What's so bad about communism, Sup Forums? Why do you all hate it?

What's so bad about communism, Sup Forums? Why do you all hate it?

Other urls found in this thread:

buzzfeed.com/thelisterite/ten-really-cool-ways-communism-is-becoming-cool-ag-301zr?utm_term=.unNrdkO03X#.auPw6d7vkb
buzzfeed
archive.is/oQJqi
web.archive.org/web/20161128103613/http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/world/fidel-castro-death-reaction/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

no I don't hate it all. I really love how communism killed hundreds of millions of communists!

It's a failed ideology espoused only by failures of human beings

Because the majority of Sup Forums are illiterate teens who ironically say they're skeptical of media and then believe everything the media says about Communism.

Genocide is genocide. It does not matter what flag you wave while you do it.

...

Because it works against human nature. It was like a lab experiment. They thought with enough tyranny they could make it work. Lesson learned.

It's based on the principles that ownership is theft and money doesn't represent value. Only people truly terrible at economics are communists.

NEVER BEEN TRIED
E
V
E
R

B
E
E
N

T
R
I
E
D

>implying the media didn't suck castro's dick when he died
>implying american academics haven't been subverted by communism and push marxist ideals on their students
>implying the media isn't trying to make communism "hip and trendy"

Let me guess. Communism in the 20th century, which has a far higher body count than the Nazis, wasn't real communism.

...

Famines are due to the fact that the USSR was coming out of a feudalist state. Meanwhile the Union actually put in research so that they could create a strain of wheat more resistant to famines and afterwards, no more famines occurred.
The "human nature" argument is always a vague term asserted with no specifics. You do not define human nature nor how Communism is in opposition to it. After all, modern humans have existed for 200,000 years and Capitalism has existed for less than 500.
>It's based on the principles that ownership is theft
Ownership of the means of production being theft, because workers produce everything, and as such should receive the full value of their labor.
>money doesn't represent value
Use-value and value are different terms used by Marx.
See pic related. This also has to do with differing definitions. The Marxist definition and the Leninist definition of socialism & communism are different. Not to mention more and more it seems like democratic socialists are using a completely different definition of socialism, the one Market Socialists would use.

Something about mass starvation. And genocide. Although, honestly, there's an element of Sup Forums that'll sign on to any ideology provided you promise to 1.) Gas the kikes and 2.) Hang the niggers

>abolition of private property
yeah get fucked

>63 years longer than Nazi Germany lasted.
All socialist should be shot on sight.

Communism is simply the idea of replacing being a slave to corporations and companies to becoming a slave to the party who can only maintain itself through constantly redefining the revolution and who is being oppressed. So at some point down the line you become the counter-revolutionary. Then off to the gulag you go. Even a cursory glance at history shows what's bad about it. What all these kids are screaming for today is not communism. They have no idea what they really want and been conned into thinking Communism is about sharing and caring.

Example: I grew up around Chinese communist, and they ALL hated gays and any kind of sexual deviancy. It was a disruption to the party, or 'the peoples' values.

because I like food and freedom and being alive

I dunno, maybe something to do with 45 years under commie occupation.

i dont hate communism... but the transfer from capitalism doesnt generate equality in a reasonable span of time

right now lots of people have houses of varying sizes and different cars. others do not have cars and may be living in a apartment they rent. you wont have a standardized living unit even after 20 years most likely

>spartacists
>sucessful

Pick one.

You don't get to just called liberal media "the media", conservative news sources certainly were not sucking castro's dick. And also I just looked back at The New York Time's article and CNN's (and I assume you would consider these liberal and mainstream, you should) article on Fidel Castro's death, they both discussed how he was loved, yes, but they also discussed how happy many people were that he died. These articles were trying to be "unbiased", of course, the NYT still described him as a tyrant. Regardless, you're just distorting reality to fit your narrative.

American academics haven't been subverted at all, the overwhelming majority of college campuses are LIBERAL. At best they say stupid shit like "Karl Marx had some good ideas on Capitalism but full-on communism is bad, we just need socialism", they have no idea what they're talking about.

Where the fuck is the media trying to make Communism "hip and trendy"? These organizations are owned by wealthy businessmen, supporting communism is directly against their personal interests. At best these news articles are conflating Communism with Social Democracy, typical Bernie Sanders-esque policies.

And the nuance behind the "not real communism" statement is twofold: 1: Communism is a stateless, classless society, and as such it has not specifically existed; there is no such thing as a "Communist government", there are governments trying to achieve communism, but that is different. 2: There are differing opinions on Socialism. Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably, they had no separate definition. Lenin changed this, the Leninist definition of Socialism was a society between Capitalism and Communism, a society attempting to achieve Communism. Then there are various other Socialists who merely define Socialism as democratic, worker ownership over means of production.

Where it's been tried, it has failed to produce societies that rival the West's proposerity and living conditions. It has no capacity to make intellectual, medical, scientific or technological progress. It focuses too heavily on the poorest and least able, rather than facilitating the most able. It resulted in gulags and the slaughter of 2 million Christians, along with 100million deaths due to disastrous policies. It is generally anti-freedom, meaning people's lives are heavily controlled and this usually results in decreased happiness of citizens. - Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.

>You can't define individual needs without a free market to signal the value of goods.
Except communities which are organized horizontally with eachother can determine this. You can do the math to figure out how much food, clothing, etc. you need to live per year. And then you can work to achieve this. After the basics are achieved any and all advancements can be determined either by community, or particular individuals who have an idea; entrepreneurship does not die under communism, it takes a separate form without money.

>Men are motivated to work more when they're rewarded for more effort.
Except that work is a pleasurable thing, so long as it is not alienating, and it does not become monotonous. This is why unsatisfying, yet necessary work is best managed by having everyone participate, so the amount of hours necessary are minimized, and the amount of days between the hours are maximized.
Let us say no one in the commune finds pleasure in agricultural work, just for argument's sake. Yet everyone needs food to survive. Having everyone work in agriculture is the best method to minimize the amount of work in it. Kropotkin pointed out in 1892, if all of Paris were to become a commune, individuals could work roughly 5 hours a day, 12 days a year, and have enough food for everyone to eat. This was with the population of Paris in that decade, and also with the technology of that decade. Now with our larger population, and significantly better technology, there would likely be fewer hours of work and more days in between the next shift necessary. I personally don't think I'd enjoy agricultural work (and before anyone starts calling me a spoiled millennial, I work in construction), but I have no problem with a 5 hour work day, and I wouldn't even mind doing something like agriculture 12 days a year.

>Workers shoulde recieve the full value of their labour
BULLSHIT. So sick of commies usong this stupid fucking logic. A worker is entitled to only the payment he has agreed upon. If you want to work for a company but dont want to give up some value of your labour to your employer THEN DONT ACCEPT AND SIGN A FUCKING CONTRACT AGREEING TO IT. P.S there is literally nothing stopping communists to create worker led companies where they distribute the means of production among all employees, but they dont do it for some reason, gee i wonder why.

Look at me, nigger!
That's fucking why!

>These articles were trying to be "unbiased", of course, the NYT still described him as a tyrant. Regardless, you're just distorting reality to fit your narrative.
Bullshit, the majority of the coverage was how wonderful he was for the Cuban people. The "liberal media" was fawning over free healthcare he gave the people despite the fact the island looks like a complete dumpster fire. Sure, there may have been a footnote on the horrible things he did, but it was just that. A footnote.

>American academics haven't been subverted at all, the overwhelming majority of college campuses are LIBERAL.
Students are shown Das Kapital, the Communist Manifesto, and a whole plethora of far left literature, much of it is required reading. The academics understand it perfectly, they know exactly what they are talking about when they expose their students to it. You cannot look at the current state of american academia and say there isn't a huge bias towards far left ideology. I had professors openly admit they were marxists and praise the actions of Stalin and Lenin. One had a framed portrait of Che in his office. Who do you think riles up the students to go out and "bash fash." Themselves?

Where the fuck is the media trying to make Communism "hip and trendy"?
buzzfeed.com/thelisterite/ten-really-cool-ways-communism-is-becoming-cool-ag-301zr?utm_term=.unNrdkO03X#.auPw6d7vkb
Clickbait exposure is better than no exposure.

>1: Communism is a stateless, classless society, and as such it has not specifically existed; there is no such thing as a "Communist government"
This is making excuses. Multiple groups tried, and all failed, to achieve the utopian end state. As you have said in various ways that generally require a transition period, or the "communist state." They all failed, and it is a convenient write off to say it wasn't real. Despite the fact they were explicitly trying to achieve utopia and described themselves as communists one way or another.

Witnessed. Please archive. Thank you.

>buzzfeed com/thelisterite/ten-really-cool-ways-communism-is-becoming-cool-ag-301zr?utm_term=.unNrdkO03X#.auPw6d7vkb
archive.is/oQJqi

>This is what happens in Communist systems: Workers only receive subsistence...
This is false, I've known people who worked in the Soviet Union and they were well over-weight. The thing is, the Soviet Union had wages paid for different amounts of work, people who did more work, and did more difficult work, were paid more. It's just that everyone had access to the absolute basics of life, and everyone had a right to a job. Despite the bare minimums being accounted for, people still did more challenging work, because they wanted to, because they were inspired to.

>I mean the very fact that "communism" only exists in the minds of individuals
Except for two things: that Communism was the standard form of living prior to the Neolithic revolution, meaning 188,000 years of modern humans were entirely communistic (this is also one reason why why the "human nature" argument is stupid). And even moreso: that Communism has been achieve in the modern era. There were no states and no classes in revolutionary Catalonia, neither in Mahknovist Ukraine. There were several Communes in China which abolished money, and there was a free territory in Korea which was anarchistic (although to be fair, little is known about this region). Even now there are things close to communism in Chiapas Mexico and Rojava.

All the comparisons to religion in this image are fairly dumb. But it also seems like this guy barely understands what Dialectical Materialism is. It's looking at the conflicts caused by the material conditions that humans had around them. He looks at the contradictions in societies and how they will cause conflict, and how these conflicts will logically pan out. He also looks at how these societies will logically form given their circumstances.

And then we get to the "Communism killed a gorillion billion people" argument that's been shit on so many times. Communism doesn't make clouds stop raining...

Can't reason with commies. There is only one solution.

Because while it's a tool of authoritarianism it leads to the inevitable destruction of culture, religion, and most importantly human lives

...And it is a necessity to stop reactionaries from re-gaining power in a Socialist state. They will simply revert the society back to Capitalism because Capitalism will do anything it can to maintain itself. That's why we don't have free markets anymore, because free markets create instability significantly faster than regulated markets, and instability means the workers start revolting.

>The "proletariat" class Marx imagined was nothing more than a gang of blood-thirty killers.
And this is where I have to assume this person have never read a word of Marx, or maybe he read the Communist Manifesto one time and forgot half of what it was talking about. The proletariat aren't the members of the government, they're the individuals who do not own the means of production, and thus must work to survive, as they cannot subsist on their accrued capital.

>One interesting thing to point out is that the dialectic... The Problem is that Marx created this system...
And here is where I KNOW this person is making shit up, the Dialectic was not created by Marx, Jesus fucking Christ you can just use Google to figure that out. Marx did combine Dialectics with Materialism, but he created neither of them.

I love when commies say that "real communism has never been tried"/

>The only reason we don't drive nuclear powered cars is they haven't been tried
>The only reason we don't open blackholes to try and wormhole ourselves to the otherside of the galaxy is that it's never been tried
>The only reason we don't have a cure for cancer is that it's never been tried

Private property are things like factories and farms, they are not things like computers, Televisions, and houses.
>it has failed to produce societies that rival the West's proposerity and living conditions.
The Soviet Union was actually coming close to reaching Parity with the West, but it had to deal with shitty leadership that brought it down.
But far more importantly, you have to ask where the prosperity of the West specifically comes from, it comes from imperialism, meddling in 3rd world countries to maintain it's own power.
>It has no capacity to make intellectual, medical, scientific or technological progress.
Then what the fuck was all that technological progress that happened in the Soviet Union?
>It focuses too heavily on the poorest and least able, rather than facilitating the most able.
This is ideology, the "most able" often are not capable of doing their work, because they must find ways to sustain themselves, look at someone like Vincent Van Gogh for this, and because their ideas must be compatible with a market. Space travel is still not compatible with our market, and the only reason we've had recent work being done on space travel (SpaceX and Elon Musk and whatnot) is due to public research, and public grants, with private profit. But beyond all this, we must look at what "the most able" actually means, and I'd suggest you read the book "The Talent Code" if you want a look into this, because skills and genius thinking are developed from thousands of hours of practice and study, not from monetary wealth.
Not to mention, the most successful entrepreneurs tended to be those who were genuinely interested in what they were doing, and wanted to change and improve the world.

>they are not things like computers, Televisions, and houses.

Kys desu

Except, a worker still must do work SOMEWHERE, otherwise he dies. Poverty is force, death is force. Because capitalism relies on exploitation, all businesses must do this, otherwise they cannot compete, and thus, all people looking for work, no matter where they go, will be exploited.

This is also why the "there is literally nothing stopping communists to create worker led companies" argument falls apart. Because in order for a co-operative to function under Capitalism, it must make sacrifices which make it survive. And as we see with several larger co-operatives, the larger they get, the more capitalistic-in-nature they get.

I assume you're either an ancap or a libertarian, or some form of free market captialist, so I ask you a question: how do you prevent horizontal and vertical mergers in a free market?

Trotskyism.

Did someone say anti-commie memes!?

...

...

Did ya sneak over the border to SA for some internet, Mugabe? Now fuck off back to your commie shithole.

...

Because they prefer globalist Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos and Lloyd Blankfein

...

...

...

...

It's a shit ideology that has never worked and will never work, and only endorsed by people who also will never work and the scum of the west. Communism is for fags

> West's proposerity and living conditions

Soviets were actually too cucked to go and outright make the Western nations into their colonial puppets.

>It has no capacity to make intellectual, medical, scientific or technological progress.

That's why burgers were so buttblasted when Sputnik happened.

>It focuses too heavily on the poorest and least able

It focuses on able, not on some inbred faggots with daddy money.

>It resulted in gulags

Like something bad.

>and the slaughter of 2 million Christians

That 2 million (a bit less, but still) (((Christians))) are burning in Hell, currently. Those fuckers deserved that.

>along with 100million deaths due to disastrous policies

Russians are not breeding that much to cover half of their population in couple years, bong.

> It is generally anti-freedom

Freedom is buzzword. Made by (((good guys))) to keep goys from asking the uncomfortable questions.

>decreased happiness of citizens

(((Citizens))), that is.
Because those (((citizens))) actually has a possibility to get fucked up in the ass for their fuck ups.
Instead of blaming fucking teachers on the worldwide crisis.

...

You've known people who... STFU BITCH BEFORE I THROW YOU OFF A LEDGE YOU COMMUNIST PRICK

How about FUCKING BEING A WORKER IN SOVIET RUSSIA AND CEAUSESCU'S ROMANIA AND HAVING SUFFERED IMMENSELY BECAUSE OF A STUPID SYSTEM.

HOW ABOUT HAVING FAMILY THAT WAS PERSECUTED UNDER THE SAME SYSTEMS THAT KILLED MILLIONS, DEATH WHICH YOU CALL A "stupid meme" LIKE THE FUCKING 20 YEAR OLD LIBERAL DIPSHIT THAT YOU ARE, THINKING YOU KNOW SHIT BECAUSE YOU READ THE BULLSHIT THAT YOUR EQUALLY STUPID AND COMMUNST HUMANITIES PROFESSOR TOLD YOU TO READ.


FUCK YOU CUNT. I HOPE YOU GET TO LIVE UNDER COMMUNISM, THAT'S A THING TO HOPE FOR YOUR ENEMIES INDEED.

>Bullshit, the majority of the coverage was how wonderful he was for the Cuban people.
And then they'd go to the Cuban people in Miami, and show how they were celebrating his death.
>the "liberal media" was fawning over free healthcare he gave the people
Yes, they used the death of a famous person to push their liberal talking point, who would have guessed?
>Sure, there may have been a footnote on the horrible things he did, but it was just that. A footnote.
I think "half the damn article" doesn't count as a footnote. Like I would find here, for example:
web.archive.org/web/20161128103613/http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/world/fidel-castro-death-reaction/

>Clickbait exposure is better than no exposure.
And you're ignoring the further nuance I already pointed out. I also assumed you were going to provide an actual article, and not a fucking buzzfeed listicle, and you might want to make sure of that, because if you look further down you might just see something like this: "This post was created by a member of BuzzFeed Community, where anyone can post awesome lists and creations." This wasn't even made by a writer on Buzzfeed, it is literally just Buzzfeed allowing people to post whatever they want so they can make ad revenue on it.

>This is making excuses.
"Using definitions is an excuse"
Are you actively trying to be dishonest here or is it unintentional?

>As you have said in various ways that generally require a transition period, or the "communist state." They all failed and it is a convenient write off to say it wasn't real.
First off, the Socialist State leads to a Communist Non-state. And "they all failed" isn't a very good argument. Italian capitalist republics were crushed by feudalism, the Napolean took over France, the first attempts at Capitalism failed, if this conversation were happening a few hundred years ago, you'd be saying that Feudalism is the only way because Capitalism has failed every time it has been attempted.

>!

houses are private property.

If you hadn't lived through it then you wouldn't understand it. Only our ex-ussr comrades and some other countries that had the bad luck to have a communist regime will undestand the deep the hatred that this shit causes.

Last one I got. Anyone got any others?

For one, it doesn't work. Literally and ideologically.
For two, it has slaughtered millions of people just because they didn't like it. Ethnicity wasn't even relevant in this, although Jews got the big end of the stick once their puppets realised they were being gamed by (((them))).
For three, it causes economic standstill because there's no incentive to improve anything when you get paid the same as someone who's too sick to work more than an hour a day from all the previous work he was forced to do.
For four, it was all a charade. /leftypol/ will claim it was nationalist as evidenced by the USSR, Cuba and China, but the reality of it was that if they didn't push nationalist pride there'd be nothing to hide the satanic cruelty. You would be disagreeing with your nation instead of the system, much more marketable.
Finally, its entire motif is the redistribution of property by first forcefully appropriating it from everyone, paying everyone the same unlivable wage and only granting special privileges to its strongest pawns who'd keep the population in check with guns, sticks and gulag. Theft, slavery, tyranny in that order, and people call that fair? Fucking madness.

>Workers should receive the full value of their labor
>Taxes the living fuck out of workers

Shoggy doggy

>waaa waaa I'm poor I want more money

communism=globalism=caliphate

>and the slaughter of 2 million Christians

>That 2 million (a bit less, but still) (((Christians))) are burning in Hell, currently. Those fuckers deserved that.

And yet you want us to believe that you're on morally higher ground than the Nazis. have my deepest kekkles cause that was hilarious.

I'D RATHER SHOOT MYSELF AND TAKE ALL YOU DIPSHITS THAT WANT COMMUNISM WITH ME THAN HAVE MY BLOOD GO THROUGH THAT SHIT AGAIN.

FUCK YOU TIMES INFINITY.

I hate violence but I consider brutality against naive communist pseudointellectual edgelord teens TO BE A MORAL OBLIGATION.

THESE PEOPLE ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS, BLIND, ABSURD, NIHILISTIC, BLOODTHIRSTY, UNCARING, NARCISSISTIC INDIVIDUALS AND THE ROPE WOULD DO THEM GOOD

FUCK

Houses can be profited from, but the house you live in is not private property. If you have a second house that you're the landlord of, then that is private property.
AntiCom are the real Communists.
Going to admit this is funny.
The difference is that the people dying in that picture were Kulaks who refused to sell their grain when the people were starving, instead they burned it. They committed a crime and are being punished with death.
I'd be lying if I said I knew much abouot Romania under Socialism, but I HAVE talked to people who were personally workers in the Soviet Union, and they quite liked it and miss it.

>1 post by this ID

Pic related to your flag.
Communism has made South Africa into a murderous shithole that has 0.0% tourism and no future.

The ANC sings songs about killing white people with machine guns and you somehow have no clue why we dislike communism.

Would seem that communism clearly kills any kind of rational or critical thinking as well.

Stfu you cunt. You at most talked with the stupidest of the Russians, that without communism to gib dem foodz would've died out of incompetence, or with the smarter ones which were party members, thus a protected class abusing the shit out the normal people.

I'D TAKE YOU HERE TO LOOK SOME PEOPLE IN THE EYES AND TELL THEM THAT YOU THINK COMMUNISM IS A GOOD IDEA, JUST SO THAT THEY CAN SHRED YOU TO PIECES IN TEARS.

SHUT
THE
FUCK
UP

YOU DONT KNOW A N Y T H I N G AND BECAUSE YOU RE SO IDEOLOGICALLY INDOCTRINATED YOU ARE A LOST CAUSE AND I D RATHER HAVE YOU BEATEN AND GAGGED THAN MAKE THOUSANDS SUFFER ALL OVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF THE SAME FUCKING INSUFFERABLE LOSERS LIKE YOU THAT THOUGHT COMMUNISM IS A GOOD IDEA 100 YEARS AGO


KYS NOW OR SOMEONE ELSE WILL DO IT LATER BECAUSE OF HOW STUPID YOU ARE

>Creating a society without money
>Wanting more money
rllllly makin me think
Except Communism doesn't require international groups to interact. Capitalism requires a growing market, so it will naturally lead to globalism. Globalism is a symptom of Capitalism, and nothing else. Many, MANY things people on Sup Forums complain about are simply caused by Capitalism. Jewish manipulation of the media would not be possible without capitalism. Liberals would not exist without capitalism.

Then
>I want more stuff waaa waaa but I'm too lazy and retarded to get a degree
Literally every communist

It wants to destroy the white race

>Wanting more stuff but being too lazy
>Wanting a system where everyone has access to the basic necessities of life and where work is a requirement until it is abolished
rrllly makin my noggin start joggin

You are retarded
>communist
Oh that was a given I guess

...

The funny thing is, people on here praise Russia's sense of nationalism and military prowess, but those are total carryovers from the the Soviet days.

Russians are patriotic BECAUSE of their commie past, not in spite of it

Not a defense of communism, btw.

Stalin had monthly death quotas fuck tard

No indidivuality.

I lived in communist Poland. Tickets... Tickets literally fucking everywhere. Tickets to get vodka thay lasts one month, trade tickets with pawel because I don't smoke and could use other items.

Gas for cars every other day depending on your last name.

Inb4 'That's not true communism

Fuck you communism. In capitalism, I have the ability to be an individual, not literally the state.

Right. It's not because half the world was communist at one point and it collapsed in bankrupt failure, much like Venezuela. I mean there are the bright spots like Cuba and North Korea.

Late stage communism

What a fucking idiot.

STOP FALLING FOR THESE DUMB FUCKING SLIDE THREADS YOU MORONS!!!

Jews clearly do not dig the capitalism or why would they even bother indoctrinating you to spout your feelings about it.

Not sure the "Jews love capitalism" thing is going to sound good when Jews invented communism in the first place.

I love communism, great way of culling slavs, chinks and spics. We need to introduce it to Africa to deal with their over-population problem shitting up the rest of the world, can't breed like rabbits if they're all starving to death.

By it's very nature it doesn't respect private property rights and when taken to it's logical conclusion, doesn't respect any rights.
Any reason to justify taking someones private property can also be used to justify taking their lives. The only acceptable reason to take either is because that person committed a crime. "Because the means of production should belong to the people" is not a valid reason to deprive someone of their rightfully earned private property or their life
To say nothing of the fact that people seem to have wildly different ideas as to what communism is. Is everyone involved voluntarily? Then you can count me out, I'd rather pack up and move somewhere that respects what little private property I have than be forced to share it. If it is compulsory and not voluntary, how will you control the system of people? If you purge everyone there's no one left to use those means of production you liberated. I've heard some refer to anarcho-communism as "simply generosity" and in response I say, is it truly generosity if it is being forced from me? Does that not defeat the whole purpose of generosity?
Critics of communisms opposite, capitalism, claim that the working class is basically slaves under capitalism. I challenge them to find any slave who has lived so comfortably as we do, with such healthcare and entertainment technology made available and enough food that obesity kills more than starvation.
I also say that I'd rather be a "slave" to one corporation under capitalism than a slave to all my peers under communism

But hey what do I know

Actually Africa's already flirted with communism, but no ones noticed because Africans always starve

The final redpill is the Godpill. It's for you the only way to protect yourself against Islam indoctrination and marxist evilogy. Your believe in yourself can never compete with a real ideology. You alone are not strong enough to defend yourself against Islam and marxism. Christianity Offers you a real strong believe, rather a way of living, able you to protect your friends, family and values. Your believe in yourself can waver. Believe in God is eternal. You can't kill or destroy a believe. Unless you kill all the believers. You as only believing in one person that is yourself, can easily be destroyed. You are just one, and we Christians are many but God is the greatest. Our fate keep us in place and keep us strong. And if one of us dies his believe will spread and it will strenghten our fates even further because he will go to God. It is that kind of dedication what is needed to protect and fight against the Islam and marxism, because they do the same. And you stand no chance against them or us Christians.

Deus vult, Gott mit uns.

Communism doesn't work.
Communism has never worked.
Communism will never work.
Communism doesn't work.

But... But.. Shhhh! Communism. Doesn't. Work.

Living in a Communist society sounds like such shit, I don't want to be equal to everyone else, I don't want to have to attend fucking meetings where I have to vote on what course the factory should take and I don't want to live in a society without religion.

>it takes a separate form without money.
Good luck with that...

I know the standard reply to this is "b-but that wasn't actual communism", but that wasn't actual communism.
Just like foreign fascism was never real fascism, they never understood it

Thing is, real communism can never be archived, so why even bother

I've looked at the people who support communism and they're ugly and repulsive so I don't want them happy.

>Gets all his points proven wrong
>Calls me a retard
Ayyyyy atleast you give up.

Because the US was creating coups absolutely everywhere, and the only nation that was able to support the smaller socialist states, the USSR, was taken down by reactionaries who gained control of the government. Venezuela fell because of the Oil Market crash. The unrest is caused by right-wing agitators funded by the USA.

Because you're deluded into thinking "Jews want Communism", and you're only argument for it is "Karl Marx is a jew". I would highly recommend reading the book "Capitalism and the Jews" by Jerry Muller, he explains why Jews are good at Capitalism, they were literate, and they also were allowed to be bankers. The literacy point is also exactly why many of the first socialist revolutionaries, Luxemburg as well as several bolsheviks, were Jewish, because they were some of the only educated people at the time. Communism is antithetical to Jewish power, it abolishes everything they use to have power. Money, banking, media are all either gone or radically changed.

If you still want to argue that rich, powerful Jews want communism, you're merely deluding yourself, and if you're deluding yourself no amount of reasoning and evidence is going you make you un-delude yourself.

>the USSR, was taken down by reactionaries who gained control of the government.
The USSR died trying to keep up with capitalism economically at least on the defense side and because it's a shit system which expects people to do for the good of the "party" for glory and trinkets.
Never going to work.

Communism sucks because you have to force people to do it. Seriously, if you have to kill millions of people to institute a political system they don't want, it's a bad system. In America we need a wall to keep people out. In communist countries their walls are to keep people in. In incompatible with human nature and has been proven time and again a shit economic system.

actual communism is statelessness after a period of socialism to transition.
Good luck with that.

Saskaņas Centra balsotājs atrasts

Oh shit I remember that, the poor soviets were paying a small fortune for a big mac because it was real food, lol. Think of how bad it really must have been.

Then you don't have any problem with collective bargaining?

It's almost as if the best entrepreneurs tend to be people who just want to make the world a better place and love doing their work simply because they find it enjoyable or something.

Except the USSR had enormous growth for several years.

Yet again the human nature argument, can someone for once give a specific answer to what "human nature" is? It's such an obvious attempt at using a vague term so you don't have to commit to an argument.

From each according to ability to each according to need means the young and healthy get to work for nothing and the unemployable get a free ride equal to the workers. You better build a wall to keep them in.

>capialism relies on exploitation
stopped reading

Communism, capitalism, its all made up tqbh

Because the only way to keep it from falling apart almost instantly is by using violence to force people to stick with it.

fuck. you.