(Outside of World of Warcraft and your family, so Mom doesn't count.)
William Rogers
ur mad cause communism doesn't work
Kevin Baker
Prove it.
Anthony King
>Because we live under capitalism
Ever considered that, perhaps, just... maybe, people have different capabilities based on genetics and epigenetics and are thus inherently unequal? I mean, I get that burger education is cucked as hell, but c'mon, John.
Joseph Torres
If everyone isn't equal than giving them an equal chance and treating them equal will lead better people to prevail right?
Jeremiah Ramirez
when has it worked?
Landon Martin
>People aren't equal
>Because we live under capitalism.
Or because some people are dumber than others. Ever consider that is why wealth inequality exists, because some people are just lazy and dumb?
Xavier Price
Catalonia and Ukraine
Cooper Cooper
But we already have given people equal chances. Socialism would just be "pulley"-ing these people, and at the same time, negating the natural course of selection in which those who cannot compete, dies, and the future generations needn't share these genetic failures.
Thomas Howard
Nope, because as you eloquently put it, there is some material, genetic imbalances between people that makes them better suited for some tasks or behaviour Human nature, if you will
Also, post some Zizek or delete this thread, it's massive garbage so far
Joshua Mitchell
>what is inheritance?
Gabriel Morales
>But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural muh privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.
Nathan Torres
Day of the Rope. Joshua, enjoy your last days and also don't forget to keep checking out the twitter. :3
Kayden Myers
>inheritance plays a bigger role than genetics >what is "spending money like a retard" >what is genetic variation >what is "getting out of poverty by your own merit"
Nathaniel Barnes
>what is "getting out of poverty by your own merit" >implying
Alexander Ortiz
reminder
Tyler Ward
>Catalonia HAHAHAHAHA
>Try to remove all government control >Fail at it >Communists are trying to force Communism >Fascists attack >Shit is so unorganized the Commies and Anarchists get killed off quickly
This is fucking pathetic, you're in love with an aesthetic conceit, you're not willing to listen to reason, use our modern tools or theories or run your ideas through pragmatism.
Marx and Bakunin are rolling in their graves seeing all these people clinging to their theories with an orthodox fundametalism.
>Inb4 muh Communist hegemony in Catalonia >Inb4 muh evil Fascists ruining the day
Brayden Brown
>When has communism worked? >When has capitalism worked?
Thats what i thought.
Nathan Diaz
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural muh privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.
Lincoln Harris
>he doesn't know what hard labour is
Ah, the American dream is truly dead, isn't it?
Cameron Cruz
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural muh privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal!
Jacob Morgan
DEATH TO COMMIE FAGGOTS
Nathan Bell
19 MORE DAYS UNTIL YOUR KIND IS FOREVER IRRELEVANT
Wyatt Carter
Uh-huh. So what you're saying is that you want the big daddy gov to gibs you dat because you're too much of a pussy to work against your own disadvantages? Am I getting this right?
Andrew Davis
Economic masters here, Capitalism works, just not in its purest form, the free-market cycle is broken and eventually spins out of control and destroys itself after creating mass social upheaval and huge economic disparities.
So we need a government to step in, there comes new-Keynesianism to solve this problem.
That's still Capitalism, just not in its purest form, but there's no pure form anyway since Adam Smith only wrote down what appeared to be happening and called it Capitalism. Adam Smith wouldn't want you to stick to orthodox Capitalism anyway, just like Ayn Rand despised the people sticking to her beliefs without adapting.
Gavin Martin
No I want big daddy guvs to give everyone dat.
Wyatt Mitchell
And pay for it with confiscated inheritance.
Nicholas Ramirez
Hahaha you stupid fucking goyim fall for it EVERY TIME.
Liam Flores
>give everyone dat
So what, money is just gonna come out of thin air without being forcibly taken from someone else?
Julian Roberts
And fund it with confiscated inheritance and profit from nationalized businesses.
List some of your questions with it and I can try to answer them.
Josiah Clark
What happens when people find out the fee market will always outperform a centrally planned one?
Landon Rodriguez
From Marxists.org Socialism > "The organisation of society in such a manner that any individual, man or woman, finds at birth equal means for the development of their respective faculties and the utilisation of their labour. The organisation of society in such a manner that the exploitation by one person of the labour of his neighbour would be impossible, and where everyone will be allowed to enjoy the social wealth only to the extent of their contribution to the production of that wealth." Communism > "From the moment all members of society, or at least the vast majority, have learned to administer the state themselves, have taken this work into their own hands, have organized control over the insignificant capitalist minority, over the gentry who wish to preserve their capitalist habits and over the workers who have been thoroughly corrupted by capitalism — from this moment the need for government of any kind begins to disappear altogether. The more complete the democracy, the nearer the moment when it becomes unnecessary. The more democratic the "state" which consists of the armed workers, and which is "no longer a state in the proper sense of the word", the more rapidly every form of state begins to wither away. >"Then the door will be thrown wide open for the transition from the first phase of communist society [Socialism] to its higher phase [Communism], and with it the complete withering away of the state. Ok so Socialism is the democratisation of labor and the means of production IN A STATE and Communism is the same but WITHOUT a state. I agree with the hue here. What does Socialism LOOK like? Are there any proper examples?
Brayden Thomas
Socialism doesn't have to have a centrally planned market. There is a branch of socialism know as market socialism and that simply wants to implement a workers democracy where all of the workers in a business manage it democratically and compete with other democratically owned and managed businesses.
Ryder Jackson
But the money is already given to said person by the dead person, of their own will, so...
Socialism looks like one of two things depending if you want to keep the market. Non-market socialism wants to centrally and democratically control all businesses to manufacture things according to the need of the people and distribute these things according to contribution based on how much I have done for the system. Market socialism wants each business to compete in a free market but each business being controlled by by the workers via democracy in the workplace.
Jason Green
Jesus,didn't realise Autism Generals were still a thing
Joseph Gray
pls recommend reads from Marxists.org that aren't Marx.
Anthony Torres
You should read Lenin's work as well. Imperialism the Highest stage of capitalism.
Hunter Perry
the government cannot hold all the means of production by himself. What about all the multinational companies? What interest would they have to establish activities in a socialist country?
What I'm trying to say is that it seems that progress is only achieved by competition, how could that be in a communist society?
Grayson Sullivan
>You should read Lenin's work as well
Yea I'm sure a mass murderer has plenty of good stuff to tell me :^)
Grayson Howard
But I prefer National Syndicalism.
Grayson Morris
The government doesn't control the companies the workers who work in that company vote on company decisions instead of a boss making all the decisions.
Elijah Gutierrez
I am so confused about commies distinction of private vs personal property. It seems like a distinction without a difference.
Gavin Long
>Human nature is defined based on material conditions Wrong. The poorest regions in the United States are predominantly White and the crime rate is nowhere near that of majority black regions like Chicago or Detroit. Behavior is influenced by genetics, not "le class xD"
>People aren't equal because we live under capitalism Capitalism has only existed as a widespread practice for around 300 years. Modern Homo-sapiens existed without capitalism for tens of thousands of years. There has literally never been a point in history where all of humanity shared equal status, under capitalism or not.
Evolution dictates that genetic change occurs under selective pressure. There is no debate whatsoever whether or not the general intelligence of the human species has increased over the last 100,000 years, this is because selective environmental pressures have consistently prevented lower intelligence individuals from reproducing over a period of time.
Add in one more variable, where the human population splits off into multiple groups, migrates to radically different biomes and lives under incredibly different environmental pressures for tens of thousands of years. Now you have a situation where the different groups develop a notable genetic distance from one another because the environmental pressures select for different traits. You will never find an evolutionary biologist who believes that a species of organism can seperate into groups and live in isolation from one another for thousands of years without developing notable genetic and, by extension, functional differences.
No part of Communist theory is supported by modern science. It's a religion at this point.
Jason Reyes
Personal property is stuff only one person uses private property is something multiple people use but only one person owns.
Parker Torres
Inherited wealth problem is already fixed in New-Keynesian Capitalism, but then again you're not replying to anything I write because you're a dumb retard with no knowledge of modern economics and you're deeply entrenched in an idealistic Marxist aesthetic conceit.
Oliver Cox
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural muh privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.!
Asher Johnson
How is it fixed in new-keynesian capitalism?
Caleb Rivera
That's called a free-market. Something that the United States objectively isn't.
You said it yourself in the OP, there are government regulations preventing people from living autonomously, and forcing them to participate in an economy with massive amounts of government services, subsidies, entitlements, debt, etc.
Jacob Martin
Why not have everyone participate in the economy equally? Everyone owns a portion of a business.
Lincoln Diaz
I don't why you think copy-pasting Marx quotes is an argument. You haven't addressed the fact that genetics plays a larger role in behavior than class ever could.
James Miller
Experience is more important than genetics when it comes to shaping behavior. Black people act like black people because they grew up with black people.
Dylan Hughes
saged
Bentley White
What if I run a business and am the sole owner and worker of said business?
Carter Sanders
Then its totally yours and the government will leave you alone.
Adrian Lee
There's nothing stopping you from opening up your own business and running it democratically.
Have you considered the possibilty that the reason these types of businesses rarely exist isn't because of some worldwide capitalist conspiracy (honestly, just replace porky with a jew and you're a stormfag) but rather because they don't work?
How could you prove if multiple people use something? If I own an oven, how could you know if I am the only one who bakes with it? Perhaps I have family members that come over and use it as well.
Angel Cruz
fuck off this is a commie hatin board
Gavin Gomez
So that business could set prices, sell to whomever, buy from suppliers, etc w/o govt interference?
Parker Butler
Again, wrong.
Elijah James
Underconsumptionists believe that inequalities are caused by economic crises and was proven to be right, it's now part of the Keynesian school.
Today in New-Keynesianism redistribution mostly happens democratically, such as the funding of public services, creating a more economic stability and an opportunity for the less wealthy to work their way up.
Part of this is inheritance taxes or estate taxes, we pay up to 40% on inherited wealth. Besides that, most money actually does flow into the economy if the people inheriting the money are incapable of correctly accumulating more wealth which statistics clearly show and have been proven to work.
Michael Hughes
Hello Comrades
Nathan Parker
CHARGE AGAINST THE WHITEST COUNTRY
Jose Walker
>Socialism killed 100000000 people >Not an argument
Exactly as expected from a communist
>human nature
I agree that this argument is false, it is not human nature that always cause the fall of communism - it is because the nature of a communist. For someone who constantly waffles about equality, communist are the most exclusionary fucks on the face of the planet, their whole shtick is based on ingroup preference. You failures NEED someone or something you can label as the outside/outsider, demonize it and then attack it as a part of your fight for revolution, because otherwise nobody would give a shit about your disfunctional word salad. Anyone who then dares to question you is labeled an enemy of revolution. It is why there the working class is always the biggest victims of communism.
It is because of you, communist, not because of human nature.
Jace Kelly
Another
Cameron Russell
*were *have been proven to be right
And the 40% inheritance tax is for the Netherlands.
Connor Long
> human nature is determined by material conditions That is the most Jewish thing I have heard, I wonder why a (((communist))) would say such things? >people aren't equal because we live under capitalism Or we aren't equal because Equality doesn't exsist and the notion itself was created by Jewish anthropoligists like Boas at the turn of the century >Communisism killed 100000000 people > not an argument Alright comrade molyneux then why do communist fags complain about hitler and facism killing the six gorriliion and how bad it was
Josiah Hill
> statistics clearly show this but the stats that show communism doesnt work dont count
John Sullivan
Yes. But if you hire someone you have to let him manage the business with you.
Christian Murphy
They worked better than normal businesses during the great depression.
Daniel Gray
Back to R3eddit you go.
Aaron Martinez
Its not a huge difference overall. We help them out but make them work.
Landon Brown
With regards to communism killing millions of people, this is only a small price to pay for utopia. Who knows, maybe a billion people will perish when we have round two.
Gabriel Baker
>human nature is defined based on material conditions
lol what a cop-out argument, human nature is the result of thousands of years of selective pressures, do you think us more than animals?
humans aren't bees or ants, and it would require humans to be bees or ants for your retarded "ideology" which is actually just a bunch of honeyed words and lofty lies
Anthony Hall
Nice shitpost >maybe a billion people will perish when we have round two
Ayden Garcia
>have famine yearly in per-soviet Russia >Russia goes soviet >famine's happen sometimes >OH MY GOD COMUNIZUM HAD RUINED RUSSIA
Kevin Kelly
I'm not shitposting.
Parker Watson
Don't expect orthodox Marxists to listen to reason, they're not willing to play along with modern tools and theories and the modern empirical data we've discovered in the last 160+ years of Karl Marx.
They're not pragmatic, I've given up trying to debate with them, they won't understand that what they want is never going to happen again.
