>Wages are set scientificallly
>Costs are set scientifically
>Nobody lives "behind" their needs (poor)
>Nobody lives "beyond" their needs (wealthy)
>Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains
What am I missing?
No we already tried communism it failed in Russia and China. You didn't know that? Geez, no wonder you have no idea how to greentext.
People often said that it worked in Yugoslavia, how true is this?
The part where in the blinding pursuite of equality you continueally errode everyone down to the lowest common denominator; Because it's easier to widdle someone's status down than it is to raise it.
The end result of Communism - of which Marxism is a mear means to that end - is a barren field surrounding a cannabalistic mother.
And you're sick enough to suggest that?
>brainlet: the post
>Marxism
>Scientific
OP really believes this.
>>scientifically
>>scientifically
Communism is as scientific as Bill Nye the fake scientist guy's sex junk.
t. bourgeois scum
Theory of value.
literally this
>step 1 collect underwear
>Step3 three profit
Communism lacks the ability to understand biology and natural law when applied to humans
NS on the other hand does
NS is the end product of evolution, if you believe in evolution you have to be one if think about it long enough
>Communism: Withering away of the state
MFW
It worked until Tito died
Although it was very nationalist for a communist country
Id rather die in a government induced famine than be exploited by the bourgeoisie
This is child-tier thinking, like when I was 5 and thought we could all just agree not to have wars. You can't just declare everything shall be perfect.
Also, using "science" like some kind of talismanic phrase. Lmao. Here's some science for you: blacks and natives are genetically stupider. Does your "scientific" wage formula account for that?
Do you believe in evolution?
You're missing that its not once yet worked in that manner, when things are "nationalised" they simply become a government asset and create a class divide and form of corporatism that capitalism couldn't begin to achieve.
Its quite simple, you have overseers of said things nationalised yes? Any internal checks or balance falls under federal command as well? Now the fed owns the corporation and the checks and balances, it can feasibly demand any price it perceives fit and you either pay into it, lose everything or face imprisonment.
Often out hear people say communism is a good "concept" were it not for human nature, that's not even close to true communism is sheer lunacy, the ideal that you're going to grant more power to a pervading government entity to reduce class division is an oxymoron and its why every communist government ends with people working for slave wages while beurocrats live in absolute luxury.
Is class divide a problem? To a degree yes but not a single person should be simply granted a decent living for breathing, unless you've a disability in life you deserve nothing but what you labor for.
All communist countries have a level of patriotism.
Yeah let's have patriotism, only to allow state socialism!
See, this is what they are doing, perverting every idea in the most twisted manner just to fit into their agenda.
Then why are Marxist so eager to flood our countries with foreigners, force us away from religion, and attack white people at rallies
It stifles innovation and the population loses its work ethic. It accomplishes this a couple of ways: if there is no reward for those who work harder, people stop trying since the outcome will be the same. Historically, the people who did excel under communism were often executed or dragged off to gulags for "oppressing others", not just people in power either, the best farmers were even eliminated. That's motivation enough right there to make sure you stay nice and mediocre.
That's just the beginning of the problems with communism, read some history on what happened in communist country's during their short existence, it repeats itself. Marx's ideology was fundamentally flawed at its core, he was working with historical / scientific knowledge of the 19th century, the industrial nation was in its infancy. That's why it has failed
EVERY
FUCKING
TIME
it's been tried.
Mass immigration drives down worker's wages and benefits the wealthy. Bleeding heart liberals are just useful idiots. Be careful how you throw around the label of "Marxist".
Communists are great at determining the ideal length of a bread line.
Let's do this, I just won't work and will fake illness to get welfare
Looks like Germany wants to shit up Europe and lose territory for it. Again.
>Marxist Socialism
It's a great idea. Make everyone equal by making them all equally poor and miserable.
Also
>(((scientifically))) set wages and cost
>Who sets these wages and cost? How is this determined
>Are the people who decide the wages and cost as equal as the common proletariat worker? Or are they 'more' equal?
Kill yourself nigger.
You forgot
>human beings
The system you laid out would be good for ants or bees, but unfortunately not for human beings.
So what's keeping you from being a national socialist?
We prefer class cooperation to class warfare strong national pride and beliefs that the individual is apart of something greater than themselves
Most national socialist want things like a living wage for workers and healthcare
Yeah that's literally Nationalism. Tito dindu nuffin btw
...
That's the problem with multiracial societies
So scientific ~100 million are dead as a result.
Ouch, you won!
>Wages are set scientificallly
No. Same for costs.
I mean, it might be "scientifically", but people don't give a shit about that.
>Nobody lives "behind" their needs (poor)
Without repressive apparatus that will kick the slackers to start working, you will have bunch of dindoos parasiting on others.
>Nobody lives "beyond" their needs (wealthy)
Haven't wealthy being totally ready to niggerify their community for the sake of being rich, I'd agree.
But you tend to underestimate human greed and interest in things outside their comfort zone.
>Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains
Not actual. They have shit to lose and risk, so they can be cucked by (((them))) in any way and won't bitch about it.
>So what's keeping you from being a national socialist?
I actually know history.
>class cooperation
No submission to parasites.
> tried communism it failed in Russia
Failed so much that Russia still tries to achieve it's living standard. Not to mention that birth/death ratio only recently normalized there and not much due to ruskies having more children or dying less.
>NS is the product of evolution
>Gets btfoed by communists
You have very perverted understanding of evolution.
Well since communism is a Jewish philosophy
I will say that you are the ones who submits to parasites
I recommend you read Stefan molyneuxs culture of critique
Don't forget that half the people still miss it, and you can literally see East Germany and East Berlin by looking who votes for Die Linke.
In a one on one battle between NSDAP Germany and the ussr
Germany would have won
Russia lost the most people in that war
>the best farmers were even eliminated
Best farmers were best only in usury and coercion. Their output would not best collective management of decent size, and their machinations on black market would only drive everyone down.
yeah, look how you turned out
>national socialist
The fact that you will literally call a Jew honorary Aryan and write White person into Jews if it fits your agenda?
Not to say that, by experience, most of you are VERY keen on the idea of being the national aristocracy and ruling the rast of the nation with Iron Fist?
IIRC, you could also see East Germany by their attitude to rapefugees.
fpbp
>Black and white pic of a bread line
Here you go my commie friend.
>all those niggers
REALLY MAKES YOU THINK, HUH?
...
>stefan molyneux's culture of critique
Ben Garrison actually wrote that, he used Molyneux as a fake name since he's Jewish
>wages are set scientifically
The only scientific way to set wages is through the market.
>Costs are set scientifically
The only scientific way to set costs is through the market.
>Nobody lives "behind" their needs (poor)
Except because as we've just established only markets can determine prices, productive efficiency will always be low.
>Nobody lives "beyond" their needs (wealthy)
Except because you've given the ability to set prices and allocate production to the Party, they all live well beyond their needs.
>Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains
Name me a single communist country with free movement.
There's not a single thing in your post that was correct. Marxism is a scam for Jews to grab power, period. It's happened every single time it has been attempted.
>don't use arguments against me when I don't like them
>implying Venezuela is socialist
>implying misrepresenting your opposition qualifies as an argument
wew lad
Thanks for sorting us out, leaf.
>v-venezuela isn't r-really socialist!
>proceeds to not explain his argument or his definitions whatsoever
Wow, I totally hate capitalism now. You've truly convinced me, comrade.
No true Scotsman? Give it up commie, you are wasting your life on an ideology nobody wants.
The revolution ain't happening.
>death camps because why kill 10% of the population when you can oops 50%
>an economy always falls out of balance with price or wage fixing.
>being equally poor sucks, just look at US wage stagnation
Commies deseve helicopter rides before they genocide the rest of us.
Here's also the best part about your pic: Not a single thing that it says actually happened.
1: Workers weren't oppressed in 19C capitalist industrial countries, they were oppressed in a bunch of countries regardless of their economic model.
2: The proletariat never overthrew Capitalism. It was always a vanguard of ideologues, criminals, and soldiers.
3: Never once in the history of any Communist country have they had a high level of production and sufficient goods.
4: Never once in the history of any Communist country has the state withered away, period.
So every single step of the Dialectic was empirically, provably incorrect.
Marx. Was. Wrong. Period. His methodology was trash because Dialectical Materialism is false, Historical Materialism is false, and he incorrectly understood the nature of Value, the nature of Economic Calculation, and the nature of Class because he was a low-information religious ideologue whose a-priori assumption was the inevitability of revolution and a change to a different economic and social model.
He was empirically wrong. There is no way to argue against this, so instead of trying to argue it Communists will inevitably just start posting Porky memes and screaming about exploitation because they know that they cannot actually defend their falsified beliefs rationally.
Venezuela protects private property. Only 14% of of the workers are in the public sector. Nationalizing a few industries and imposing regulations does not a socialist state make.
>
If the government says what it costs to make, and how much its sold for, how can it be proved that it is working? Only by comparing it to a free market. Who appoints the scientists? Who oversees them? Why wouldnt they lie and keep the profit for themselves like they always do?
We need to start enforcing anticommunist laws, preaching talmuddic shit should be punished by death
1. Revolution to overthrow the bourgeoisie
2. Replace it with socialist dictatorship made up of Jews
3. Property that was formerly owned by bourgeoisie is now managed by the state, so de facto owned by the Jewish dictatorship
4. ???????
5. Stateless, classless, communist utopia
What am I missing here? What happens in step 4?
>high productivity
You pretend to pay me, I'll pretend to work
>What am I missing?
120 million innocent people murdered simply for disagreeing.
>IT WASN'T REAL SOCIALISM
Heeeeere we go again.
>we only nationalized a few industries
>it wasn't REAL socialism
wew
your image:
>greentexting a reply to an essay
>without actually debunking the main arguments, only nitpicking which quotes came from which book Marx wrote and whether or not dialectics are falsifiable
>you would need... ...to falsify them
>gives no real world example of this
>Venezuela protects private property.
You're right, kind of like how all regimes protect the private property of the elite who don't want to starve like the proles.
>venezuela isn't socialist!
Weird, then why do they call themselves socialist? If they're not socialist, why are they all starving? If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck... it isn't a real duck?
>1 post by this ID
But seriously, why should the government, or anyone else besides me, determine what my needs are and whether I'm living beyond/behind them.
>scientifically
Read this. Then go play Alpha Centauri.
Science is not coming to save us.
Herp, that one has the bottom cut off.
Ah fuck it.
thanks, my dude, I got it on the googs
>Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains
This is 2017 tho, and there won't be any Proletariat in your Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism. Leaving everything up to AI and robots to do all out calculating and production for us is retarded. Why even bother having humans anymore?
i don't care whether you call it marxist socialism, or gooblonga oblungmanatah jubjublinglongism. if it requires you interfering with my life OTHER than when i violate a natural law right of another human or i have broken contract, then go fuck yourself, and if you won't, i'll end you.
>Then you realise US was importing food, because there wasn't produced enough to support 300 millions of people
US produces so much food that the government has to pay subsidies to farmers to stop them from crashing the grain markets, and the farming is all highly automated, and there's plenty more land sitting untilled.
The reason the US isn't a communist state is because nobody actually wants to live in a true communist state.
Go to NK