Explain why Communism is bad without using history

Explain why Communism is bad without using history.
>protip: you can't

Other urls found in this thread:

aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/miami-cuban-americans-celebrate-fidel-castro-death-161126064101470.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_movement
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Shepard died and the galaxy was almost brought to the brink. Nice diversity.

Sup Forums btfo guess we're a communist board now
raid is over go home

Fuck off

communism is too idealist. humans are trash and fuck everything up and can't be relied on.

Communism fundamentally requires a fair and honest govt who has only the best interest of the people in mind. Since a govt is made up of human beings, this is an impossible goal.

>explain why communism is bad
>without using evidence

Remember to report and sage

Lack of system of succession; corruption and stagnation occurs when a new leader is put into place effectively for life.

People who speak out are usually killed, and thus any innovations created that break the establishment lie are ignored and left unused. Society may deteriorate depending on who is currently leading, and what their ideology may be.

>Explain why drinking bleach is bad without using all the people who have drank bleach and died as an excuse.
Saged for bait thread, but the reason is because when you immediately give over your government to a one-party state they're not going to relinquish it. It's always going to result in a princeling caste because consolidating power is usually the most brutal point in a regime's timeline, the difference is that communism expedites this process and consolidates power immediately.

>without using history
why wouldn't you

Because it suggests a world we don't currently live in.

It's some presumptuous-ass shit.

The only way it will work is in a fully P2P societal/economic system enabled by automation and the creation of home-quantum-computing (home super PC) coupled with extrapolations on the 3D printing industry, which will also be personalized.

in an effort to destroy the top rich ruling class, communism effectively leaves all other classes beyond that of the ruling political class to become slaves, ironically putting them in a worse situation than they likely were in before.

Like as in socialism, any major contributions are spread out in the favor of "the people," and the creator earns probably close to nothing, as it is the case in socialist countries and soviet Russia.

Explain why Capitalism is bad without saying why it's bad

>protip: you can't

lefties lose again

Communists believe all Humans are equal. This is scientifically false

>Explain why Communism is bad without using any kind of information proving it's bad.
Yeah, whatever. I get it you're sad because another one of your heroes died recently.

David Rockefeller, George Soros and a few other powerful jews were endorsing it.

Guess I'll bite

Why would you want a system where brain surgeons are paid the same as people who work in shops? Nobody would take any high skilled jobs because there would be no incentive to.

>Without using history
Even though I've proved I don't need to why the fuck wouldn't I? Ever communist state has failed entirely.

Stealing is bad m8

fuck you. mine.

>Shoot a head at 10 kilometers without using your finger

>>Why would you want a system where brain surgeons are paid the same as people who work in shops?
Why do you think they would be?

>Explain why Communism is bad
>Don't use examples

a communist government gives absolute power to said government

absolute power absolutely corrupts

resulting in a system with a corrupt entity with unlimited power


also, communism takes away all incentive to work hard

Humans are greedy, and any form of government that doesn't play off of that will fail much quicker than ones that do.
They'll all fail in the end, some just last longer than others

>Explain why Communism is bad without using history.
Price calculation is essential for a functioning economy. Read some mises.

>explain why communism is bad with the same ideological bullshit needed to support it.

Because as I said, that's the only reason someone would want to become a brain surgeon because of how much time, stress and effort it takes to do.

I mean why do you think they would be paid the same?

Where did this whole myth of "literally everyone gets the exact same salary" even come from?

Explain me communism without using words or gestures.

Communism and the self determination of my country and its people are not compatible

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
-Karl Marx
The literal basis on which communism is built, a person's need is not going to change based on what job I have so I can just pretend to be incompetent and have an easy job and the same quality of life as those who take the high-skilled and harder jobs.

But it would be more prestigious being a brain surgeon than working in a shop

heres my argument

There are no salaries in true, final form communism moron. Everyone shares everything and it's all provided by the state

Thing is.... nobody fucking cares. You cares about what other people think when you can have a really easy life?

>why pursue a career in biochemistry making treatments for illnesses when I'm going to get paid the same as the old lady that sews buttons on shirts

same for nazism

hello /leftypol/ edgefags
you have to go back
sage

communism is the ultimate conspiracy theory that relies on no evidence and is assumed already that the wealthy are somehow always evil and always in the wrong.

...

this

Needs are paltry compared to surplus. There's absolutely no reason not to have a LIMITED hierarchy once base needs are met. The main problem with the capitalist hierarchical pyramid is that the inequalities are completely inhumane.

>>Thing is.... nobody fucking cares.
People care a lot.

Yes, and final form communism will materialize from the heavens when humans transform into aethereal faerie folk, so obviously it's not what we're talking about.

>without using history
Funny how Austrian school idiots use same argument.
It's bullshit. Marxist critique of capitalism is good, their suggestion on how to fix it is awful since it creates even bigger problems.
Our Lord and Saviour John Maynard Keynes made Marxism obsolete.

It's wrong on a moral level. If I have a lot of money and two other people are poor, having a vote between three people where by a 2 to 1 majority the poor decide to steal my wealth does not make it moral. Re-distribution of wealth is therefore inherently immoral.

>Capitalism fundamentally requires a fair and honest govt who has only the best interest of the people in mind. Since a govt is made up of human beings, this is an impossible goal.

In other words, democracy is inherently immoral.

This. Clearly, OP has superior arguing skills and we're all commies now whether or not we like it.

So you disagree with nationalism.

Hmmm, ok. Name a true democracy.

aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/miami-cuban-americans-celebrate-fidel-castro-death-161126064101470.html
It's present, so no History, is that proof enough ?

Why the fuck would you care about what other people think if you can work in a really easy job and then go home to your grey box with the only colour being the red of the mandatory flag in every room the same as everyone else does.
Even if you care, you cannot rely on the fact other people will.

Explain why anything is bad without using reasons
>checkmate fag, I've won.

Without a price system you don't know what anything is worth

Without distributed knowledge you don't have an economy

Nationalism is nationalism, socialism is socialism. Show me how nationalism and socialism cannot exist without each other.

LIEBER TOT ALS ROT!

Are you retarded? Capitalism requires the already existing law of supply and demand. You want food, I want money - let's trade, because if you don't, you will die.

>explain why AIDS is bad without mentioning lethality

Kek is blowing you the fuck out commie

Humans are competitive animals.

I just did.

I want to live poor

bye!

Communism was never tried is not a meme, it will never work, though, because you need leaders and when you put leaders in communism it becomes socialism, which the soviet union and its satellite states were.
Now, why did socialism in the soviet union and its satellite states fail? Simple answer, too much government. Too much government caused:
-planned economy(very slow economical growth, business can't be created where it's needed, market spots can't be filled, because the fucking government wants to control everything and everyone)
-regulated citizen lifestyle(both a positive and a negative, it led to a healthy, crimeless and a moral society, but it caused citizen distrust)
-atheism(this one is self-explanatory, people in 45-onwards were very religious, so another thing to increase distrust in the government)
-oppression of ideas(with the lack of freedom of expression, freedom to do business and develop only what the government tells you to led to again slow economical growth and slow scientific progress, the soviets only progressed scientifically, because the top scientists were left to do whatever they wanted, this is actually both a positive and a negative, because in a capitalist society, scientists develop means to make more money)
-communism background(socialism is not that bad as long as it is not rooted with jewish communist ideas)
-corruption(a giant government such as this one, combined with its untransparent structure led to corruption levels that we cannot fix today, in many satellite countries as well as the soviet union a popular saying was "if you don't steal from the state, you are stealing from your family")
-opression of people(every purge was a terrible mistake, again it was a jewish problem, jews seem to have that idea that if you kill everybody that does not like you, only people that like you will remain, which turned out to be wrong)

Those are the main things that were responsible for that failure called the soviet union.

This entire post is fucking stupid because you are asking people to ignore the historical aspect of communism and focus on the theoretical side of the ideaology that on paper sounds like it may work.

History shows otherwise, that the system itself is completely retarded and has no real world applications, so the only argument that you think you could possibly pursuade people otherwise is a theoretical one which is categorically false and seriously stupid.

Fuck off commie.

Theft is wrong
Coercion is wrong
Communists can live in communes if they want to in a capitalist society, but the reverse is not true. You ever wonder why that is?

...

>without using history

Implying history is not relevant

what a queer

Don't give me that bullshit. Nationalism without (some) socialism is a pure facade. It's the type of nationalism Marx criticized. It's the "nationalism" of ruling elite, a tool to brainwash mases.
Nationalism and liberal capitalism are totally incompatible. Stop living in a dream, or you're just like commies.
And I don't really have to explain this to you, but nationalism is somewhat collectivist by default and places the needs of nation as whole above the needs to rich elite.

>and then go home to your grey box with the only colour being the red of the mandatory flag in every room the same as everyone else does.

Sounds an awful lot like the western world in 2016 to me.

>explain a scientific fact without using research
No. It's bad. We already know it's bad. This has been tested in proven many times.

>jGH9kUoN
>1 post by this id
reminder that redditfags and /leftypol/ niggers are posting commie bait on Sup Forums, sage your posts if you want to reply.

> wherever government is in charge, it's a horror (not in history. today. even in the most prosperous capitalist states)
> and now you want to give it the power over those few oases it doesn't thoroughly controls
nigga are you mad?

It'd not bad or good. It's different. Requires total transparency or the majority will suffer due to corrupt government officials.
The same thing applies to current crony capitalism system...1% own everything they wish while the rest aren't living a life, they're just alive

But at least we have smartphones and expensive gaming pcs

>
Attacking the joke I made because you can't defend your ideology


>/thread boys, time to go!

Yes it is.
People can vote to deprive other smaller group of their liberties. And they do that.

Because it defies the truth of self-ownership.

If the fruits of my own labor aren't mine to enjoy, how can the state punish me for not giving them to it?. If you don't own the consequences of your actions, how can you be punished for them?

Marx is wrong and his theory doesn't apply on practice, if you want the full argument on the matter read any respectable economist, Ludwig Von Mises for example.

Without change there is only death.
Communism stops competition and exploration thus leading to stagnation. This biology, physics, you cannot fight it.

because humans aren't equal and so hierarchy is needed

>without using history
Year Zero, much?

Which is why Communism insists on a Year Zero.

Your precious ideology is Nihilism with knobs on. You assert that the status quo is standing in the way of a beautiful utopia and so set about tearing it all down. Yet, there is no utopia waiting for you, just depression, despair and poverty.

When you cannot better your situation, how are you different froma slave or a prisoner? At least a slave could flee, of be freed. At least a prisoner could escape. A Communist is trapped forever.

Also worth noting, they shoot socialists on day one of the revolution. They shoot the gays, the drug abusers, the left wing academics and the socialists. You are considered a risk to the new regieme thanks to your unrealistic view of reality. I'm not joking, little commie, look this shit up.

Please explain to me why people living in those houses even exist anymore.

>>If the fruits of my own labor aren't mine to enjoy,
You mean like they're not in capitalism? What is happening here.

I like to own things i make.

Again, why do we "need" socialism? Why not rely on voluntary systems instead of government compulsion? I can see the need for government control over some things in some cases simply because we have no tried and true system to replace them if that's what your getting at (I'm ok with the idea of government owned roads, government institutions such as law enforcement and the military) but do you really think that makes the U.S. socialist to any significant degree?

It's like you've never been to America

t. worker in a Lamborghini factory

For the positives, well, there are a lot of them.
+government controlled citizen lifestyle(health programs, young working programs, state paid vacations, etc.)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_movement
+society with high morals and less crime than the rest of the world(no drugs, almost no crime, iron laws against crime, regular beatings for drunkards, recidivists, proved to be a nice way to keep those people from doing crime, also the punishment for murderers was, well they killed them)
+job security(you don't like the boss? you don't like the job? there are tens of factories nearby that you can work in, no lazy people, no neets, you could buy housing and cars without fear that you may become jobless and lose them, highest amount of home ownership in the world)
+order and cleanliness in society(everything commies built was/is ugly as shit, but during socialism it was clean as shit too)

Again, if you support liberal capitalism, you're anti-nationalist.
Because under the values of liberal capitalism, there is literally nothing wrong with mass immigration.
Or globalism. Or cultural relativism.
Everything will be well when there's GDP growth. All problems will just fix themselves.

theft is bad mkay
people dont want to work if you take away most or all they produce

>Explain why nationalsocialism is bad without using history.
>>protip: you can't

There is no such thing as a stand alone nationalism economical model.

>the inequalities are inhumane
Bullshit, people who possess very rare and useful skills are worth a whole shitload more than someone who can hit something with a hammer (which the aforementioned valuable people can probably do just as well too).

It looks like shit, but not nearly as bad as commieblocks.

a worker in a lamborghini factory could afford a lamborghini in no time

Nope: easy.
Communism is bad for the same reasons capitalism is bad.
There, see? Not hard at all.

You're anti-nationalist. I'm just trying to establish that, I'm really not in mood to debate libertarians.
>Social Security
>Obamacare
Just some examples. Government spending as percentage of GDP is more than twice than that in China.
You're social democracy, only you like to pretend you aren't.

>Explain why having no ideology and only wanting everything that's good and not what is bad is a bad thing
>protip: you can't

...

Elaborate.

Yet they for some reason still continue to work in systems which have 50% taxes, which is several times more than the amount people in medieval times would literally go and cut the heads off their rulers over.

>Bullshit, people who can hit a football with their head are worth hundreds of millions times more than someone who can hit something with a hammer

Yes, you think a owner of a Lamborghini factory woud keep working if he got shit for pay?

Because the dumb plebs who can hit something with a hammer like to watch them toss a ball and create weird cults of personality around them.

>Please explain to me why people living in those houses even exist anymore.
W-what? Please explain in a way that makes sense...