Communism

Any actual good argument against commmunism?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=bI7y4QjQPQk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Vahan_Damadian
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

200 MILLION PEOPLE KILLED BY THE JEWISH BOLSHEVIST IDEOLOGY!!!!! HUNGER, TYRANNY!!!!!

History
But I don't expect a dumb spaghetti to realize that

came here to post this

Do you have any real arguments for it

if it was so good you would see more people forming communes and them being successful

lack of incentive to excel in the workforce, laziness is rewarded in the general populace, dissenting opinions are violently suppressed by champagne governments especially during times of social unrest/hunger/hardship. Theres a reason the Russian population is generally depressed drug abusers with an economy that's been in the shitter since the collapse of the soviet union. They got jewed pretty damn hard.

It's a fantasy. The reason for its relative success is it propagates religious yearnings for a afterlife.

its immoral /thread

No actual Concept what it actually is (al la "XYZ wasnt real communism")
and manymanymany Dead People

You sure it isn't 300 billion?

There are communes and cooperatives and they're sometimes successful.

It doesn't work

youtube.com/watch?v=bI7y4QjQPQk

Ideologically sound, but it forgot to take one element into its model: humans. Humans simply cannot make communism work. Humans have greed, ambition, dreams, etc. Every attempt ends like Cuba, USSR, or others. The power corrupts the leadership. Always

Marxism is LITERALLY jewish talmudism.

>commmunism?
Its a dated failed primitive pseudo analytical model based on incorrect perceptions, observations and predictions that has acted as a catalyst for 100 million deaths, cultural devastation and the impoverishment and oppression of hundreds of millions more.

That is the farthest Communism can ever be achieved. Anything larger than a family is bound to get rekt.

What about a town or small state?

Any actual good argument against dinosaurs?

Doesn't mean that it scales to a nation-state or planetary civilization. People also say things like 'the US government should be run like a corporation' or a family, etc. All of these answers are wrong, those things all have different concerns, inputs and outputs than a large government.

Start shit get hit, Noah did Gods work letting them die.

...

this

Venezuela

dey ded nigguh

>wop doesn't into argument

Present a claim first dummy.

Know who loves communism?

The mod known as pricklycactus in pic related who goes by ayden sanchez on site:hollaforums.com
His email is [email protected]

Let him know how you feel about him shitting up the boards.

It's a front ideology for a literally "willing slave"-movementh, that's pretty much the only argument you'd need.

Yup. Communism denies human nature.

It gives the power to the weakest links in society.

It fails to take into account human nature and selfishness

hence why it'll always just be a "theory" and never "true communism".

I'm not already rich and jewish so I have a lot to lose

It's a Jewish creation

I believe the machines will have real communism, in time. But by then it'll be The Matrix timeline.

>Ideologically sound

you said that as if you ever read marx but your next sentence just confirms that you never had read a single word of his.

Your consciousness does not determine society but rather society determines your consciousness.

What you see as "human nature" didn't fucking exist 500 years ago before capitalism made it exist.

For 95% of human history humans didn't have the "human nature" you have today. They didn't behave like you behave and they didn't believe in things you believe in today.

They were living in primitive communes where everything was shared. There was no concept of greed, ambition, private property, mine vs theirs etc..

read a fucking book sometimes will you?

Same materialistic and individualistic bullshit.
It is capitalism for the weak.
Their view on humans is both naive and outdated.

One small detail to add, it is not a fault of humans, it is fault of communists. The people who scream about equality for everybody are at the same time the most exclusionary fucks on the face of planet, the people who never worked in their useless lifes constantly waffle about working class, only to kill them in droves when those workers refuse to dance to their tunes.
How can someone like that make anything work?

It always results in reform or collapse.

>Humans have greed

This is quite literally the entire case for communism. To remove the inactive corporate welfare kings that (bourgeois) democracy allows to dominate society.

Just look at former communist countries.

Shit tier system for failures who can't achieve anything. All communists are lazy fuckwads who should be turned into organ donors. Kys faggot.

>read some socialist wanker

Yeah, I have better things to do, like work. You know that? Did they ever mentioned it in those '''''''books'''''''?

If you want to worship a leader of thieves and murders, at least pick Genghis Khan. Not the false messiah of self-hating Jews.

>There was no concept of greed, ambition, private property, mine vs theirs etc..

Now, stupid faggot, let me put this plainly.

The bible may or may not be in general, a work of fiction, but it does represent the people's mindset quite well.

There was most certainly greed before 500 years ago, and it wasn't casued by communism, you moron.

Now kindly kys.

The disfunction of every. single. communist. country.

And to install useless fucks in their place.

International Marxist Socialism is fucking ridiculous in today's society.

Read some Spengler, recover Socialism from the paws of Marxism, and institute a national Socialism that actually captures the idea of 'providing for all' without the slave morality and forced equity of Marxism.

do 62 men who have more money than the bottom 3.5 billion people, do they have to work? hm... really jingles my bongles...

you do know that humans have existed for more than 2000 years, try 200 000 years.

are you fucking retarded or something?

are you fucking retarded? Thats a really high effort bait

>What you see as "human nature" didn't fucking exist 500 years ago before capitalism made it exist.

You specifically said 500 years ago you slimy fuckwit.

better ask are there any good arguments to suport it

>answer: NOT

I said they weren't capitalistic 500 years ago you illiterate fuck

The state and any form of archy or cracy is a pretty sorry way to run society in general. Nothing can possibly be worse than capitalist plutocracy though.

>International Marxist Socialism is fucking ridiculous in today's society

Nationalists are just clutching at straws. Nationalism is a brief feeling that comes in times of crisis and goes just as soon. It is not a long-term solution to any economic issue. There are no historical exceptions to this rule.

It's also worth noting this is a strawman of Marxism. Marx himself ridiculed abstract notions of justice. He saw "providing for all" as nothing more than a side-effect of class war, he just happened to support the proletariat as he saw it as the inevitable winner.

Individualism

YOU ALSO SAID THAT IT WAS CAPITALISM THAT MADE HUMAN NATURE.

You're being purposely obtuse, fuck off. If it wasn't for Serbia being master kebab removers I'd say your country deserved to be glassed by the soviet union.

It's an ideology that appeals to sentimentalism and provides no incentives for development. Humans are animals and just follow whatever incentives are given to them.

MAMA JUST KILLED A MAN

The best argument against communism is to go to former communist countries.

it's just another attempt by the jews to disestablish western society

There are no viable alternatives or competitors to the Westphalian nation state yet, and the attempts to build them collapsed more than two decades ago.

>/leftypol/ doesn't have real arguments against capitalism so they strawman, greentext, and imply implications.
Those "arguments" are jewish by nature. to jej

/thread

>there was no concept of greed, ambition, private property, mine vs theirs
>read a fucking book sometimes, will you

dumb shit, it's you who should read a book

Read any of the oldest writings and you'll find all those concepts there

Communist invented lasers and MRI.
Have you ever worked in a factory before? 9 times out of 10 the supervisor is a lazy incompetent shit.
You should hang around some richfags and realize they are not ubermensch.
Capitalism has not created a meritocracy, but a plutocracy and only the most naive believe money corresponds to merit.
Tell me how many people died of hunger after Mao WENT FULL STEAM AHEAD on communism in the Cultural Revolution.

Why didn't capitalism save the U.S from the dustbowl and great depression which followed the most unregulated period of american business?

[citation required]
consider reading Marx's paper about the Jews

>It's obvious you work for a living and have never read my brainwashing propaganda Jew
>Let me post a wall of buzzwords and mental gymnastics which leave out all the millions of corpses and starvation and all that stuff

Ftfy

>Any actual good argument against commmunism?

>Why didn't capitalism save the U.S. from a period of drought

O i am laffin. At least nature had something to do with the Dust Bowl. Your starvations are all by design. Pic related, current year.

>slave morality
I don't think you know what that word means

>They were living in primitive communes where everything was shared. There was no concept of greed, ambition, private property, mine vs theirs etc..

Uhh...what?

Humans have always been fucking savages who raped, pillaged, murdered, stole, exploited, etc. since the dawn of time. You are the one who should read a book, moron.

>"National Socialism is a failure! It was tried once and was destroyed after 12 years by the rest of the world for being such a failure!"
>"Now, Communism. There's something that hasn't been tried and we could really get to work!"
>"What? China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, Vietnam, Armenia Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Mongolia, Yemen, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, (East) Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia, Angola, Benin, Congo, Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea and Mozambique have all tried Communism and they're all shitholes? Pure coincidence. In fact none of them were REAL Communism, so checkmate desu"

Why are Communists such dirt?

>Communist invented lasers and MRI.
>Have you ever worked in a factory before? 9 times out of 10 the supervisor is a lazy incompetent shit.
>You should hang around some richfags
>and realize they are not ubermensch.
>Capitalism has not created a meritocracy, but a plutocracy and only the most naive believe money corresponds to merit.
>Tell me how many people died of hunger after Mao WENT FULL STEAM AHEAD on communism in the Cultural Revolution.

>Why didn't capitalism save the U.S from the dustbowl and great depression which followed the most unregulated period of american business?

Because the jews who created communism (which is how you run a slave labor camp or plantation) also created the Federal Reserve Bank. Thomas Sowell has spoken ay length that this kikery with the FED caused the stock market crash. The market itself recovered in 24 hours. However for some reason 48 hours later the government came in, and that administration's actions caused a recession that lasted for years. Before that happened the capital trade markets recovered in 24 hours.

Do some fucking reading kids

>communists invented lasers and MRI.
But that's a lie.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Vahan_Damadian
>Why didn't capitalism save the U.S from the dustbowl and great depression which followed the most unregulated period of american business?
Nice loaded question. First off, the dustbowl was a naturally occurring phenomenon to say you can stop it, well, is retarded.
>be you let's 'stop' a hurricane hurr hurr
Also, the great depression happened for a few years not for nearly the entire time period of say life under communist Russia. Far people starved to death in Communist Russia than America during the Cold War period. Fact.

The same use of statistics anti-communist use in their allegations of intentional famine can be applied to the dust bowl and then you find out that millions of Americans """"disappeared""""" in that era.
The population of Oklahoma went down, a real historian considers the effect of migration, But anti-communist shills see that there is a population decline in a famine stricken area and they assume everyone dies instead of having migrated.

Also consider the great depression(not the dustbowl) What caused that?

How many people have starved in the USSR or China since the 60's?

in b4
>china dropped communism
between 1966 and 1976 Mao basically destroyed the central government and returned power to local peasant and worker collectives, How much famine existed in that time?

Communism beats any of those systems in uselessness hands down. My wife didn't have to beg the clerk to hide some menstruation pads for her in capitalism, only in communism.

Kill yourself communist, please, the world would be a bit more brighter place if you did.

i will make this argument as someone who advocates a fascist corporatist system, which is a mixture of capitalism and socialism generally,

Marx argues that as the economy grows under capitalism, technology advances. As technology advances wages decrease while labour input increases while also decreasing the honor of labour and the living conditions of the laborer.

Let us first condemn these accusations as technophobic and drawn entirely from a realm of emotions, not having any correspondence to the world in its actual form.

First: the argument that as technology grows wages decrease.

This is clearly untrue, evidence against this can be found by comparing the living conditions between any developed and developing nation. (consider any nation that went from an agricultural society to an industrial society, you can even consider the benefit industrailization had to the soviet economy.) the largest divider between developed and developing being chiefly technological.

As technology increases more production is increased leading to a cheapening of the value of products and an increase in the quality of said products. the cheaper every product is, the more of your money can be stretched. this results in either more products being purchased or money being saved(for those who say "the cheapening of one product isn't enough" it isn't one product, every product has prices that decrease and quality that increases when greater technology is introduced. for those companies which use sub-par materials and the like to artificially cheapen the product, no monopoly exists and consumers know what they are purchasing, a monopoly should never be allowed to function, as such any company will have competition and any overly large company that has a monopoly is liable to be broken up into smaller firms. what this means is that the cheaper product which has a lower quality will drive down consumer demand for said version of said product.)

[1/2]
It's an idealistic goal that's virtuous in thought but unobtainable. Marx's theory that primitive societies were classless and egalitarian is probably untrue. Societies develop hierarchies in response to outside and internal threats and issues (such as tribes appointing elder chiefs to guide and rule them). Those external threats is what caused the advancement of classes and social hierarchies, and will perpetually exist as due to human nature, and will continue to exist until those threats and issues cease. And those threats and issues will only cease if there's no external threats and issues. Therefor, communism can only occur and reach peak stage if everyone (which I'm referring to external nations) else is communist and not trying to be competitive and warring dicks to each other.

Marx said that for Communism to happen, the society that it occurs it must be in the industrial capitalist stage prior to it happening in order to spark it and properly transition. Marxist cite this as the reason why countries such as Russia and China became failed communist states--because they were still in the feudal stage in the class development--but fail to the excuse he uses of why there needs to be a capitalist industrial stage also consequently means that the transition will not develop the way he thinks it will. If his ideal of communism is to successfully happen, it will be a long and slow process of a developed capitalist industrial society turning more classless and egalitarian; there wouldn't be a revolution of any sort with the proletariats. Any revolution that disrupts production will just stunt the transition, therefor it's pointless to be radical and quick to overthrow class inequality.

[2/2]But ultimately, communism is unobtainable as not every nation and worker is equal, therefor not everyone can reach the ideal stage of communism. To successfully transition a society that is developed and progressive enough to decommission the use of classes is only achieved by the advancement of technology and abundance of wealth--and that causes a paradox with how that's achieved. As a society will only aim to reach such levels to competitiveness against another competitive society, and since the advancement of technology is boundless, there will exist a perpetual competitive struggle among communities / nations / state wanting to achieve the best prosperous conditions. While doing so, not only will greater hierarchies exist in such societies for being reliant and emphasizing the importance on an innovative and technical worker class, but said nations will grow more competitive and unequal among each other. Marx had the wrong idea of natural transition of civilizations--the future stages and potential end-stage will exist greater hierarchies and class differences, but also will have better living conditions and workers and people's rights as compared to historic feudal societies.

Any derived benefits of a State received in the name of communism--as claimed by Marxist--such as the industrialization in the Soviet Union and mass improvement of literacy rates and living conditions for the average citizen, could've just been achieved if the revolting sect was just some competent pro-labor and pro-democratic political group, or by some pro-labor competent monarch / autocrat / aristocrats. Such goal isn't only obtainable by communism, but just a byproduct of those who tried to attempt it.

Consider the wages of those in the middle class of Mali an African Country vs the low class of the USA, obviously it can be seen that the low wages of the lower class in the USA are extremely more valuable than the wages of the middle class of mali.

We can now say clearly that this is just overly emotional and fearful rhetoric

Second:as technology advances labour input is increased and value of said labour is decreased.

This is also clearly untrue when we consider the high paying wages of the U.S. Factory worker when the manufacturing was done chiefly in said country.

It is obvious that as technology advances according to the principles of Fordism and scientific management(Taylorism) physical input from workers decreases while increasing the wages of said workers. because every corporation wishes to turn a greater profit they shall try to reduce the work of making a product in order to create it faster, further the more they'll pay the employee to ensure that a good job is done. it should also be mentioned that when new technology is introduced, eventually so does new jobs relating to the new technology.

When you maximize the gains of your corporation you maximize the payment of your workers.

As such we can now clearly say after examining these principles and the state of reality as history judges that this argument is nothing but emotion fueled fearful rhetoric.

>intentional famine is the same as a drought
wew lad
Did all those people taken into slaughterhouse basements just migrate, too, goku? :^)

/thread

Yeah the man who invented was a NEET

You seriously used that picture in support of your arguments? This is why communism always fails, because dumbasses like you are part of it.

>workers decide how much they work/everything is in abundance

Jesusfuckingchrist, we should have shot you all.

Third: it is argued that as the economy grows the honor of the worker is decreased and the further is he exploited.

I argue that seeking honor for physical labour, that is to say for payment, is an unrealistic demand that is made purely to appeal to the emotions of those who feel the need to be honored or respected without placing any extra work for that as payment.

The only honors and glory one should receive from his work is the following. The honor of knowing he provided for himself, the honor of knowing he provided for his family, and the honor of knowing he helped his nation-state/society with his work.

Seeking of any further honor than these is pointless.

After understanding that this was nothing but an attempt at appealing towards the emotions of the poor and the emotions of the narcissistic we can now say that is was again nothing but emotion fueled rhetoric.

The argument of Marx about the means of production continuously changing by the shifting of hands from the minority into majority is also a false argument with no place in reality.

Rome was capitalist for example, and Egypt had state-capitalism.

Rome had banks no? It had legal tender no? It had a legal system and a court system no?

Further if we give the argument to Marx that this is how the economy shifts and grows eventually, that bourgeois overtakes aristocrat and proletariat overtakes bourgeois, we have no reason to assume that proletariat is the bottom line, the lowest principle. "Worker" isn't the lowest common denominator, especially not in modern welfare states. Person is.

If we go by Marx's own logic taken to the extreme, eventually the means of production would be forcibly taken from the proletariat by a different people. The leech class.

Resulting not in a world of workers owning the means of production, but a world of lazy people leeching off the work of those who came before them, never advancing the sciences or art, never striving towards growth or improvement.

read this>India, Burma, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Pakistan, Israel/Palestine, Bangladesh, Iraq, Malaysia
All former British colonies, all now are shitholes

you can't blame the third world and slavs for being shitty.

dodging the question
By the way how would capitalism prevent a federal reserve from coming into place?
crony capitalism is capitalism!

The haymarket strikes and other labor activities did not create the federal reserve, a bunch of wealthy people protected by the capitalist state created the federal reserve.

you are brainwashed, do you have any proof of intentional famine?

You think stalin woke up one day, twirled his moustache and said
>I am going to create a famine just for the lulz, mwahahahaha
if you can honestly believe such fairy tales, I urge to extricate yourself from public life and submerge yourself into a fantasy land, while the real people deal with real issues.
>capitalist decide how much they work/everything is in abundance
wew lad

It doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work. It's not even a good idea on paper.

The answer is Fascist Corporatism.

We can nationalize the Fed or abolish it. It doesn't matter.

You can have the central planning of socialism and the perpetual growth of Capitalism.

...

>Communism is without hierarchy
wow, the brainwashing is strong with you. I will correct you on that claim because to not do so otherwise is to do you a disservice. If you are not corrected you will continue arguing against strawmen and wasting both my time and your time.

Communism the replacement of private property with collective property that is all.
If anything hierarchies in communism are more legitimate, because you can't buy your way or inherit your way to the top. If you want to be a leader you have to earn the respect of your followers.
Capitalist permits """leaders"""" to buy a factory and shut it down and send the jobs away.
This kind of """leadership""" is obviously false and creates a discordant community. There is no true relationship between leader and followers.

>>capitalist decide how much they work/everything is in abundance
Not an argument.

that's right, therefore communism is the next step of human evolution

Pure Communism = State stealing from people to help other people.

Pure Capitalism = People stealing from other people to help themselves.

Both are theft but at least in capitalism you can resist because the theif is not all powerful like in Communism.

Only if you don't like opressive two-class countries of rulers and workers that is bound for revolution since the masses don't enjoy being enslaved.

>money is the only form of power is your argument

Yes, sage.

>perpetual growth
what do you mean by perpetual growth?
Growth in number of medicines available and the such
or
Dude, dragon dildos and starbuck's coffee sales are down. let's shill these commodities to pre-teens to expand our market

>capitalist offers me money for my skills, I decide
>communist forces me to work at gunpoint, throws my kid out of school, threatens to jail all my acquintances, for the good of all

Go 'wew' somewhere else you communist swine

>India, Burma, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Pakistan, Israel/Palestine, Bangladesh, Iraq, Malaysia
All former British colonies, all now are shitholes

All are either muslim failures or surprise, surprise communist shitholes. SA managed to obliterate its middle class in less than two decades. The rest of them are considerably better off than shitholes without britain colonialism.

The famine happened because fucks like you thought they know better than the farmers they forcibly removed, and that is always the same - Becky who gave you pitty handjob during school party is put in charge of transportation, and Joshua who shared his used toilet paper with you in communal harmony is put in charge of agriculture.

You are always the same, communist.

...