What exactly is the difference between someone who falls for the lie of Communism and someone who's able to see through it?
To me it doesn't seem like it's a "difference of opinion". To say it's a difference of opinion is like saying that 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 is a "difference of opinion"
It doesn't seem to be IQ related because there are plenty of "rural retards" who are still somehow smart enough to see Communism for what it is.
So why exactly do people still fall for it?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
newscientist.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
Communists promise lots of things that they are either incapable of delivering upon, or were never going to follow through with in the first place, and you don't have to be very smart to see through a scam.
Emotional under development. They don't understand the need for themselves having individual autonomy on an emotional level. That's why they are young and child-like.
Someone who is a rural retard knows that the world is not sunshine and rainbows, and forcing the nuclear families they like to share networth with the local hooker is not such a clever idea. A young kid however, thinks everyone is great and awesome and doesn't believe that 80% of the human population are soulless bugmen.
Don't you see an intellectual shallowness in your question?
>I can't point out how my opponents are objectively wrong and inferior, but I very much want it to be so, therefore I say that it is.
>thinks everyone is great and awesome and doesn't believe that 80% of the human population are soulless bugmen.
Spotted an autist.
>"Don't you see an intellectual shallowness in your question?"
>"Spotted an autist."
Brags about "intellectualism" then can't actually make reasonable arguments or rebuttals. Typicall of a commie.
>workers seize the means of production and can actually own it
They can act on their interest and sell labor for the highest bidder, and produce goods for the lowerst cost; aka, they have private property
>government seizes private property to keep people from owning it
Then we have an economic calculation problem and half of you retards would also say it's not real communism.
Your ideology is intellectually bankrupt and only preys on people that are emotionally underdeveloped. Talking with people like you only confirm my beliefs.
By the way, I'm also completely convinced that commie kids have an incredibly high rate of single motherhood. The main bulk of them are all the result of single moms.
>I can't point out how my opponents are objectively wrong and inferior, but I very much want it to be so, therefore I say that it is.
This thread isn't about proving how communism is flawed yet again because it's already been proven a hundred thousand times.
Regardless it's not like communists listen to rational arguments anyway. Which is the actual point of this thread - it's strange how the communist brain is seemingly unable to think rationally/logically, and when cornered resorts to either personal attacks or insane mental gymnastics and post-modernist sophistry
>Brags about "intellectualism" then can't actually make reasonable arguments or rebuttals.
A person who sees humanity as an 80% of soulless bugmen is an autist. What's unreasonable with that statement?
>They can act on their interest and sell labor for the highest bidder, and produce goods for the lowerst cost; aka, they have private property
Yes, they can. They can also be sold as cattle, or sold and exchanged with the land. Your point is?
>Then we have an economic calculation problem and half of you retards would also say it's not real communism.
Every government empirically permanently manages enterprises and sectors of the economy. No government is withdrawn from the economy in the modern world, bar failed states.
>Your ideology is intellectually bankrupt and only preys on people that are emotionally underdeveloped.
Marxism is one of the most intellectually rich ideologies, as it never ever had a shortage of intellectuals upholding it, like, say, fascism.
>This thread isn't about proving how communism is flawed yet again because it's already been proven a hundred thousand times.
And I didn't speak a word about converting you to communism. I addressed that your question is intellectually dishonest: you both claim that communists are inferior and confess that you can't point it out in any rational fashion.
Same thing that National Socialists here do.
"Man I bet I could find a way to make a better society. There's so many problems. "
>discover X text full of "answers"
>generally by the dichotomy and assumptions on face value because they sound right
>install authoritarian state
>dis is the brice of freedum :DDDD
CASUALTIES INTENSIFY
>confess that you can't point it out in any rational fashion.
please do point out where I confessed this
All -isms are slave management systems.
>please do point out where I confessed this
In the OP question, of course. You literally ask Sup Forums to validate your belief in inferiority of communists.
Communist tend to be girly wristed faggots with high IQs and low real world experience.
Most of them are social shut is with limited exposure to bad people and wide eyed optimism about the core good of other humans.
T.ex commie.
>Your point is?
You are either very low IQ, or you purposefully avoid thinking about an obvious point I made. So, the workers are not meant to actually own the means of production?
>Every government empirically permanently manages enterprises and sectors of the economy.
That's as untrue as it gets. Governments disrupt and damage the economy. Most of the genius "managements" by the government revolve around sanctioning your own population. A measure which during wartime an enemy will try to do to you.
>All -isms are slave management systems.
Well, what are you doing in society then? There are plenty of woods and caves where you can be free.
They don't know the jq
Communism = kike dictatorship
Not an argument
Well, duh, it's a question. If you dislike society in general so much, why don't you opt out?
We built a country that was meant to solve this issue and it worked pretty good.
I can still do whatever I want more or less and no one will stop me
Natsoc worked
Commies are evil people, user. Don't believe their lies about sharing and equality. They have murder and despotism in their hearts. Evil people.
That doesn't imply that communism can't be proven to be objectively flawed. In fact the implication in my OP is that it can be proven to be objectively flawed but for some reason they don't believe it, or choose not to believe it.
It's so flawed it's basically self evident, but when you point it out they scream at you and call you a capitalist bourgeois bootlicker
Still not an argument.
It’s a (non) argument in the form of a question. It’s also irrelevant to the point, as he never stated a desire to disengage from society.
So please, either make an argument or stop playing dumb.
Communism is a materialist solution to a moral problem. Hence why people continue to be attracted to it, and hence why it continues to fail.
We still use mouse traps because mice aren’t smart. It’s not the system itself, but rather the ignorance and naiveté of the ones buying into it.
People can always be expected to buy into communism because it appeals to “thinkers” by posing questions with no viable answers. It falls prey to the very idealism Marx despised.
>worked
At what?
Genocide?
World War?
Serving as a great excuse for Installing the state of Zion?
Growing the economy?
Being authoritarian?
Hitler dindu nuffin?
Because Stalin grew the economy hugely. Dindu nuffin wrong. did some genocide. Fought some world war and built Israel too. 10/10 authoritarian.
How the exact fuck is that different?
Research into envy - particularly malignant envy.
It nearly fully explains the draw of socialism/communism to some people in any given populous - assuming that people vary in their ability to both experience it, and in how they react/respond to it.
I say "nearly fully explains" because aside from the focus on economics and status, those leaning towards communism usually lack the feeling of ethnocentrism as well (allowing personal well-being to take prominence over their own people or culture's well-being) which relies more on the affiliative oxytocin system.
Recommend: "Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us"
There's no way this isn't a troll
>So, the workers are not meant to actually own the means of production?
History is meant to be progressing, along with technology, and society is meant to be built up. Despotism, Slavery, Feudalism, Absolutism, Capitalism and others - are its fully natural and necessary stages in one form or the other.
>That's as untrue as it gets. Governments disrupt and damage the economy. Most of the genius "managements" by the government revolve around sanctioning your own population. A measure which during wartime an enemy will try to do to you.
It's your dogma and nothing more. If it was actually true, Minarchist governments would dominate the world. It isn't the case, so your dogma is also unquestionably false.
...
...
I’ve asked myself this many times in muh lyfe. At some level I think it boils down to having a sense of humor and a sense of competition.
If I I had to speculate on the source of the difference, it has to be genetic, psychological, or sexual.
We all know that communism is essentially political and economic Judaism, which is why it is materialist (because there is a religious component to its conception, but the vast majority only live in the materialist facet of communism because they aren’t Jewish).
Communism is like a negative of a photograph, particularly the photograph of christ.
> inb4 pagan butthurt
> there’s a reason the Jews don’t give a shit about paganism
Communism has the appearance of Christianity with its talk of equality and kindness and a lot of other stuff that is not actually a part of Christianity.
Communism and Judaism is however conpletely opposite of the Aryan race, soul, and liberated societies.
Therefore, to be white and a communist is to be a rebel against ones own nature, which has to have a root in genetics somewhere.
Somewhere along the line, white communists have some seasoning of the anti-christ.
Either that, or white communists subconsciously realize that they are disgusting creatures and their egos are trying to protect themselves.
Finally, and this might be a strong point, communism and by extension communists are feminine. They see the sexual virility of the other race and throw in with them in the hopes of ris
Either way, white communists are rebels against the Aryan god, the Aryan soul, and the Aryan race.
I am never surprised when nonwhites resort to communism. For them, a communist society
Your own prejudice aside, the thing that makes people to actively choose Socialism-Communism or something else, is down to outlook and concept.
Considering that you little sect are nobodies, it's not looking good for that concept that you hold.
...
wouldnt have been for you allies wanting to be the goodest goys europe wouldnt have been turned to shit with muh freedom muh equality
We lost the war and now: you fucks have it at least as bad as us, though you won it
Thats the funniest thing in the last hundred or so years
Exactly, hence my earlier comment where I said that
> communism is a materialist solution to a moral problem
The real solution is Christ. The communists are right to decry poor working conditions, to decry the endless accumulation of wealth without sharing, the destruction of the environment in pursuit of profit, all those things I can and do agree with the reds about. But their solution, instead of a moral revolution in men's hearts, is a materialist revolution in the streets, with all the blood and resentment which that entails. Instead of transforming men's hearts so that they would share willingly, the communists attempt to take by force. The communists attempt to change men's hearts so that they will have compassion for the poor, but the communists are not God, and thus must resort to force in order to try to bring about change.
For any communists ITT, you are not wrong in your outrage, or your yearning for something different, but the only lasting solution is to allow yourself, and ourselves to live according to the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, according to His Church.
Not a single war was ever declared against an Axis power, not even an intervention, you you pathetic Neonazi crybabies still try to present your self as poor little innocent victims who dinndu nuffin and were mobbed by le ebil Joos.
Hitler, to his credid, didn't scoop so low
Well that is the irony of the USA at this stage. Capitalism is killing the USA. Overproduction has led to "neoliberalism" which if funneling more and more wealth to the 1%. No relief for the working class because we cannot compete. We still pay taxes but they are used again and again for bailouts of banks and to create socialism for monopoly business'. Welcome to slavery at the barrel of the state gun lol.
The rural retards aren't smart enough to see communism for what it is.
If they were then communism would be feasible.
The fundamental reason communism doesn't work is because people are inherantly unequal. Theyre just fucking born that way.
The intellectuals actually look deep enough into the ideology to see this.
The rest of the masses do what masses always do. Clamour and bray like cattle for the satisfaction of their petty base urges because that's as far as theur thought process can go.
I worked to pay someone to make machinery
I worked to pay someone to build a building
I worked to pay workers to operate some machines and others to do some other tasks needed for the better of the other workers
Why can't I control it? I'm still working to move the products to the consumer, if I fail, myself and my workers will suffer
Who's going to decide what to do, what to make, what to produce
Who's going to move stuff across countries
Are other countries be happy of me taking their resources for nothing?
What if I do nothing and just take everything available from someone else?
This is some big retarded ideology that's never going to work cause it's flawed to the core
>couldn't even reply to the right post
>So, the workers are not meant to actually own the means of production?
>History is meant to be progressing, along with technology, and society is meant to be built up. Despotism, Slavery, Feudalism, Absolutism, Capitalism and others - are its fully natural and necessary stages in one form or the other.
Get a load of this delusional motherfucker. Your answer is so fucking disconnected with the point I made its baffling.
>>Governments disrupt and damage the economy.
>It's your dogma and nothing more.
Except it's not my dogma and the Roman empire and many other empires sustained themselves by forcing free trade and free markets into neighboring regions through their military power. There's no such thing as a managed economy. Even the USSR had money, even North Korea has money. Your fantasy is so fake that it never happened in human history.
>Minarchist governments would dominate the world.
And they did. Empires are built around free trade historically.
On top of that 50 years ago price controlling the entire economy was considered the norm and commies like you would think that that's the direction everything would be heading towards. Now price controls are seen as backwards and short sighted. The entire planet learned libertarianism the hard way.
There's not even a point trying to reason with you, your replies are literally LARP. You pretend to know what you are talking about while having no arguments nor reference to back you up.
>your dogma
>your dogma is also unquestionably false.
en.wikipedia.org
Seems like my "dogma" was not so unquestionably false, and it seems I'm not the one dogmatically avoiding reasoning here. You couldn't even address the fact that you don't actually want the workers to own the means of production and it's all a big lie, that's because you are a dogmatic believer.
Because a very significant portion, if not more than half, of that population have no personal drive beyond reproducing as much as possible, despite the fact that that is the very reason for their poverty.
>wartime
An excellent point. Even when we look at things like the Cold War, we see commies (sadly with success) spreading the ideology to the West, because they themselves understand it is a just-fuck-my-country-up tier ideology. They can't beat capitalism, even when capitalism is not well-implemented, and therefore try to create a future where an ignorant, indoctrinated populace voluntarily forfeits everything that made their country great in the first place.
Let me hear that again comrade.
You don't want actual ownership, right? Workers owning things imply in private property, and that would not allow you to get all the free shit you would want.
So, can you admit, that the "workers should seize the means of production!" is actually a trick to make the workers surrender their autonomy to the state?
He could make a charity if he really wanted to help, or you know, have a real job
All he did was to steal from someone else to give it to others and to his friends, a literal thief who made everyone poor in an island
Meanwhile in Singapore, another tiny island, thing went way better without stealing anyone's property
>Why can't I control it?
Because it's not in our (the proletariat's) interest. We don't care about what your bourgeois rights, we want to eat.
I would argue that has more to do with control of education and opportunity but that is why your ideology is that of mongrels and animals... everyone is born with the same potential.. it is what people are exposed to that shapes them
the thieves were the Americans that exploited the natives... you kiddos really don't have any arguments now do you?
>everyone is born with the same potential.. it is what people are exposed to that shapes them
Veritably untrue. Intelligence is genetic, and the current variation of intelligence is over 50% inherited by genes.
false... where is your evidence?
>core good of other humans.
honestly smiled
fucking faggots
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
newscientist.com
>commies literally can't google search
Go on, tell me how 50 000 years of parallel evolution resulted in utterly identical brains.
If you want to eat get a job then, or go hunting
I worked to get everything needed for a factory so other people can get my product, but then you say it's not in your interests to get a job so you can eat ? What's that retarded shit, if you want your own factory then start working and get better skills to make more money, to create your own factory, fucking retards
If you are the proletariat, how are you going to get the factories? Stealing ? Then what? Are you going to stale in innovation? Who's going to build more factories ? Who's going to give you the materials, the knowledge? Who's going to distribute them if you can't have a fucking worker since that's slavery according to your retarded ideology
I'd say a communist happens after the fulfillment of two criteria. One of these being an overdeveloped sense of fairness in an unfair world, and the acceptance of the lie of equality.
If you believe that everyone is equal, and life ought to be fair, why wouldn't you be a communist?
intelligence and potential are not the same thing user.. you can try harder though?
organize and take control of them? what right do you have to them over me?
I remember the natives selling their land
I remember the natives trading their good for other goods
If people got killed then that's the product of it's time, just like natives killed others, just like any other civilization fought against others
The only exploitation was slavery, and it was a practice made by many different civilizations, including our own in Mexico, but those days are over in our countries , cause guess what, people learn about private property and about respecting the lives of others
Fuck, even the first settlers in America failed, they were communist and almost started to death, until someone taught them about private property and working for themselves
>If you want to eat get a job then,
I'm lucky to have one. But it's not enough to feed my family. So I'm gonna take away your toothbrush.
>So why exactly do people still fall for it?
Because communism is an attractive idea for masses. It says that there are "oppressors" and "oppressed", communism proposes to take the power from oppressors and share it to everybody, no matter who you are. In fact communism is the struggle for resources to oppressed. And people who is falling for communism don't want to educate themselves on this and understand why communism is worse than capitalism, they just like the idea and maybe communism aesthetics like pic related.
yes and slavery is the best system...we should not have freedom.... nice argument kiddo...
freedom over slavery user... you will never convince me that chains are a better option to freedom
I offer a job , people will line up if they want a job, if they agree to my contract they get a job, the worker is protected from me if there's another factory offering something better, I'm not slaving them, they can leave if someone offers them something better
I'm not putting a gun against someone, they want a job , I can offer them one, they get paid, they decide what to do with the money
I have no power over the worker but to tell them what they should and whatnot, if they are not happy with it they can walk out and find a better job
I think we have all decided that killing you and taking your factory is the best option for the community at this point.
Are you retarded? Kek.
People do not have the same potential you dunce. Over 50% of the variation being genetic means that if there's a total equalization of the environment, blacks and other low IQ groups would still have a lower IQ than most european groups.
Let me repeat that; real life is not a disney movie, and people get less competent brains from birth.
I already brushed you wife's teeth so she could eat
Donald Trump with arguably the lowest IQ in history is the president? proves you wrong.. right? Your argument does not hold water.
Capitalism requires individual rights.
Slavery is involuntary therefor not capitalism.
Mandatory taxation is socialism.
Corporate socialism is ruining America.
Grow up retard.
Stop feeding the troll (You)s
>Capitalism requires individual rights.
False
>Slavery is involuntary therefor not capitalism.
False
>Mandatory taxation is socialism.
False
>Corporate socialism is ruining America.
partially true
>I think we have all decided that killing you and taking your factory is the best option for the community at this point.
Then any legal system would persecute you , and some would put you to death. Then even if you don't get caught, people wouldn't want to deal with thieving barbarians that stole the investments of others.
And if you somehow subvert the legal system to make this acceptable, what would happen is that it would be a reign of the low IQ and the impulsive. A reign of niggers and low lifers, just plundering for short term pleasure. Not to mention the immediate economic destruction due to the fact that people who murder to steal aren't really the nicest capital managers around.
Nice LARPing though.
Too bad you don't own the means of production of guns, or the means of production of private security, or the means of my own gun to protect myself from thieves
socialism or barbarism... I hope you have enough guns to stop us all
nope... too late.. we have already decided what to do with your factory
This fucking thread
Same reason Plato for his own theories. People are in love with ideas, not results.
What a boring fucking troll.
Common commie baby put some effort into it.
>Every government empirically permanently manages enterprises and sectors of the economy. No government is withdrawn from the economy in the modern world, bar failed states.
The extent to which is true depends highly on the specific type of capitalism in play. The government of China, and even to some extent that of Japan and Germany, are much more heavily involved in managing the economy than say, Britain or the US. For all of the talk about "The Fed" there are still independent banking firms in the US, whereas every bank in China is the either the PBOC or a subsidiary of the PBOC.
Nice LARPing friend. But I think your LARPing is a bit imperfect.
>workers seize the means of production and actually own it
That means the can do whatever they want with it, that means they'll sell their goods to whoever pays the highest price since that's their best interest. That means it's just private property changing hands.
>government seizes everything and nobody has any rights to keep people from owning private property
Doesn't sound like "worker ownership" to me.
prove me wrong
nope... too late... we have already decided what to do with your factory... your opinion doesn't matter anymore
I already did moron.
Common I don't got all day I wanna hear some good arguments.
>make a baseless statement
>"prove me wrong"
Not how it works. They don't need to prove anything to you. You are meant to make your own arguments.
>cognitive dissonance is hitting him so hard he literally didn't even read the post
It has to be an essentially religious process, because, as you say, many intelligent people were communists. I mean Marx himself was obviously extremely intelligent, and many Marxists have been more or less the brightest people in their field.
I will note though that a lot of these people have some sort emotional or other psychologial disturbance.
Really though I think it comes down to the religious concept. It's the idea of the perfectibility of humanity, of heaven come on earth, a secular rapture. This idea is so extremely desireable that it blasts through all attempts to question it. When you add to that the superficial plausibility of theory of value from labour, you have a recipe for what is essentially theological debate.
Capitalism doesn't require individuals rights, it does even better if the workers don't have individual freedoms.
Dude, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN IN A COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST WHATEVER YOU CALL COUNTRY?
I've been in Cuba in the middle of 2000's it's like a the poor side of hueland
I think the pro-Communism position here is "The status quo is monstrous. It would be better to try and fail in the attempt to change it, than to fail to try it at all." The position is rather arbitrary if I understand it. It's practically just dissidence itself arbitrarily labeled.
Existentially satisfied people do not take up communism. They have no need to. Under communism, existentially satisfied people do not revolt. (These are typically different populations, though exceptions are imaginable.) Satisfaction at that level is not more likely with intelligence.
Meanwhile, people who cast their minds through the tangled logic of how to get people working for each other, aka economists, rather famously tend to line up in opposition to communism... though I suspect what is actually going on is that economists learn extensively what gets people working for each other in the present economy, and thus may in politically strategic terms simply be engaging in relabeled anti-dissidence.
yes? do you have any actual arguments or would you like to find something else to do now?
"everything is awesome" -Lego Movie
>make arguments
>he ignores
>then ask for arguments and claims there was never an argument
What a pathetic existence.
You know who's more developed than Cuba?
Singapore.
not an argument
>workers seize the means of production and can actually own it
They can act on their interest and sell labor for the highest bidder, and produce goods for the lowerst cost; aka, they have private property
>government seizes private property to keep people from owning it
Then we have an economic calculation problem and half of you retards would also say it's not real communism.
>They can act on their interest and sell labor for the highest bidder.
Jajajajajajajajajajaja.
Wait you are serious.
JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA
I think the problem is you do not have a foundation of knowledge for even the most basic of arguments. This is just another false dichotomy that you are presenting.
>claims to be a false dichotomy
>avoids explaining why
>claims that I have no foundation
>avoids explaining why
Another great commie debater.
Government ownership and worker ownership are direct contradictory. It's not a false dichotomy, that's why you couldn't even explain it.
It goods are owned by everyone and have to more around forcefully to provide for the population, then workers absolutely do not own the means of production.
If workers do own the means of production, that implies in private property.
