>Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce
>Communism is a form of radical authoritarian politicalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce
So, whats the big difference?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
myredditnudes.com
twitter.com
if our big government wins then they have to eat shit
if their big government wins then we have to eat shit
The difference is one is hated by the Jews and the other was started by the Jews.
Communism is literally the absence of state after the means of productions have been redistributed to autonomous workers communes voluntarily working with each other.
Fascism is literally everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state. Oh that and a lot corporatism subsizised by the state.
Kill yourself retard.
For real?
National Socialism aims to breed an optimal race of human, whereas Communism aims to breed a permanent underclass of slaves.
>Communism is literally the absence of state
alternate universe episodes are not canon
same can be said of faux democracy and capitalist imperialism
the german third reich was based on a republican system of government
the soviet union was based on a social democratic system
all forms of modern government are basically similar and useless in effective control of their massive populations
>absence of state
Then who was anarchy?
wait is that the same chick that was antifa and got punched in the head?
did she get kinetically redpilled? wtf
When the Nazis got power, their priority was to kill the least intelligent people.
When the Communists got power, their priority was to kill the most intelligent people.
How is Communism not just statefunded Corporatism? Who is going to be able to function as a business other than the Monopolists after all of your state expansion and socialist policy? Also, your ideology doesn't have anything to do with voluntarism, you have to kill and murder for it to take power so don't pretend you have an moral high ground in that regard, the fact that we're having an argument is in itself proof against the "voluntary" nature of your cult.
Who is this nazi hottie? 10/10 would fuck and make 12 white babies
nah I think she just did some mental gymnastics whereby her doing a nazi photoshoot meant she was strong and empowered (TM)
she's an antifa that got famous for getting punched in the face at a rally and then did this photoshoot ironically
How about in practice, not theory, dingleberry?
Trips of truth
It's a shop of Antifas favourite whore, the one who got punched in the face after she attacked some guy. She's the one that was throwing wine bottles at people with m80s in it.
Marx didn't write much about practice. That came with writers like Proudhon or Lenin.
Then it's not communism, it's socialism.
This. Fascism is eugenic, communism is dysgenic.
The problem is that communism never gets past the soul crushing authoritarian part of the process. The Revolution can never end because in the end, the communists are revolting against human nature itself.
You faggots are worse than the AnCaps ever were, even during the Ron Paul shit.
its called photoshop
No, honestly. Communism is literally the utopian post-socialism stage. You want to criticize leninism, stalinism, maoism, bolivarianism, whatever else...that's various forms of socialism. Many of which are/were genuinely awful and deserve criticism.
But I get most people call "communism" what is actually "socialism". And the moderate reformists/gradualists like the mainstream social democrats (the most watered-down brand of socialists) are complicit in this since it allows them to "clean up" the name of socialism by saying all the failed attempts were actually "communism".
That's the idea, in a society where the means of production and the surplus labour of the workers are their own there will be no more need for a centralized state to have a monopoly on force to maintain a capitalist model.
Depends on the type of corporatism. If it is left-wing corporatism, like cooperatives, where the workers are also the "shareholders" then that's fine. However if the shareholders are not the workers and alienating them from their labour, then they are a bad thing.
>your ideology doesn't have anything to do with voluntarism
It does once the capitalist yoke on the means and relations of production have been broken. Why would the worker not want to be entitled to the wealth he helped create?
>you have to kill and murder for it to take power so don't pretend you have an moral high ground in that regard
We don't. We're pretty open about wanting class warfare and a revolution against the working class.
The state will totally disappear this time guise!
Have we ever given you a reason to not trust us?!
Communists are too busy denouncing each other and stealing each others shit, to grow food.
en.wikipedia.org
Communism.
Is.
Imaginary.
You are like a Christian talking about "getting to heaven" where there is no suffering.
youtube.com
They're both anti-liberty assholes.
That makes em both the enemy.
I don't disagree, that is a huge problem that the vanguard party succumbs to internal politics and develops/turns into a nomenklatura/ new bourgeoise.
HOWEVER, it does not change the definition of the words. Socialism is an attempted transition towards communism. So far, all have failed I will not dispute that. If OP had said socialism instead of communism, I probably would have just said nothing and moved on instead of making a post desu.
Historical materialism disagrees with this.
>autonomous workers communes voluntarily working with each other.
This already exists. It's called volunteering and I bet you do none of it.
that woman is a degenerate whore
NOT IN MY REICH
dialectic reasoning is so fucking shitty it really activates my autism.
You don't know me like I don't know you.
And no, the comparison is poor. Free association between communes is one of the necessary criteria for a state to be declared truly communist. That means anyone can form voluntary arrangements with anyone else in order to improve production and/or its means. It's much more encompassing than "charity volunteering", although the words are the same.
Read more.
What happens if you don't want to be in a commune?
...
I already said. Free association. If you don't like a certain commune then you are free to leave it, you can always join another if you don't particularly like the one you came from.
However I will state that other members of the commune withhold the right to bar you from the goods produced by that commune's owned means of production (or exchanged for said local products with other communes) if you are deemed to be idle and parasitic. So yes, being a lazy ass bum could get you deprived of the communal goods of that commune. But you're always free to move on to the next commune and try your chance there. Hell, maybe you'll find a trade you can actually ply there. Or get barred again if you're lumpen proletariat.
But that's only a problem during socialism stage, during communism the scarcity problem will have been solved (most likely through automation) and idleness will not become a problem anymore. Although it would not be exactly a very fulfilling existence.
What happens if half the country like me don't want to live in your gay commune? They want their own life, house, family and not your version of utopia, their own instead?
>A rose by any other name would smell as sweet
You say communism is one thing, BUT every application of it is the definition of fascism. So, is communism just a hypothetical concept then like faster than light travel? Anyone that claims to be a communist is really just a fascist. What proof is there otherwise?
>in a society where the means of production and the surplus labour of the workers are their own there will be no more need for a centralized state to have a monopoly on force to maintain a capitalist model
>no more need for a centralized state to have a monopoly on force
What happens when one worker decides to stockpile his work (atomic bombs) and then demands the wives of ever other worker has to sleep with him? Does the cuck shed belong to the people in your utopia?
Nazi porn thread?
Communism is also not a reality, so when he said:
>"communism is [a description of what ACTUALLY happens when people attempt to reach communism]"
he was correct in the practical sense. He is using the [practical application] definition of communism, you are still using the [unproven fantasy] definition.
Historical materialism is unfalsifiable and therefore worthless
>not a very fulfilling existence
Says you! Where does it say that you can't make your life worth while by studying and creating what you are truly passionate about? I'd think the exact opposite actually, that would be a very fulfilling life indeed!
Who says we can't take his bombs from him and the wives can ignore his demands?
Bad shop is bad.
...
Cant*
Unshooped is best
Is that moldylocks? LMAO
Would totally love to put a right wing rape baby deep in her womb. Hairy pussy or no hairy pussy.
>This kills the an-com
>turns out basing your identity on something temporary [muh class] is retarded
There isn't a difference really. The reason that both the no good reds and the piece of shit facists hate each other is because they have to fight over the same people and mindsets. It's the same thing socially, one just allows for personal property with the understanding that the government can intrude at any time vs. the other that decides there is no such thing.
They're both retards
Just imagine the smell
That is some bullshit definitions.
So in game terms it's like one is a license that can be revoked whenever, while the other is like streaming a game with a subscription service. Both are fucking shit and ruining vidya btw.
If you can find a way to have a perfect communist society why cant that guy find a perfect way to stop you from taking his nuclear weapons? And if he has a larger benis than yours why wouldnt your wife sleep with him? If all workers have equal access to resources what incentive does she have to be faitful to you?
>country
No such thing anymore as communism implies internationalism has succeeded and all pockets of capitalist-owned means of productions and landowning worldwide have been redistributed to the workers.
>don't want to live in your gay commune
Then go make your own elswhere. Communism has nothing against ethnic or cultural communities, only as long as they do not seek to subvert communism by exploiting and alienating others from the labor of their work.
>they want their own life, house, family and not your version of utopia, their own instead?
would be completely illogical in an actual communist state. Personal property would largely outclass what most petit bourgeois own currently as private property.
Under socialism, that's another story and if you actually tried to reinstate capitalism, then yes, you most likely would be gulaged after being trialed by your local worker's elected council.
Don't be a reactionary, comrade.
>FtL
>hypothetical
You know we have already discovered particles which do precisely that? I guess every research lab out there should simply close because we're not "there yet".
>is the definition of fascism
Nah mate, fascism is an authoritarian nationalistic ideology that exalts the nation above the individual and believes in solidifying its autocratic rule through severe state regimentation of economic and social norms. Usually involves some sort of palingenetic myth of national and/or racial rebirth. Very esoteric, spooked stuff.
Socialism/Communism on the other hand is purely an economic theory and seeks to abolish the state in its final form. But I already explained the differences in my first post, if you can't understand basic english then I can't help you.
>stockpiling his work
Who cares, if its own work then we will defacto be encouraged to reinvest into the commune's plied trade. Or another. It doesn't matter as long as he doesn't start exploiting other people to steal their surplus. Bad kulak.
Literally everything.
Fascism/NatSoc- The state and the people (race) are one in the same. Nothing can be done to harm the state (read "people"). A leader is given power to take action on behalf of the people, unlike the current lying and bickering do-nothing system we have now. The economy is controlled to protect the people, no economic endeavor may be undertaken to harm the state (again, read "people"). This includes globalism, outsourcing, and flooding the job market with low wage immigrants. Private property is allowed and encouraged as is private enterprise, just like in our current system. In fact businesses were privatized under fascist control.
Communism-
You are an equal pawn to the controllers of equality- the state (and by "state" i mean just that, the small ruling party who are a *bit* more equal than everyone else.) You have no right to property of any kind and are stripped of identity to reinforce equality. The economy is controlled to benefit the ruling elite of the state, while the equal proletariat continuing being equal in misfortune. There is no upward mobility, as everyone is "equal" and the ruling elite wouldn't dare let anyone in to their circles. But at least everyone is "equal."
Step it up faggots
>by studying and creating what you are truly passionate about?
But THAT'S labour too, friend. By idleness, I mean true unproductive behaviour. Basically NEETdom who are the lumpen proletariat.
If you want to write, sing, dance, create, then you are producing something of value. Services are still products, it's basically economics. Communism is not purely about industrialism and/or agrarianism.
>unfalsifiable
That's the good old Popper dilemma. I admit that's a fair critique at first, and it has been addressed by better qualified marxists than I. I will concede it is a serious point of contention and a reason why many marxists give up on violent revolutions because they feel they cannot ascertain with absolute certainty that socialism will guarantee improvement. Although it is undeniable that class warfare throughout the millenia, slowly but surely, led to progressive redistribution of wealth amongst all individuals.
Going for a smoke, lads, don't shit your pants if you don't get a (You) immediately.
So basically your going to have to butcher half the planet to achieve your utopia. Its a stupid ideology on paper and its even more flawed in practice.
Really makes you wonder why jews push communism.
Don’t show pics of snatchsquatch.
>doesn't address any of the points
>just throw a strawman instead
Sup Forums btfo yet again?
>Facism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce
> Comunism isIn political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal")[1][2] is the philosophical, social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money,[3][4] and the state.[5][6]
Communism includes a variety of schools of thought, which broadly include Marxism, anarchism (anarchist communism), and the political ideologies grouped around both. All these share the analysis that the current order of society stems from its economic system, capitalism, that in this system, there are two major social classes: the working class—who must work to survive, and who make up the majority within society—and the capitalist class—a minority who derives profit from employing the working class, through private ownership of the means of production—and that conflict between these two classes will trigger a revolution. The revolution, in turn, will establish social ownership of the means of production, which is, according to this analysis, the primary element in the transformation of society towards communism
so YEAH NICE TRY THOUGH
Nobody wants to live in your shitty gay commune dude. We want stuff, property, cars, family. Some people even like having capitalist overlords and a hierarchy. You morons have been offering a better deal for almost two centuries and failed to deliver every time. Gulags are just as retarded and not even remotely justifiable as Concentration Camps. The only one BTFO is whoever paid for your education. Your even worse off than the ignorant.
Person A wants to kill person B.
Person B also wants to kill person A.
Person A opposes person B, and person B opposes person A.
Both commies and nazis want increased state power. The difference to whom the guns are goint to be pointed.
Of course they oppose each other.
For one Nazis weren't Fascist.
...
...
What? It was a government that controlled where your money went and was in it for the benefit of the group not the individual. Seems pretty fascist to me i.e left wing.
god i want to be inside of that so bad
One exalts your soul, the other crushes it.
...
>WAAAAAH MUH HUMAN NATURE
classcuck : the post
>You know we have already discovered particles which do precisely that?
Except we have not. The measuring instruments were calibrated wrong.
>Who cares, if its own work then we will defacto be encouraged to reinvest into the commune's plied trade. Or another. It doesn't matter as long as he doesn't start exploiting other people to steal their surplus.
It matters because if one worker has more force than another they can change the "Communist Utopia" into anything else imaginable and no one would be able to stomp them from doing so.
I want to sniff and lick that hairy asshole
i bet she pushes out nice fat shitlogs. those bare feet are also looking tasty. Looks nice and sweaty and salty and stinky
Not only will you have to butcher half the planet to achieve your utopia, so goes the best genetics as the only people to sign up for your communes will be losers, victims, drooling morons and the low testosterone idiot intellectuals dumb enough to believe in your drivel.
...
Fascism is not left wing. Its hierarchal, traditionalist, militaristic, and concerns itself with the conservation of the founding stock and mythos of the nation. It only differs from hard right republicanism or hard right libertarianism by its usurpation of certain economic policies and/or principles. It would be very anti-left wing.
>if one worker has more force than another
Impossible, only worker councils can wield political power and propose legislation. Which is why the only political threats during socialist stage are from outside through foreign imperialism, and from within through corruption of the vanguard party. The latter is what leads to Stalins and Maos and Pol Pots.
Hence why there is a split between various communist movements. Some believe socialism should withhold dissolution of the state til the later stages (standard coms), some believe it should occur immediately (ancoms), some believe the problem lies with the structure and advocate for political power through workers unions rather than communes (syndicalists), etc etc.
Sup Forums thinks itself so smart asking those gotcha questions when in reality it's something socialists have been debating, researching and experimenting with for decades. A bit presumptuous desu.
Has someone sent these pics to her parents? Would love to know what they think of them.
That's not what communism is but ok...
(It's actually a system in which the worker has control over the means of production. Authoritarianism under such a system wouldn't make sense. Marx didn't even intend it to be authoritarian in the long run (excluding the transitional period of the Dict. of Prole.))
>the best genetics
*modernises agrarian state in a generation*
*crushes your 3rd reich*
*goes to space*
*halts your imperialism*
*seduces your intellectuals*
pssht...nothing personnel kid
Fascism and national socialism are two different ideologies, you idiot.
kekked
>implying the people running the communes aren't the state
>trying to imply that every worker will have a say when instead what you'll actually get is a smaller collection of greedier/smarter workers forming committees who "oversee" the "allocation of resources" to the retard workers who will all end up starving because the committees take their resources from them and give them a quarter of a potato every day since that is the standardized ration; there is no candy, there are no hamburgers, there is no pizza. The state-not-state cannot have some people getting burgers while others get a quarter of a potato, now can they?
I can't believe there are people who actually follow this meme ideology.
>Took four empires to crush Nazi Germany (US, UK, USSR and France)
>Both space races were Germans on both sides (working for US or USSR) racing each other to the moon. Where has either space program gone since Von Braun died? Nowhere.
>Communism collapses, former east bloc countries adopt winning system for obvious reasons.
>Intellectuals are idiots anyways. (See Taleb). Everybody but losers, victims and morons know that communism is for idiots.
Not really, if anything National Socialism was fascist interpretation of Spengler's Prussianism. Its late Sven, don't you have a bull to prop for your wife you cuck?
>took four empires
actually it did not, the USSR did not join the war til june 1941 after hitler broke the ribbontrop-molotov agreement by invading soviet territories during operation barbarossa. By then France was BTFO'd, the UK in lockdown, and the US only declared war in late december 1941. Meanwhile Germany had Japan, Italy, Ukraine, Hungary and other satellite states (including former ally colonies) under their thumb. And the only opposing player on the playing field capable of making any moves was the USSR. And the european theater was mostly dominated by soviets and later Brits, frog resistants, and some americans - but only after june 1944. Kursk happened in 1943 and was the turning point in the war after which hitler went from a global offensive strategy to a defensive one.
>Both space races were Germans
Actually no, the US stole most of them. the USSR, however, spied on you. LMAO. See operation Alsos.
>Communism collapses
No, the USSR did :^)
>Intellectuals are idiots anyways
Then you don't mind them teaching marxism. Good prole, we may make a comrade out of you yet.
And their research hasn't really gotten them anywhere, has it? They cannot get rid of the state and end up taking on the politic of the state they overthrew in the interest of the workers, get frustrated and start murdering to burn through the final problem of higher management.
Sometimes a shitty commune is going to fall apart, and upper management has to put it back together. You don't have the funds to pay the whole commune, so workers stop working. Other countries get pissy at your aggressive threats, somebody has to pay the police, there's gotta be Mail, firemen, city planning and infrastructure, sometimes the commune is going to fail to take care of that.
>WOW I CAN'T EVEN
lmaoing @ ur lyf rn
Maybe skip the dictatorship?
fascism:
>I'm better than you
Comunism:
>I'm the same as you
Both super left wing, both almost the same.
Fascism is just for cowards who love to hurt other people because they're in a high position to do so.
You're retarded. Read a dictionary.
>only socialist states experience economic crises
really gets culls your kulaks
Besides the battle for gradual socialism is not over yet, the neoliberals are a pain to both the far-left AND the far-right but they are evidently on the defensive since the 2007 crash. Hopefully once that beast is crushed, social democrats can start being red again. Workers movements and unions and syndicates and parties are absolutely everywhere. Just like you're not going away, neither are we :^)
Fascists reject materialism, or the theory or attitude that physical well-being and worldly possessions constitute the greatest good and highest value in life. Instead, fascists strive for a higher ideal in the self, and for the nation. Fascists also reject dialectical materialism, or the abolition of private property and enterprise, while also rejecting the doctrine of international capitalism in lieu of a deeply nationalized form of private enterprise.
that's what ancoms are about desu
Battle of the Atlantic, Atlantic Wall, Defense of the Reich (bomber defense), African Campaign, and later the Battle for Italy all drained off manpower and materials. The eastern front did not happen in a vacuum. Italy, Hungary and Ukraine were not empires. Japan could be considered one I suppose but with oil supply and really only engaged against half of the one of the four main allied empires. So my point stands, Germany took on four empires from a minimal resource base at great manpower disadvantage and kept it up for six years.
The first of these, the R1, was a replica of the V2, built by German prisoners under the guidance of Sergey Korolyov. Korolyov was a rocket engineer who was soon able to improve the original German design.
China, Vietnam, East Bloc, Yugoslavia and all the little backward communist asshat clusterfucks collapsed at the same time.
Nobody listens to Intellectuals any more except clueless millennial snow flakes.
Read Evola.
>actually a good post on Sup Forums