What IS communism and why do you hate it so much? can someone please describe it to me in a couple sentences?

what IS communism and why do you hate it so much? can someone please describe it to me in a couple sentences?

I thought communism was good but I came here and everyone hates it so I do too. It's a bad idea.

...

oh wait wrong pic

literally not an argument. can you try contributing to my thread instead of shitting it up with gook cartoons? thanks

Communism is where the intellectuals from the wealthy echelons come and jerk each other off. They pretend they are doing meaningful work but in reality all they're doing is writing texts inaccessible to the so called 'working class' they wish to empower.

In essence communism is 100 different splinter groups with their own ideologies so there is no one communistic system.

so why is it collectively hated by Sup Forums

>communism = slavery

its simple math.

The state seizes all means of production and promises to eventually turn it over to the people
All give for equal outcomes
Which is fucking retarded because you can't expect humans to all be equally productive because of genetic and cultural differences, let alone the quality of work now means nothing because everyone gets paid the same.

Communism works fine for bees. It might even work for a very small and homogeneous community. But for a national government, it is literally against human nature.

this is more or less the kind of response i was looking for, thanks

Communism has never not resulted in a significant number of deaths directly related to preserving the economy. Stalin killed more people than Hitler did just to keep everyone living in the same level of poverty.

bump

why the fuck is my thread not getting to page 1

Communism is the abolition of all private property.

Absolutely anything and everything you possess is nothing more than a resource which would be better utilized under the direction of an educated technocratic elite, as opposed to an ignorant 'owner' of private property. That includes your life, your mind, your labor, and your fucking bodies. If some useless eaters have to die to supply Rockfeller, Cheney and Soros with new hearts, than so be it.

It's this boogeyman that the republicans keep speaking of. I think it has something to do with obamacare and college tuitions

i except a better answer out of someone with a commie flag, faggot

I expect your mom to come over and suck my dick any second now

isnt that what we have right now in germany ?

I can describe it in a single word:

Hunger.

Actually, Stalin killed slightly fewer people than Hitler (around ten million) while turning an agrarian peasant society into a heavily industrialized one, though some living standards like housing size were lower than in the West by the end of his reign.

100 million dead

Commies destoryed my grandmas family and murdered her parents, my gramps lost his sanity mowing down gooks in Korea and on top of that the ideology is garbage tier idealism.

more like why not

BS, it became shit under gorbachev.

Everyone is supposed to be "equal" under communism but it never works out because someone always either gets cheated or people naturally rise above the others.

Also, one of the biggest communist principles is "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" but if you really think about that, it means that those with a lot of needs force others to work even more. That's unfair to those workers because they don't get to enjoy any of the fruits of their labor even if those with said needs are incapable of producing anything to benefit the whole.

Communism fails to provide incentives for workers and citizens to work hard and be productive.

And the people who think gays, trannies, and the mentally and physically disabled would get better treatment under communism is a huge joke. They would be the first to die because they are too much of a burden for everyone else to deal with.

>society begins
>people trade freely

>imagine a village
>one villager is exceedingly good at collecting and processing coconuts
>begins to build machines by himself that aid him in his coconut collection/processing
>even gets one of the villagers to operate the machine in exchange for some coconut
>other villagers are terrible at collecting coconuts
>some even starve
>villagers ask Coconutman to share all the coconuts he's collected, since he has more than he would ever need
>coconut man says they are his coconuts and he will only give coconuts if you trade something.
>other villagers get angry and kill the coconut man and split the coconuts he has amongst everyone
>slowly the coconuts run out
>everybody starves like before since coconutman is dead

thats communism

>why work when I'll still the same gubment cheese
>everybody does it
>breadlines

Bullshit numbers you got there, Mao and stalin combined killed 101 million people. Pic is even worse then the bullshit black book of communism

And the machines dissappear?

Basically ignore everything about humanity and focus solely on class divide, declare the upper class as inherently evil and force a system in which everybody shares everything with each other regardless of contribution.

That's not even the real reason why people hate communism, the actual reason is you must be so obsessed with it to the point of infecting everything with the ideology so you can force a revolutionary overthrow.

So basically nothing in life can be fun, it must all lead to a violent revolution. That shit is inevitably annoying as fuck as you can see with modern day Antifa.

Imagine not liking communism after 30+ years of this.

user, his mom ís secret police

>Communism is the motherly family instinct for distribution applied to the entire nation.
>It's such a great idea that it has to be enforced at gunpoint.
>In communism, walls are built to keep people from escaping.
>In capitalism, we build them to keep barbarians out.

-Abolish private property, still has personal property.
-Dictatorship of the proletariat, democracy included
-worker ownership over the means of production
-collective effort
-inevitable

It's an interesting idea that sounds great at first glance. People share and give equally to everyone so that no one is poor and no one is rich. Everyone has equal economic and social status. Sounds good.

But, overall people are driven by greed, not a desire to work together and share. Communism is sharing. If you work the hardest for gain, you will instead be forced to give away your excess goods for the sake of equality. So why work harder?

Not to mention it requires extreme government control and strips away freedoms.

continuation:
>the village coconut man taught to use machine begins becoming new coconut man
>villagers once again see "greedy coconutman with all his coconuts"
>coconutman2 sees what happened to coconutman1
>destroys capital and leaves

alternative:
>no villager will touch the machine since they will become new coconutman
>why work when they see you will have your coconuts taken away
>villagers simply wait until new coconutman arrives to steal from him

Things declined rapidly in the late 80s and went totally to shit in the 90s.

Since he was the only one that knows how to operate them (We are talking theoretically right?)
They are now useless.

It's an internationalist totalitarian ideology based on class-based scapegoating. There's a lot of theoretical nonsense that attempts to justify this, but it is just another flavor of totalitarianism. Think Nazism but with petty bourgeois and kulaks instead of Jews, and international subversion instead of international conquest.

Its a terrible system which keeps 99% of population in state of cattle without any rights and keeps killing everyone till country collapses and commies are killed themselves by revolutionaries.

I probably should write longer copypasta for these threads, telling how it felt to live in USSR in 1970-1980s. Most people don't realize how much of hellhole it was and how happy we were when it finally collapsed.

They see the new coconutman as a proletariat manager though, that coconutmanager can be democraticly voted away. Productivity is ok

Yeah, that's kind of how I explained communism to my family.

Imagine you had a machine that would just make anything for you. Like a replicator from star trek. How would that help you?

I mean really. You'd think it was really cool. But would it actually improve your life? Would you maybe sit around and become more of an asshole and get bored and fight with your family?

Ok, so imagine communism is like murdering people to get one of those replicators, but it doesn't work that good and then it breaks completely after two years.

That's what communism is.

What, people worked for him, they know how to use the machines

I've spent the last month or two studying Communism.

Here are the basics:

>society progresses economically in stages
>one of those stages requires capitalism
>capitalism requires division of population into classes, ie "toilers" or proletariat and businessmen classes aka the borgeois
>the state exists to oppress the lower classes for the service of the higher classes
>communism says that eventually, we will progress enough and produce enough that capitalism is no longer necessary
>thus the class divide is no longer necessary
>therefore the lower classes should "seize the means of production" aka the factories
>it is literally communist doctrine that there must be a violent overthrow, where the proletariat kills and oppresses the higher classes like the businessmen, church, police,etc
>the state will take over all means of production and the economy will be planned by the state
>to each according to his needs, from each according to his ability
>this means you go to work not for a paycheck, but because of the "common good"
>the government takes responsibility for feeding you
>eventually, the state "withers away" and we are left with a classless, propertyless society where no one has private property and thus no one has more than anyone else

only problem is that every time they try it, the state fails to properly manage the economy and causes massive famines. in the 1920s, farmers were afraid to produce more than they could physically eat themselves lest they be targeted as "hoarders" and killed by angry mobs. so 10 million people starved to death (except for lenin, he died in a mansion because he deserved it)

no one wants to become coconut man

While I'm not saying communism is a good ideology, keep in mind that 99.9% of people who have an opinion on communism have not actually read a single line from Marx.

Because Sup Forums is working class and Communism is bad for the working class.

It's even worse than blaming jews because literally anyone could be a bourgeois. It's an eternal boogeyman.

> what IS communism
It's shit wrapped in a Christmas paper

by the way if the part about society eventually "evolving past the need for capitalism" sounds familiar, it's because it's the same argument used to justify Universal Basic Income.

UBI is repackaged communism, nothing more. what you need to ask is, "ok well once i have no job, skills or education because the government feeds me... what happens if the gov hits hard times and can't afford to keep my checks coming?"

you starve. the answer to that question is you starve.

The state owns everything, the state controls everything. Those who govern the state are basically absolute kings.

It's a mental illness, look what it does to society? Sure it's great in concept but only if it is relegated by God, it can never function by man alone.

>>In capitalism, we build them to keep barbarians out.

In capitalism, we build walls to keep the people we're stealing from out.

Fixed it for you.

you can actually learn more about the logical fallacies that fuel communism if you read Engels.

Your the first guy that answers honestly

100 million dead

>communism fails because the state doesn't manage the economy enough

comrade, do you mean they have not enough bullets to shoot those who don't want to go to work for the "common good?"

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest

The idea that the resources and means to production should be controlled by all people instead of owned privately. The method of achieving this is violent overthrowing of existing systems as Marxism only views things in relation to power and oppression.

Communists and the ideology itself is to blame for the worst tragedies of the 20th century.

Communism is the idea by Marx of a classless society, no government, no private property of the means of production.
If now you have a lot of shoe companies, with different brands offering different products for different markets, in communism (as Marx saw it) factories would be own by the workers, they would produce in excess and everyone could just go and take shoes as they pleased (only for their needs). In exchange, shoe factory workers would get free products from the other factories (clothes, can food, TVs, etc).
Society wouldn't need a government, because in Marxists philosophy everything bad in human nature comes from being exploited, or have been able to exploit someone.
(Being "exploited" in communist jargon, means being employed. If a capitalist made a profit by selling his house that he paid you to renovate as a contractor, you where exploited because the profits where made by your work)
Therefore, the poor only do crime because the system made them poor, the rich only do crime because the system made them rich, if everyone is equal there would be no crime (or it would be reduced greatly).
Now, to get to that point, Marx thought that society first had to be capitalist, in a highly industrialized country (like Germany or England), then a worked revolution would happen, and they would control the means of production and would have all the political power, then a socialist government would take place in order to transition from state capitalism (government owns the means of production) to true communism.

It's an ideology filled with obvious errors like not understanding how markets work, how mutual beneficial contracts for profit work, etc.
But "''intelectuals"" like it because "they" (shitty writers, shitty painters, conceptual "artists") don't produce anything normal people would consume on their own will, they would starve in a capitalist country if it weren't for "academia" grants.
The market is replaced by bureaucrats.

communism fails because governments can't do anything right. the reason they say "true communism has never been tried" is because theoretically, under a perfect government then maybe it could work.

but the problem is that this is real life. not only do we not have a perfect government, we don't even have GOOD governments. good government is impossible. the founders knew this, why is why we have a system that focuses on the LEAST BAD government.

self-interest is inherent to human nature (as it logically should be), which is why capitalism is the only way you can semi-reliably keep the economy functioning. government is inherently flawed and inherently inefficient. good government is impossible, it is automatically inept.

no government has ever made its people happy or successful. ever. that's what the communists fail to realize.

Now what about national socialism?

sounds good me desu

communism also fails to create a classless society. it abolishes society divided by property and instead divides it by ZEALOTRY, much the same as modern liberalism does.

the most zealous defenders of communism, the ones willing to put bullets in the backs of heads, will always be well fed. the nonbelievers will starve.

when bernie sanders lived in a hippie commune, he got kicked out because he wanted to be rewarded for spouting communist doctrine all day instead of helping with the chores.

communist bureaucrats live in mansions while the peasants starve. that's a class society, but one that recognizes only zealotry.

>what IS communism
Communism is the belief in a society without private property. Basically, everything is owned by the government and resources are fairly dealed out to those who need them - "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

The problem is, in order to work it expects people to give up their self-interest. Not only is this impossible beyond a certain extent, but it is also deeply immoral. ALL labour and charity must be voluntary, or else it is not labour but slavery, and is not charity but extortion.

i ordered Mein Kampf last night so once I read it I can work on that. I've still got a little bit of "The State and the Revolution" by Lenin left, he quotes Engels and Marx at length and provides a pretty full picture of communist ideals.

the parallels to modern American liberalism are striking, but not shocking.

Communism = Bolshevism = Judaism

>>eventually, the state "withers away"

This always gets me.

>sharing and charity are illegal
>no reason why state would wither away besides guessing about human nature
>you don't own anything, state maintains this
>uncontrolled violent overthrow

There is tons wrong.

Tell that to the Muslim Crusader parasites who literally could not sustain their own civilization without pillaging ours.

You mean about 9 million more than Hitler?

Le epic meme XD

Is Communism related to Fascism? If so, how?

machine breaks down after 6 months and no one has any idea how to fix it or make a new one because they are retards, which was a given considering they're commies

A lot of memes are true so that's not a very good argument. I bet you don't think mossad did 9/11 either.

It's a totalitarian regime under the guise of """EQUALITY."""" Idiots like it because they think once it's enacted they'll be the top dogs and get the best free shit but will just end up dead or ostracized

yea, the "withers away" aspect is pretty ridiculous. Lenin takes Engels word at face value and simply assumes that this will happen as a natural result of the revolution.

what you have to realize about Lenin is that he would say whatever he had to say to end his sentence with "seize the means of production." He'd tell you the moon was made of cheese if it would help convince you to seize the means of production.

It's basically because he knew once he could get the opening shots of the revolution started, his followers would finally be able to enact rampant cruelty and bloodshed. There is nothing sweet in life than justified cruelty, and simply giving his followers an excuse to let out their inner demons would cause them to revere him as a God.

And after tens of millions of deaths, rapes, and thefts, they do. He was right. Leftists revere the man who justifies their violent impulses.

A system in which the means of production belong to the workers rather than to bourgeoisie.
In theory, should provide much better opportunities for everyone than barebones capitalism, through equal wealth sharing. Since it was developed in the middle 19th century, its basis is contemporary industrial nations, e. g. England (a reminder that workers lived in awful conditions, worse than the farmers, worked 12 hours a day and still didn't have enough money for a suitable life). One of its points was its final form as a planet-wide system; in the early 20th century it came quite close to achieving this goal, with the crises after a wasteful, imperialistic WW1. It turned out that cooperation is less logical than egoism, so both international relations continued between nation states rather than classes, and the system built in war-torn Russia, the first socialist state to exist, became extremely repressive and controlling. All other socialist states were either supported by the USSR and built in its image (bueracracy, direct discource control, repressions) or got crushed by the Americans (Allende's Chile). It's hated here because Cold war memes didn't go anywhere, and the majority of people here are from the US.
tl;dr a supposedly fairer system that contemporary capitalism was; got mangled by reality. pol hates it because american propaganda and obsession with an even less realistic society.

Or the State fixes the price of coconuts, causing market distortions that end up destroying the entire economy.

Read this comrade

Lenin would have slandered modern liberals as "revisionsts," petty-borguois who embrace communism-lite as a means of furthering their influence over the lower classes. Leftists think of themselves as the intellectual class that Engels called essential to helping the proletariat achieve class consciousness. what they don't realize is that communism usually purges all but the most ardent, zealous followers (Elizabeth Warren will probably be spared but not many others).

the copy pasta about Commisar Jamal and Commisar Cletus comes to mind.

unworkable. unachievable. A unicorn the hunt for which unites the far left.

fucking revisionist.

honestly br0 going to pol to learn about anything is a bad idea especially le scary bad gommies

>Stateless, classless, monelyless society.

Somewhere between 40-60 million people died because of Stalin through executions or starvation

Capitalism is what happens by default in nature. It shouldn't even have a name.
Property is an inevitable natural thing.
Trade is a natural consequence of property.
Markets are a natural consequence of trade.
Banning what happens naturally is expensive.
Price controls fight natural negotiation.
Banning private property requires a totalitarian state, every time. This is why people constantly say 'That wasn't "Real Communism(tm)"'.
They say '"Real Communism(tm)" is anarchist.', but you can't resist Nature without a state.
The protection of property from ownership IS ownership. Do this in a decentralized fashion, and you have the same decentralized ownership of property.
These decentralized property owning collectives would still need to trade with each other, and this brings markets.
Therefore, under actual Communism, total state ownership is the only solution.
"Capitalism" still allows sharing and cooperation, though.
A collective can still exist within a completely lassez-faire market.
Are these advantageous? Let them compete as such. We have the digital know-how to manifest this.
Communism removes all incentives.
Communism is reverse eugenics.

communism removes selfishness by removing the opportunity to be selfish

if some one wants to make art fine. he will not be compensated for it. so nobody shills with art. it is pure but the soviets kinda specifically didnt want art to be a thing so much. its wasteful.

in theory because communism doesnt support religion (because the only reason to have a church is to make money) you end up with less bullshit

russia could have made it work if the west didnt gang up on them. china had more success because they went full on ant colony and didnt need any help which is why the west bribed them with outsourcing

Social equity.

This is Capitalism.

...

this

Communism is shit, Aussie. Stop pretending it isn't.

Communism is a polar opposite to Fascism.
Communism is based on a theory of Class Conflict while Fascism is based on a theory of Class Collaboration.

>Class Conflict: That hierarchies that exist in nature lead to conflict between the classes and so hierarchies need be done away with.

>Class Collaboration: That hierarchies that exist in nature cannot be effectively done away with and abuse from any position leads to violence and so hierarchies need to be organized better for the benefit of all sides.

Both groups obviously abhor one another. This is why Sup Forums gets on about Communists constantly and ANTIFA will speak of horrible groups as exclusively Fascists and supremacists.

Didn't know much about Lenin. Thanks for the info.

Absolutely not.
Instead of taking your food, the govt is taking your civil liberties and gives you gibsmedats to keep you fat and happy, so that you won't revolt against them.

If you mean fascist economy, it varies depending on each individual case.

If you mean strictly Nazism, then it was a mixed economy with populist overtones.
Hitler encouraged private property and industry, but only for Nationals. Tariffs on imported goods where there to encourage consumption of homegrown products. As limiting imports causes scarcity, they had to ration.
They were mostly coming up with shit on the go to appease the public as they saw fit.
I think of Nazi Germany as Venezuela. They had about 10 years of doing OK with government involvement in the economy, but likely would have failed on its own a few more years after that, if they didn't do more capitalist reforms.

>communism removes selfishness by removing the opportunity to be selfish

How is the state restrained from an opportunity to be selfish?

I was hoping for a clarification. From my understanding capitalism exists and is promoted within NS but there is a bubble of protection placed around it so it always benefits the nation and by extension its identity.

One word

Evil.

Go talk to an ex communist.

Those people die becouse they don't want to work or think to improve their conditions.
No one can help that.
On the other hand communism kills people who were doing just fine with bullet in the head or tortures.

>implying those numbers weren't much bigger before capitalism caught on

What?
Communism wants to abolish the state.

>can someone please describe it to me in a couple sentences?
No, honestly just read the literature if you want to understand it.
t.non commie