none of her previous work, laden with communist themes, ever found popularity among Conservative Cubans.
In 1981, she married Harold Johnson, a yuma businessman. The marriage ended in divorce in 1988, which only weakened her reputation among the conservative Cuban class. She currently lives in a small house in suburban Havana.
Revmira Malekov, another infamous defector, met Anita Bryant once during her ill-fated time in Cuba and described her as "a woman who sounds like a lamb, but has the facial expressions of a wolf."
[1] ITTL version of the OSU
[2] I figured that in a non-consumerist society, this is one way to gain attention.
[3] Her music wasn't considered THAT great.
[4] ITTL, she has to put her criticism along left-wing lines.
[5] ITTL, it was protests against orange juice that led to the Florida citrus growers dropping her as a spokeswoman.
Redshank Galloglass
Banned
@WotanArgead please don't make me regret defending you, dude. As someone with a mental disability (ADHD) I found what you said a bit insulting. Lets try to keep our shit on the down low.
Redshank Galloglass
Banned
As for Red American serial killers, I tho k the UASR will be behind the French and Brits, but not that far behind.
About autism I'm not specifically - I just did not notice this part!
This is very dogmatic indeed. It is well founded to say that OTL Soviet authorities were indeed tightly hobbled intellectually, but that is clearly and plainly due to having a police state. In turn you could suggest that any and all socialist regimes of every kind must be a police state and therefore have the same limits--which is what your saying "even of the non-Soviet variety" seems to imply.
But are you or are you not granting the premises of Jello's TL, within the TL anyway even if you are understandably skeptical it is plausible?
In this TL, the UASR was formed by a revolution that was not similar to the Bolshevik October Revolution; rather, a Socialist Party candidate was democratically elected POTUS, then a panicked bunch of conservatives killed him, which was the last straw for a very very broad coalition of more or less dissident mass movements, collectively adding up to a near or even actual majority of the nation, if we integrate from the most radical to moderates who did not themselves desire radical change in principle but certainly agreed that status quo was not working well enough, in view of President-Elect Thomas's murder and the attempt at a right-wing police state on top of the general failures of the Depression. Thus when the civil war concluded, there was not an all-powerful centrally ruled single Party with the notion of trying to control information and dictate what could be said--only a set of several radical parties with a penumbra of moderate reformists checking them. National consensus was that radical change was happening and it was good, but there was still free speech and organization of dissenting moderates was still legal--people who plotted violent counterrevolution were subject to being detected by tactics that would not pass Constitutional muster in modern OTL--or rather, would surely have been condemned at the height of the post-Watergate backlash, and would be condemned in principle as avowed policy any time between say WWII and the Reagan administration, certainly if our enemies practiced it, but if kept quiet might be allowed, and with the later conservative backlash asserting the importance of law and order and counter-terrorism overriding squeamish touchy-feely "coddling of criminals" might even be openly proclaimed to public applause today. Hoover's people can use entrapment and other dubious methods to flush out serious reaction, and if the Debs-DeLeonist party or some other centralized one had leaders with the agenda of getting totalitarian control, they could perhaps use the laxity of procedural restrictions to panic the masses or silence inconvenient dissent.
But in fact, if we take Jello at her word (and I think it is plausible enough, given the back story of several decades before the Revolution in America) there are several layers of checks preventing such a totalitarian takeover. For one thing, the Debs-DeLeonists themselves don't want that; they have lively democratic debate within the party and have not ruled extra-party intellectual activity as inherently vicious and subversive. I would think among them, especially given that they attract people of the basic mentality as say J Edgar Hoover or Richard Nixon, that there are "hard heads" of that type, but there are enough free-spirited types or deeply principled enough to check that within that Party.
Second, the D-DL party does not rule unrivaled; the set of parties that do rule most strongly are of a consensus, more or less, but there is enough diversity that no one central body runs things unchecked and without disclosure. The centrally powerful radical communist, syndicalist or socialist parties know that they have to demonstrate the superiority of a socialist system to conservative skeptics, who are themselves free to organize in a couple of dissident parties which have some status and power in the capital and in their strongholds. The socialists rule because they can deliver results, while under scrutiny and heckling by conservatives--and if the conservative voices are muted, it is largely because their grosser charges against the socialists are proving ill founded. They are shamed into keeping quiet not by organized terror but by looking ridiculous. Indeed conservative carping might get some people into serious hot water--because the masses of Americans not incorrectly link propertarian priorities with sharp and massive instances of general misery, such as the carnage of the Great War, the privations of the Depression, and the violence and betrayals of the counter-revolutionary coup the revolutionaries managed to overcome, but at a cost. But it is understood that large masses of Americans, for one reason or another, are not on the socialist bandwagon by inclination and need to be persuaded, and that "persuasion" of a terroristic kind is not an option.
Given all this, it is not unreasonable that the ideology of human psychology and deviant behavior being a mere refraction of the social order, and attributing everything bad to projections of capitalism which would therefore automatically go away when capitalism was removed might lead this rather powerful (and trusted) central police authority astray from the most effective detection strategies, and indeed unjustly point a finger at the innocent instead. But the UASR police do not enjoy the luxury of OTL Soviet organs of silencing whomever they like and operating with no accountability to anyone but the Party central authorities, able to stop all dissenting inquires in their tracks and indeed discourage even the most cautious and tentative voicing of any dissent whatsoever. If someone a lot of people suspect might be innocent is being railroaded, it is possible to say so without fear of being disappeared in turn. Sadly the authorities, in making wrong arrests, are liable to finger people who are not popular generally--but how is this worse than OTL? If anything I think clearly even the most zealous days of revolutionary fervor, when the simplistic model of "crime=capitalism" has not yet been proven hopelessly inadequate the opportunities for third party interventions questioning the state's infallibility would be better, not worse, than OTL.
So the post by Mr. E begins by acknowledging that big mistakes were made, and those you can blame on socialist ideology in an unevolved state. They arrogantly erred, but were eventually forced to recognize they were going astray and were forced therefore to revise their ideology.
It is here you seem to have a serious problem recognizing that socialists can be sane and reasonable human beings. This is really very essentialist thinking, isn't it? In the ATL, at any rate, they prove they can and do function as well as capitalist agencies can. They can produce a war-winning level of industrial production, they can provide housing and food and other essential needs for all, they can provide for art and culture. And they support a competitive political system in which divergent views can be expressed--in which as Yakov Smirnov's joke goes, "in Soviet Russia too we had freedom to speak--but in America you have freedom after you speak. It makes a difference!"
You can bet your firstborn as freely as you like because there is no way to settle the bet, but all you have to prove that socialist police must be incompetent relative to the professionals of the capitalist world is pure ideological say-so. In fact, from the point of view of enforcing regime priorities, people seem to agree that the Soviet bloc police organs were chillingly effective; if they could not solve a problem it was generally because their bosses did not care to. They were not able to do things like shut down the black markets--largely because Stalinist bosses found that if they did crack down on one criminal operation, three more would take their place--and this was because the Soviet system did not provide well for worker needs, so the "on the left" black markets were brought into being by sheer demand--in some forms, even by sheer demand of the industrial enterprises as well as of their workers. Permitting a certain degree of black market operations was not just a safety valve but an economic lubricant that official sector managers had to rely on to meet their ostensible Plan goals. In other words, they resigned themselves to it.
But no one ever claimed that the life of a pro-Western spy or conspirator in a Leninist country was an easy lot! I don't think one can point to a Soviet counterpart to Oskar Schindler for instance.
So the question is not whether socialist police can be capable, but whether they can use their powers for good. Or acknowledging that police who comply with liberal values have a harder job than those of an authoritarian state, given that a socialist society that is also libertarian exists, can it have police as good as the capitalist ones? I think if the departments are just as good, the overall outcomes will be better because of democratic oversight over their operations that OTL in capitalist societies is often frustrated by the vested interests of the wealthy, who can effectively take priority in ostensibly democratic government bodies, such as legislatures, executive offices and so forth. Not to mention the pro-property and propertied biases of the judicial system! These create refuges of privilege versus the general lot of most citizens; in a system that substitutes formal state power (and responsibility) for the "natural" operations of wealth and the interests of the wealthy, there is serious danger of crony coverups, but when the state is balanced among several competing parties the opportunity for covering up against the impartial workings of rule of law is much reduced.
Give the UASR cops credit for being human enough to prefer success to failure, to want good collars and not just to sacrifice the first mook they happen to stumble on. Factor in external factors such as being disproven and shamed by amateurs with a point to make which they cannot simply quash but must face in public.
They would change their thinking soon enough.
Bookmark1995
Banned
I got to say, I love it when you contribute. You're discussions are long, but never tedious. They are very enlightening.
Last edited:
Bookmark1995
Banned
We've discussed how the UASR might ignore serial killing because they can't imagine why anyone would kill in a society will almost no poverty.
But what other crimes would be overlooked in this environment?
Could child abuse be ignored, since only a poor person would abuse his children?
What about bullying? I bet that being a loner in a highly collective country might be frowned upon even more than OTL and could lead to more severe harassment in schools.
But what other crimes would be overlooked in this environment?
Could child abuse be ignored, since only a poor person would abuse his children?
What about bullying? I bet that being a loner in a highly collective country might be frowned upon even more than OTL and could lead to more severe harassment in schools.
I do not think - in the USSR, the very idea of corporal punishment was condemned. Given that much of the Red America is controlled from below, such cases will try to adjust from below.
Bookmark1995
Banned
redturn.blogspot.uasr-The blog for Comintern immigrants
A Brazilian Ex-Pat To the Soviet Union Explains the Process of Red Immigration
March 10, 2016
By Pedro Cardoso
I'll start with the perfunctory Red Turn story. Mine is the typical story of middle-class disillusionment.
I was born and raised in Parauapebas, a town in the Paras state in 1975. Our state's main export are neo-Integralists manchildren who play soldier in the jungles, and iron ore. My parents moved to Parauapebas from Rio, and my father got a job in the mines. Thankfully, my father was a charming man, and was able to get a promotion through guile. He in turn funded my technical education, allowing me to become a mining engineer.
I enjoyed an upper middle class lifestyle, but I still had ties to my lower-class friends who did the scut work, which annoyed my upper class acquaintances in the country. Had that not been the case, I still would have been one of those upper class parasites.
In 2006, a mining accident killed about 14 miners, including one of my comrades. This began my Red Turn, but what cemented it was the Vale corporation offering only 10 percent wages to the families of the victims, and the classist attitudes my wealthier acquaintances had for the poor workers.
It was then I realized that the bourgeois liberalism of Brazil is a sham, and it has done nothing to eliminate the class divides that still plagues my country, even after Salgado had his last cup of tea.
So after some soul searching, I decided to flee to Rossiya. Instead of merely joining the communist party (as my Rossiyan comrades have implored me to do) like some wannabe socialist, I wanted to experience Communism, and see what it could offer the Brazilian people.
But then I feel in love with Rossiya, that I could never part with it.
Let's get into the process of immigration.
1. Picking a Country
Some of you are wondering why I, a man from a tropical nation, would willingly immigrate to a land known for winters so brutal, they stopped entire armies of men.
While Comintern nations may have the same general rules about immigration, different nations have different things to offer, in terms of jobs and culture.
One reason I chose Rossiya was because of their mining industry. The Rossiyan website had tons of ads looking for skilled engineers to work in the iron mines in the Belgorod oblast. As a second generation miner, I filled that niche quite easily.
The other reason was the lack of personal animosity that exists between Brazil and the USSR, at least compared to the rest of South America. Socialist Latin Americans are still convinced that Salgado will possess the Brazilian crown and attempt to destroy Latin America. Of course, the fact that millions of imbeciles still publicly wave sigma flags mean that animosity may never vanish. Brazilians who go to Socialist South America will leave after a week or so, but of course that only adds to the cycle of vengeance.
In Soviet Rossiya, that animosity is thankfully non-existent, albeit because only a token number of Soviets did the actual fighting. To my surprise, Rossiyans are surprisingly welcoming toward Germans despite their poor history, if only because East Germans have proven to be faithful communists.
So with lots of mines, and little historical bad blood, I chose the USSR.
2. The Application Process
Comintern people take for granted how fluid their borders are. One of my favorite pictures is a group of Chinese and Rossiyan children ignorantly playing across the borders, and treating them like they are meaningless.
In spite of the labor shortages in Comintern that makes them encourage immigration, applying to a Comintern nation from a Blue nation is a process that can last about a month.
You first download a form off of the Soviet embassy website. On the application sheet, you have to fill out basic information, like date of birth, education, history, reason for leaving, etc. But you also have to open up to your political affiliations. While Soviets don't have much enmity with Brazilians, they are aware of the right-wing hoodlums that run around the Amazon, bowing down to their king god Salgado, and they do not want right-wing counterrevolutionaries in their country.
You must be very honest about what you do, because they will find about your political background. If you lie about it, or don't mention it, you can be denied entry and banned from any further inquiries.
You also must be honest about a criminal background too, but surprisingly economic crimes aren't a dis qualifier, but a quality to the Soviets. I mean, they want to be seen as doing more for the poor than the Brazilian monarchs.
3. The Interview
Once you've cleared the application, you must go through an interview with a Soviet official. They want to feel you out, to be sure you are who you claim to be.
This a process that is much easier than it was 25 years ago. Back then, you had to travel all the way to Brazilia or Rio to meet with one directly. Nowadays, you can do an interview via online chat.
I spoke with a Soviet woman named Ekaterina Zolomya. She was a very polite but firm person. You can joke around, but you must be frank and civil.
4. Relocation
Once you've passed the interview, they ask you for a date that would be convenient for you to leave (while they arrange for international travel, you are responsible for domestic travel)
On August 10, 2006, I boarded the flight from Rio de Janiero to Moscow. It was a day that I'll never forget. When I arrived at the terminal, I was already nervous about my decision even though I hadn't even gone on the plane. Part of me wanted to stay. I still felt the anti-communist propaganda thundering in my mind. My fellow Brazilians, even ones who were very poor, were also very reluctant. But when got to our gate, we saw these Soviet teenagers holding up this banner.
They were trying to say Welcome Brazilian Comrades, but these kids wrote the Latin script terribly. Nevertheless, me and the other immigrants were very touched by what we saw. It helped reduced our anxiety about leaving our homeland.
Our flight lasted about 16 hours, until we finally landed in Sheremetyevo International. When we got there, we were greeted by immigration officials who were waving the Brazilian flag.
5. Settlement and Assimiliation
After another flight, I landed in the Belgorod Oblast. The first month was both hard and easy. Hard because I had to learn the Cyrillic alphabet and language and understand the Soviet way of life, easy because I didn't have to work until I did understand these things.
Making friends was not really that hard. My fear was they would look down at me for being a middle class Brazilian, but aside from some teasing and light bullying for being a blue, I was able to build relationships very quickly. We Brazilians are social animals after all.
Adapting from a bourgeois lifestyle to a Russian proletariat lifestyle is hard. Going from owning a home to sharing a 3 story apartment with 20 people, going from hiring a maid to cleaning a floor is difficult, and working on one of those household plots can be a difficult transition (I accidentally destroyed a strawberry bush the first time a tried gardening), but not only is it possible, I found it to be a life I could enjoy, as many residents try to help you along the way.
The supervisors in Russia are very, very strict. They give you a lot of trust, but they expect a lot of good work in return.
Eventually, I fell in love and married Natalia, a pretty nurse, and we now have two children.
6. Citizenship
After five years, you can apply for citizenship in the USSR. After nine years you can qualify for a Comintern passport, which gives me the right to travel to much of the world.
In conclusion, moving to a Red nation can be a period of pain and frustration, but I find myself thinking in ways I never thought possible, and I found a place I can call home.
A Brazilian Ex-Pat To the Soviet Union Explains the Process of Red Immigration
March 10, 2016
By Pedro Cardoso
I'll start with the perfunctory Red Turn story. Mine is the typical story of middle-class disillusionment.
I was born and raised in Parauapebas, a town in the Paras state in 1975. Our state's main export are neo-Integralists manchildren who play soldier in the jungles, and iron ore. My parents moved to Parauapebas from Rio, and my father got a job in the mines. Thankfully, my father was a charming man, and was able to get a promotion through guile. He in turn funded my technical education, allowing me to become a mining engineer.
I enjoyed an upper middle class lifestyle, but I still had ties to my lower-class friends who did the scut work, which annoyed my upper class acquaintances in the country. Had that not been the case, I still would have been one of those upper class parasites.
In 2006, a mining accident killed about 14 miners, including one of my comrades. This began my Red Turn, but what cemented it was the Vale corporation offering only 10 percent wages to the families of the victims, and the classist attitudes my wealthier acquaintances had for the poor workers.
It was then I realized that the bourgeois liberalism of Brazil is a sham, and it has done nothing to eliminate the class divides that still plagues my country, even after Salgado had his last cup of tea.
So after some soul searching, I decided to flee to Rossiya. Instead of merely joining the communist party (as my Rossiyan comrades have implored me to do) like some wannabe socialist, I wanted to experience Communism, and see what it could offer the Brazilian people.
But then I feel in love with Rossiya, that I could never part with it.
Let's get into the process of immigration.
1. Picking a Country
Some of you are wondering why I, a man from a tropical nation, would willingly immigrate to a land known for winters so brutal, they stopped entire armies of men.
While Comintern nations may have the same general rules about immigration, different nations have different things to offer, in terms of jobs and culture.
One reason I chose Rossiya was because of their mining industry. The Rossiyan website had tons of ads looking for skilled engineers to work in the iron mines in the Belgorod oblast. As a second generation miner, I filled that niche quite easily.
The other reason was the lack of personal animosity that exists between Brazil and the USSR, at least compared to the rest of South America. Socialist Latin Americans are still convinced that Salgado will possess the Brazilian crown and attempt to destroy Latin America. Of course, the fact that millions of imbeciles still publicly wave sigma flags mean that animosity may never vanish. Brazilians who go to Socialist South America will leave after a week or so, but of course that only adds to the cycle of vengeance.
In Soviet Rossiya, that animosity is thankfully non-existent, albeit because only a token number of Soviets did the actual fighting. To my surprise, Rossiyans are surprisingly welcoming toward Germans despite their poor history, if only because East Germans have proven to be faithful communists.
So with lots of mines, and little historical bad blood, I chose the USSR.
2. The Application Process
Comintern people take for granted how fluid their borders are. One of my favorite pictures is a group of Chinese and Rossiyan children ignorantly playing across the borders, and treating them like they are meaningless.
In spite of the labor shortages in Comintern that makes them encourage immigration, applying to a Comintern nation from a Blue nation is a process that can last about a month.
You first download a form off of the Soviet embassy website. On the application sheet, you have to fill out basic information, like date of birth, education, history, reason for leaving, etc. But you also have to open up to your political affiliations. While Soviets don't have much enmity with Brazilians, they are aware of the right-wing hoodlums that run around the Amazon, bowing down to their king god Salgado, and they do not want right-wing counterrevolutionaries in their country.
You must be very honest about what you do, because they will find about your political background. If you lie about it, or don't mention it, you can be denied entry and banned from any further inquiries.
You also must be honest about a criminal background too, but surprisingly economic crimes aren't a dis qualifier, but a quality to the Soviets. I mean, they want to be seen as doing more for the poor than the Brazilian monarchs.
3. The Interview
Once you've cleared the application, you must go through an interview with a Soviet official. They want to feel you out, to be sure you are who you claim to be.
This a process that is much easier than it was 25 years ago. Back then, you had to travel all the way to Brazilia or Rio to meet with one directly. Nowadays, you can do an interview via online chat.
I spoke with a Soviet woman named Ekaterina Zolomya. She was a very polite but firm person. You can joke around, but you must be frank and civil.
4. Relocation
Once you've passed the interview, they ask you for a date that would be convenient for you to leave (while they arrange for international travel, you are responsible for domestic travel)
On August 10, 2006, I boarded the flight from Rio de Janiero to Moscow. It was a day that I'll never forget. When I arrived at the terminal, I was already nervous about my decision even though I hadn't even gone on the plane. Part of me wanted to stay. I still felt the anti-communist propaganda thundering in my mind. My fellow Brazilians, even ones who were very poor, were also very reluctant. But when got to our gate, we saw these Soviet teenagers holding up this banner.
They were trying to say Welcome Brazilian Comrades, but these kids wrote the Latin script terribly. Nevertheless, me and the other immigrants were very touched by what we saw. It helped reduced our anxiety about leaving our homeland.
Our flight lasted about 16 hours, until we finally landed in Sheremetyevo International. When we got there, we were greeted by immigration officials who were waving the Brazilian flag.
5. Settlement and Assimiliation
After another flight, I landed in the Belgorod Oblast. The first month was both hard and easy. Hard because I had to learn the Cyrillic alphabet and language and understand the Soviet way of life, easy because I didn't have to work until I did understand these things.
Making friends was not really that hard. My fear was they would look down at me for being a middle class Brazilian, but aside from some teasing and light bullying for being a blue, I was able to build relationships very quickly. We Brazilians are social animals after all.
Adapting from a bourgeois lifestyle to a Russian proletariat lifestyle is hard. Going from owning a home to sharing a 3 story apartment with 20 people, going from hiring a maid to cleaning a floor is difficult, and working on one of those household plots can be a difficult transition (I accidentally destroyed a strawberry bush the first time a tried gardening), but not only is it possible, I found it to be a life I could enjoy, as many residents try to help you along the way.
The supervisors in Russia are very, very strict. They give you a lot of trust, but they expect a lot of good work in return.
Eventually, I fell in love and married Natalia, a pretty nurse, and we now have two children.
6. Citizenship
After five years, you can apply for citizenship in the USSR. After nine years you can qualify for a Comintern passport, which gives me the right to travel to much of the world.
In conclusion, moving to a Red nation can be a period of pain and frustration, but I find myself thinking in ways I never thought possible, and I found a place I can call home.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what to say Russia so often here is appropriate. In the USSR there was a process of integration and the formation of a supra-national community. In the third Soviet Constitution (1977) it is written - "a society of mature socialist social relations, in which, on the basis of the convergence of all classes and social strata, the legal and de facto equality of all nations and nationalities, their fraternal cooperation, a new historical community of people - the Soviet people."
Often foreigners corrected - "Not Russian, Soviet!" In general, this is some kind of analogue of the "American nation".
Historically, this process was going on in a straightforward manner (in particular, due to Russophile tendencies in the 50s and 70s). It is possible that by this time this process will be more stable.
Required there must be a pioneer-girl with a bouquet of flowers!
It is worth writing that they will necessarily ask about Brazil. This happened in OTL. Of course the country is much more open, but they are still on opposite sides of the barricades.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Required there must be a pioneer-girl with a bouquet of flowers!
Did that happen OTL?
What would they ask about?
It was a joke ... but as always there was a joke in it. Before the Congress of the CPSU Congress / Supreme Council meetings on a special occasion, young pioneers with flowers ran up to members of the Politburo / Presidium. If the head of a foreign country came, he was also met by girls with a bouquet of flowers. This also happened if a foreign guest, an astronaut, an academician ... even the Chairman of the Obkom came to the pioneer camp, then a girl with a large bouquet of flowers still came out. I do not think that democratization will save us from this singularity - the propensity for lush meetings, the desire of leaders to decorate the "front door".
In principle, everything. Here it is necessary to note what is the situation in the country. If you were in the early 80's, you would have asked about deficit, fashion, and censorship.
Here it is still important who asks. For example, children will want to ask about animals, particularly ardent communists and Komsomol members will ask about the situation of the working people, or about some "progressive" figures (such as Angela Davis). And of course some young man will ask about the girls.