DEBATE: Capitalism vs Marxist-Leninism

Dozens of leftist generals/threads have popped up here and I've yet to see ONE, yes ONE thread where it wasn't just stormweenies autistically giving adhominems and spewing meme.
You've been ignoring our arguments completely, which means that normies visiting this site recognize us for our superior bantz AND logic.
Lets have an actual discussion here, comrades.(if you can handle it)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=No1-4GsQa-g
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

First of all, let's dispel the "muh real communism" meme. For all of you with an IQ > 0, if communism is "a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs"
but ""communist"" states that failed are actually state-capitalist, then IT WASN'T REAL FUCKING COMMUNISM AND WE'RE RIGHT!

>inb4 "lol look at this guy and laugh!"

get a job faggot

sage

Those are some awesome sources. Are they all referencing just America? Can you elaborate on what the counts as a "Poverty related death" for those 18 million?

lefty pol needs to go

lol just fucking use your brain

>886 million people go hungry

nigger the us only has 300 million people

>It's not my job to educate you!
You came to argue and didn't bring an argument. Isn't it past your bedtime?

Communist Revolution soon.

the rake awaits my friend

They devolved into something that failed because communism is such a retarded ideology that it can't even be attempted without devolving into cancer.
>real magic hasn't been tried
>my infallible version that works in my head

Ok I'll bite you economically illiterate retards. I doubt you've even read Marx. First off one of the founding principles of Marxism is wrong which is Marx's labor theory of value as price is not determined solely by labor so unless you can prove to me the labor theory of value is correct you fuckers are all wrong. Second big reason you are wrong Marx's assertion that firms will have to abuse workers more and more to accumulate more and more to keep the process of capital acquiring going. This assertion is incorrect because technological advancement opens up new markets for new profits to be derived from.

I am an uneducated man, please explain it to me. I wish to know your ways.

So you have this theoretical system and you seem to think it would solve all the woes of the world. But in reality everywhere where the state (on behalf of the people, they swear) seizes control of the means of production, the people suffer catastrophically.

Additionally, and more importantly, nearly every communist experiment has resulted in some horrifying tyrant taking over the political machine of state, because they correctly identified that such a government focuses unbelievable power in the party leadership, which they then use to brutally suppress the populace (and anyone who looks at them funny).

And you support this system?

>debt meme

Nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to go out and borrow money. In a manifest destiny society, you choose to.

Capitalism, while it has its flaws, has allowed society to receive amazing technology in every household. Even the poorest, laziest, shittiest "impoverished" people I know have fucking smartphones.

are you one of those cucks that keeps a sign in the yard announcing that your home is gun free? Give me your address so I can have my melanin enhanced acquaintances liberate you of your worldly possessions and butthole virginity

All the "capitalist" states that failed are actually state-capitalist. Real capitalism hasn't been tried.

:^)

fuck you marxist. I tried to debate you cunts on infinity chan with lefty poll and they banned my permaintly for "baiting". I won't even give you shits the respect of acknowledging your arguments.

Again, you use the term "communist" when you're referring to state-capitalism.
Please reevaluate your argument

its okay uneducated men have a special place in the gulags

In a REAL communist revolution, cucks like you will be executed first, faggot

forgot foto

Both are trash systems.

hellot rebbit

Sure, faggot. Good luck getting here though. Want a timestamp too? 2107 Amador Ave, Davis, CA 95616

stop Larping

Lol nigga if this is your real adress you dumb

If you stop giving a fuck if dumb lazy people die out, like they should, then capitalism is 100% baller as fuck. You can have what ever you want, go get it.

Commies are just low energy.

>you have to choose 1 of these two shitty ideologies
Fucking commies get out. Sup Forums is an anarchist board

even russianbro is calling you out for your bullshit

I look forward to removing kebab side by side with russiabro

yeah man I am really scared gonna happen any minute now!

>internet tough guy
Calling that as not your real address.

Capitalists point to the successes of capitalist countries in the past.
Marxists point to the failures of capitalism in the past because a true Marxist state can't exist without it sliding into totalitarian communism unless every participant in the civilization are inhuman robots.

Your fight is with reality itself, Marxist, not capitalism and please, feel free to bash your head against a wall yet again and learn nothing. Just do it somewhere where you won't be ruining something actually valuable. Africa could sure use some Marxism, don't you think? That'd be an achievement.

They all went in with the intentions of implementing communism. See

that's right lol I'm not an idiot

>debate

Twas just a jest.

Commie shills already getting frustrated

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

No, you use "state-capitalism" because doing otherwise admits that Communism has been a massive failure everywhere on earth in many many countries.

Tell me, if you are so smugly certain no communism never existed despite dozens of states declaring it to be their government, explain why the following states WEREN'T (or AREN'T for the scant few that remain) communism like they claim:


Afghanistan
Aragon
Albania
Angola
Benin
Bulgaria
Catalonia
Chinese Soviet Republic
Congo-Brazzaville
Czechoslovakia
East Germany
Hungary
Ethiopia
Free Territory
Grenada
Kampuchea
Mongolia
Mozambique
North Korea
North Vietnam
People's Republic of Korea
Poland
Rojava
Shinmin
Romania
Somalia
South Yemen
Soviet Union & the Soviet States (about 15 of these)
Yugoslavia
Zapatista territories

China
Laos
Cuba
Vietnam

I can tell you're a troll because no leftist calls leftism in general "Marxist-Leninism"
0/10

oh i cant wait for the communist revolution
me? no, I'll be a card carrying member of the party, not in some gulag lol

In the same way that if I claim I'm a pony doesn't mean I'm a pony, a country calling themselves communist doesn't mean they are communist

You have no arguments aside from theory's that when applied in the real world get btfo by reality.

>This image proves that people die, therefore, communism is a flawless system, fuck capitalist scum

>DEBATE: Capitalism vs Marxist-Leninism
Both sides of the same, Jewish shekel.

Oh I see, so you're just a naysaying faggot with no evidence to back up your BS. Thanks for clearing that up.

I mean that's what I figured you delusional
>communism has never been tried
people were, but jeez you didn't even have a pseudo-philosophical argument to fall back on.

Marx didn't invent Communism. Check dat Jesus. Think maybe? Mussolini didn't invent Fascism. Writing a book doesn't make you the owner of an idea. Communism is an ever evolving idea , one that embraces science and logic. Once the ranks have been purged of contentious bitches , sjws who diivide the people , and lazy freeloaders , a new Communism , Neo-Communism if you will , shall emerge to sweep the one world order-master/slave system away in a glorious wave of revolution red , forever extinguishing the barbarism of capitalism and exposing its adherents as inherently selfish misanthropes

My logic is solid, and all you have to say is
"you're just a naysaying faggot"
ok

If you faggots think communism is so great why don't you go join an Amish community?

Marx was a Jew (along with Trotsky and Lenin).

Thus, Communism is Jewish.

Jews are inherently anti-White.

Thus, Jewish Communism is inherently anti-White.

He's actually got a good point tbqh.

I mean, look at communist utopias like DPRK where the poverty rate is nonexistent and every citizen lives like a glutton.

Oh... wait...

>calls it communist while its not

their weed sucks and they bitches be basic

litreally what

I asked you to specifically explain why the many many communist ex-countries (and the few remaining ones) weren't or aren't communist and your response essentially boiled down to "just cause they say they are doesn't mean they are" and nothing else.

Which means you probably know absolutely nothing about the subject AND you're complete fucking garbage at debate.

All you do is respond to posts posting bs like
but when you got called out you had nothing.

So you're just a shitty troll essentially.

Hey Lefty fags , guy is right stop calling it Marxism-Leninism. Lenin was a shit head so was Marx. Stalinism shit Maoism shit , how about we FUCKING TRY COMMUNISM THIS TIME? Ok? Hu? Can we? None of your shitty input or fancy opinions you call ideas , lets give workers the means of production and let them vote to make decisions. Fuck your elitist shit. And yeah im working class , Christian , former kkk member , who voted for Bern and then President Elect when ya'll fucked over a True socialist for a Marxist-Leninist mafioso bitch fk yall

>He doesn't distinguish Jewish finance capitalism from productive worker-based capitalism
>He doesn't know the difference between Yellow socialism and Red socialism
>He doesn't know who Gottfried Feder is

Read a book.

>Worker's Party of Korea
>not communists

lol, keep up that "no true scotsman" if it makes you feel better kiddo.

Read the communist manifesto. Most of the "communist" countries were the transition states that Marx said were required to achieve communism. These states fit the guidelines of the transition states very well. If the transition states caused the deaths of millions of people, then communism is still to blame because communism was the end goal and these transition states are required to achieve communism. And if they have failed to achieve real communism, then that is even worse. If these states cannot achieve communism, then stop trying them.

There is no debate. Capitalism is superior and always will be, keep dreaming plebbit kids, now get off our board.

So every time people try to implement it, millions die. Sounds great.

Those states weren't communist because communism is stateless and classless. Those are minimal conditions that a society has to statisfy before it can be called "communist" in the fullest sense of the term. This is evident if you read Marx.
So those states were not real communism. They were real socialism, though, but not the most robust form of socialism. More recent developments in socialist theory focus on the establishment of workers' co-operatives as an alternative to the capitalist corporation. The corporation, as a way of organising labour, is pretty hard to defend once you understand what a co-operative is and how it works.

read

>capitalism vs communism
Both are shit, even if capitalism is slightly shittier. You faggots need to take the real red pill.

...

That is quite possibly the dumbest poster I've ever seen.

Really makes you think....

>Buht ya meen staht captlisn!

>being in debt means capitalism doesn't work

What the fuck does that even mean?

yes

>weren't communist because communism is stateless and classless

By this definition of communism is literally impossible outside of a fantasy utopia.

The concept of having no state, but also a rule that there can be no class makes no sense. How can you have a rule banning class in an anarchic society, which inherently has no rules? How do you enforce the rule that classes are not allowed if enforcing rules is also not allowed?

>but ""communist"" states that failed are actually state-capitalist,

Then communism is inherently impossible to achieve.

its just because of human nature. Take that away (form a nation of cyborgs) and you're good

>Strasserism
>Not just National Bolshevism

much better than the Le Internationale :^) commies though

youtube.com/watch?v=No1-4GsQa-g

>what is distrubitism
read the bible

>being in relatively unenforced financial debt is bad
>owing everything in your entire life including your life to the state somehow isn't debt and is good
Just typical commie delusions.

>Not just National Bolshevism
I'm a very special type of snowflake. :^)

>(form a nation of cyborgs)

Hmmm.
Really makes you think...

But anarchy itself is the absence of class. At least, if you're really committed to the "an" part. It does mean that there are NO RULERS, after all. This doesn't mean that there are no rules. Just that there's nobody licking boots, and nobody whose boots are to be licked.

>blaming -all- poverty on capitalism

plebbit commies need to leave

You shouldn't talk to your betters without permission.

Good I located someone with at least a semblance of intelligence. But the definition is troubling as points out.

It is definitely fudging the definition to say that it's only Communism at the extreme conclusion of the process Marx describes. In truth, many states have attempted to move towards communism and enacted many socialist institutions towards that goal, but on that path they all crashed and burned without exception.

If Communism is incapable of taking place, why bother supporting it?

What about smaller communities? The Amish have no state and their means of production are firmly in the hands of the workers. Are the Amish communist?

>18 mil deaths from poverty
Yeah, you know how many of those deaths are american? barely any. You know how many are from Africa or india or china? almost all. You know how many of the countries with the problem are capitalist? none.
>homeless in america
those people have more than ample opportunity to get a job and find a place to live
>debt
people don't use their money wisely, not my fault not your fault. its their fault. people in communist countries have no opportunity gain wealth to do anything whereas ingenuity has a reward here.
>number of people communist china killed >50 million of their own people
>number of people solviet russia killed > 50 million of their own people
>number of people united states killed

Class doesn't just mean rulers, it's a division in socio-economic status. There are always going to be people with more, and people with less. The only way to prevent that would be to have an enforced rule preventing it. You can't have absolute individual freedom (which is anarchy) and then also say that a person can't have more of something, it's inherently contradictory.

>Wipes sweat
>Thankfully someone came to my rescue

Here I was hoping to actually see a Communist carry through a debate. Yet it end the same way, some vague comparison and calling it "not real communism". Lucky for you comrade leaf came to save you

>capitalism
>socialism
>libertarianism
>communism

dead doctrines from the 1900s
we all live in managerial states now user
read some Schumpeter, James Burhnam, and get with the times

>Are the Amish communist?

No. The Amish have a rule of law, and don't really have a "means of production" in that they're mostly self-sufficient. The idea of capitalism vs communism is essentially irrelevant there, because they don't rely on others for goods for the most part.

I'm beginning to think these threads have been commandeered by high level trolls because this is hilarious

>dozens of commie threads have popped up
Kind of like the dozens of commie regimes that popped up and failed, leaving over 100 million dead?

>uses world hunger stats as an argument FOR communism
What, are those numbers too low for you?

I would simply deny that a classless, stateless society is possible. Anthropological evidence seems to suggest that that was the nature of most primitive, pre-agricultural societies. If that was the case, then surely it doesn't go against human nature.
I would not, however, deny that many states have attempted to move towards communism and failed. I'd say that the reasons for that are complex and numerous, and lots of ink has been spilled analysing these regimes, so I won't waste much of anyone's time here, but in essence, I think it's a mix of those places in the world not being ready at that moment (the material conditions have to be right, i.e. the country has to be very well-off with regards to production capabilities), and the revolutions themselves going wrong due to a less-than-fully-nuanced conception of what exactly they're supposed to be doing. This is leaving aside the problem of outside interference, which is very common, as socialist states present a challenge to the dominant capitalist countries.
None of this is unique to socialism. Anyone who's studied the French Revolution will know what I'm talking about.

Right, and communism doesn't deny that. The principle is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". It isn't "from each the same, to each the same", precisely *because* people are not equal in that way; they do not all need the same things, nor can they all produce the same things. So it's not that everybody has the same, but that everybody has what they need. It's supposed to give you the freedom to do more and get more beyond that, but in this respect, the socialist regimes of the past have tended to fail pretty horribly.

deny that a classless, stateless society is impossible* rather
jej

>The imaginary communism that literally only exists in books is "real communism", but the communism that actually happened in the real world is "not real communism"

>The path to a stateless society is to give absolute power to the state

>People will willingly surrender their property to the state, it's not like we'll have to take it at gunpoint like we did every other time we tried communism

>"Seizing the means of production" is a meaningful concept in a human driven service economy like the USA

>The labor theory of value is correct, the value of an item has no relation to demand

When you believe things like that, any attempt to engage you on a rational level is a waste of time. Saged.

First of all Communism is stateless and the Communist states are actually Socialist, both suck. Communism can't be a state. It's a stateless society which is idiotic. The reason people call the Soviets state capitalists is that under Lenin's NEP private property was allowed. This was only a few years and by far most of the time period the Soviet Union was around, it was Socialist.

We need to be wary of these threads my friends. Before we know it retarded Marxists will have taken over this board. At first it will be a meme everyone laughs off but give it a year or two and communism will become the redpilled position. We cannot let it happen.

Those people don't eat because they are weak. Let Mother Nature do her job.

>So it's not that everybody has the same

This is the definition of class though. This is why communism makes no sense.

>The principle is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

Again, how do you enforce this. If I grow a crop and decide that I want to keep it instead of giving some of it to a poet that can't grow crops, how do you make me do that without a state? That's why communism only works in a fantasy-land where everyone has this amazing goodwill all of the time.

Well you lefty fags usually accept what people identify like when a man thinks he's a woman so if some faggot said he was a pony your lefty mates would accept him as a pony.

Because the farm will be co-operatively owned. It will work for the community, and not for any one particular individual in the community.
So how will the co-operative ownership of the farm be enforced? I'm not sure that it'd need to be enforced, per se. The co-operative model is so vastly superior to the corporate model that it's hard to imagine any worker actively choosing the former over the latter if they've had a taste of both.

>discovery of a junior high plebbit communist plot

This must be how JFK felt when he saw the missiles in Cuba.

Plebbit is a cancerous threat to everyone.

You Fuckers simply dont get it. This is not a revolutionary army of internet heros that can be recruited for anything. We are those who turned away from the darkness to find light where nobody sought it. We are the new oracle of delphi, we are the new prophets, we are the voice of an Ancient Deity that started speaking to us. Our god is a god of everlasting change, whispering through chaos. Your attempts are futile.

PRAISE KEK

>was the nature of most primitive, pre-agricultural societies.

I can agree to this but that brings up two questions

1)what is to stop society from sliding right back to this state since all everyone doing is providing the means to survive comfortably?

And

2)correct me if I'm wrong but we evolved away from such things thus allowing people to specialize and therefore grow, innovate and build ourselves up. If everyone is just concerned with making that which is necessary then where is the room to expand to the stars, which we will have to do due to finite resources here on and Earth and the since eventually going Allahu Snackbar on us.