Right wing retards say that soviet Russia was communist

>right wing retards say that soviet Russia was communist
>it was actually state capitalist
How does it feel knowing capitalism has been the biggest blight on humanity since its inception

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf
youtube.com/watch?v=mXbfK--PjVU
youtube.com/watch?v=9Onj4Wx61ps
youtube.com/watch?v=OlB_xNOAn1c
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People's_Welfare
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>It was state Capitalist

State Capitalist is probably the most contradictory buzzword ever.

How the fuck does State Capitalism work you fucking mongoloid?

What did Hitler say about Capitalism and Communism?

Oh yeah.

They're both fucking terrible systems.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

Hitler was also a capitalist. He privatized the German market hugely and executed leftists and socialists national or otherwise, his economic policies were fairly Reaganesque actually

Don't forget that he banned Trade Unions too.

you wacky Commies and your word games

sage

Yep, he was a textbook capitalist

>Literally incapable of debate
Is this the mighty right wing Juggernaut of the internet Sup Forums this is what you are now? Pathetic

Cite your resources that dont include what your liberal arts professor told you. This should be good

Im not going to give a source yet but have you heard of the New Economic Policy?

I am familiar

Same way it works in the US, I would imagine, just with big government LARPing instead of muh freedumbs

Soviet Union went trough multiple leaders, changing it's economic structure as it went along. The most successful periods were indeed state capitalist (Stalin, Khrushchev), yet there was plenty others, like state socialism (Brezhnev) that killed the soviet economy or the FUBAR mess that was Gorbachev's perestroika. Hell under lenin alone we went from State capitalism (Russian Empire), to military communism (Raskulachivanie), to mixed system (new economic policy), etc.

And it was created in order to establish state capitalism yes?

You are avoiding the question; assigning your own terms for the periods of Russian rulers does not make it true

The same as any monopoly does. Only one covering all fields.

I don't give a shit about your question, just pointing out that OP is wrong to say that SU was straight up state capitalist. If you want sources go attend a college course.

The nazis invented privatization. Can you imagine how much better the world would be if these capitalists hadn't murdered millions ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

Notice, the most deaths occurred under Stalin the state capitalist

What does this have to do with anything? Stalin was the most successful SU ruler, bar none. If he had to kill some folks along the way, so be it, I disagree with the necessity and scope of the purges, but I don't debate results.

I would not call murder, famine and a collapsing country and economy a success

I wouldn't call things unrelated to reality anything other than delusion. Yet you do.

Are you denying famine happened under Stalin? Are you denying he killed 20 million people? Is this really the state that capitalists are reduced to? What a joke

I am denying that a country that continued fighting when most of it's populated territory was collapsing. I am denying that an economy that managed to rebuild half of europe despite the devastation was collapsing.

I am denying the simple idea that you are not a troll.

>Condemning perfectly functioning countries to war and poverty is "rebuilding"
No, they were just exploited and enslaved for petty short loved profit that ultimately amounted to nothing.
Typical capitalist, incapable of thinking long term

The absolute state of leftypol

I posted sources and constructed an actual argument. What do you have?

Fake news, shitlib.

Alright, prove it then. I challenge you to prove me wrong. Right now, I won't call your sources propoganda. Just provide something if you can

Shut the fuck up with that BS. The MoP was publicly owned(by the state) which makes it communism.

>state capitalism
marxist oxymoron to explain away their failures

No. You're wrong. Stalin wasn't state capitalism, he was state privatized communism. Millions of people died under state privatised communism.

>Reeel gommunism haz never been tried,dude weed lmao.
Ummm yea? How about Soviet Union?
>It was actually state capitalist
>state capitalist
>Soviet
>Fucking
>Union
>Of
>State
>Capitalism
pure benis

State capitalism =/= capitalism fuckhead

The state is not the people. It's private. NOT socialism. Capitalist.
Nazo Germany was also capitalist

That's intersectional redistributed capitalism. Soviet Union was definitely state privatised communism though.

Communism is an end state that this not achievable over the duration of a moment. It's like a man trying to balance himself standing only on an atom. The same goes for other utopian end states like the anarchos and libertarians. Its true communism was never tried. It can't be tried because this end state is volatile and instable. Such an end state never takes human nature into account and that's why systems that try to implement them always fail.

...

>the state is private

That's a rather silly pic user. You'd be hard pressed to fight an ex-soviet national who would argue that union wasnt socialist.

The "not real socialism/communism" thing has mostly developed in western universities among neo-marxists to cover up fuckups of the USSR.

Hell even the modern "china isn't communist" is a complete meme developed by right wing to justify their reliance on cheap chinese goods.

>it was actually state capitalist
KYS

>being this dumb

Commies believe everything that's not their retarded imagined utopia is capitalism because they are too mentally ill to understand that their shit doesn't fucking work

>The state is not the people. It's private

Poorfags and middle-class average joes defending capitalism makes me laugh every time.

It wasn't State capitalism. It was capitalism, plain and simple.

If everything is Capitalism, is all ideologues a ripped off it, thus being superior?

Everything is not capitalism.

>It wasn't State capitalism. It was capitalism, plain and simple.

It was communism, faggot.

if everything is capitalism then capitalism is a meaningless word.

No it wasn't, faggot.

OP is right. USSR was Marxist only during Civil War. During all other times USSR didn't fulfill Marxist definition of socialism or communism. Means of production were not under control of proletariat. There were under control of bureaucrats class who enforced their decisions via class of mercenary cutthroats. This include so-called Brezhnev's socialism.

Socialism can only be if everyone work sat factory at normal capacity as proletariat, Dear Leader, minsters, military, police , everyone. No real work that produces added value - no food for them, Pol Pot war right.
youtube.com/watch?v=mXbfK--PjVU

>No real work that produces added value - no food for them
No, communism gets rid of value altogether.

Read The Book, idiot.

>the absolute state of commies having to disavow their biggest supporter ever

...

"The Book"?

We did at the end of the 1920's.

...

You are, much like most people, confusing ideology and economic structure.

Capitalism, the ideology, in essence argues for private enterprise and personal freedoms, Communism on the other hand argues for collective, i.e. state run, enterprise and popular responsibility.

Take state-socialsm and state-capitalism, for example. In a capitalist society, like US, both would be seen/painted as abomination, hence the lack of proper public medicare policy. However your government is more than happy to subsidise and bail out private enterprises, to keep them running.

State capitalism/socialism share a similarity in that buisness is either owned directly by the state or is held responsible before it under threat of confiscation. In state-capitalist model, the businesses primary duty is still the same as if it was a private interpris however - profit. State socialist model however re-purposes business into a giant public service, where things are run for public good, e.g. keeping a factory subsidised despite factory being near useless for the state, so as to avoid firing the workers.

The dividing line between the two is fuzzy as hell, and the country running state-capitalist model doesn't make it not socialist, much like a nation running a national healthcare service doesn't seize to be capitalist. After all neither side has perfect solutions to anything, no matter what hardcore communists or libertarians have to say on the matter.

>communists don't understand value at all
duh

youtube.com/watch?v=9Onj4Wx61ps

...

hows it feel to be a total retard? Because you are.

>State capitalism
Why is the road to anarchy one where the government gets huge control over everyone's lives? Aren't your goals the same as libertarians? Just shrink and dissipate the state and we can have real communism.

>Just shrink and dissipate the state
How?

>glom :D

Are you telling me communist revolutions don't solve anything and you end up with an even more oppressive system, what a weird coincidence, let's try it again.

>This thread has been up for 2 hours
WHY HAVE THE MODS ABANDONED US

Certainly not by giving the state Supreme power

capitalism is private ownership of the means of production. If it's owned by the state its not capitalism. If you nominally own something but the government dictates when , where and how you use it under strict guidelines with threat of confiscation then you don't really own it. What you are describing are different forms of socialism.

Deregulate everything, privatize the fed, make it so that at least the federal government doesn't have any real power. Both parties are corporatist so I'm guessing it'd take a revolution at this point to actually get there.

As long as people believe the state is corruption in and of itself we could further this.

Commie cunt alert.

>mods, help! my safe space is being invaded, I'm being triggered save me!

No, I'm telling you the Bolsheviks' attempt at the communist revolution failed in the 1920's.

Not a single one of you capitalist pigs has been able to refute me. I knew it, all you have is ad hominem. You have no legitimate argument against communism. You can't even prove that it doesn't work,you have no sources.
I defy any one of you faggots to actually prove that
1) the USSR and/ or the nazis weren't capitalist
2) that communism doesn't work
Go ahead, try. I bet you can't because your pathetic capitalism has no actual argument in its defense

Revolutions, in general, are a rather bad idea that should only be implemented if you believe you have no other way to change your nation.

People are too eager to follow promises of freedom and opportunity or unity and responsibility and both kinds of revolutions tend to make things worse, not better, at least initially.

Hell Russian history alone has both Communist (1917) and Capitalist (1991) revolutions, and both were complete disasters for the country.

Do you SERIOUSLY think the OP actually makes sense & deserves to be up?

>If it's owned by the state its not capitalism
You don't get to decide what is and isn't capitalism, mate. States run for profit capitalist enterprises long before the obsession with privatisation got tied in the mind of the western public with capitalism.

>Certainly not by giving the state Supreme power
So how?

>Deregulate everything, privatize the fed, make it so that at least the federal government doesn't have any real power.
How?

>You have no legitimate argument against communism.

When has it worked, faggot?

You're just making up facts, you moron.
>Hurr muh not real communism
>Hurr akshully it was capitalism
>Hurrrrrr despite it coming about through a communist revolution, being run by communists, and actively working to spread communism throughout the world
>LOL Capitalism is bad

You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.

>implying state capitalism isn't at the same level of retardation as blacked threads
and both threads are created by the same people, what a coincidence

>commie has absolutely no idea to reach for his goal of communism

OP is a re-fucking-tard who literally has no goddamn clue what Capitalism is and is not.

centrally planned, state controlled economies are not capitalist, fuck face.

sage

Oh I do: through the dictatorship of proletariat that will abolish private property worldwide.

But I was asking them.

>How?
Spreading the word of our lord The Invisible Hand of course.

Realistically, buy gold, guns, ammo, and generators, and create a new state (a state being a corporation with a monopoly on force) in your image.

I didn't decide. That's what capitalism is.
>[kap-i-tl-iz-uh m]
>noun
.>an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth

marxists only came up with the bullshit state capitalism oxymoron to excuse their failures. Industry can't simultaneously be privately and governmantally owned

youtube.com/watch?v=OlB_xNOAn1c

If you are a communist in the 21st century you are a pathetic failure

>When has it worked, faggot?
People's Respublic of China.
USSR prior to Brezhnev.
Singapore.
Baathist states in middle east.

There are plenty examples, just like there are plenty examples of capitalism not working. USSR just shot itself in the foot with brezhnev and later gorbachev which resulted in a large scale collapse of many states dependant
on it for political protection and support.

>That's what capitalism is.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
I guess 71 source link in this wiki page are made up.

So communism is state capitalism, then.

So, who will represent the proletariat?

>abolish private property!
>You don't know nothing goyim!
>I will be a ranking parrty member in a communist utopia!
Much much later
>What do you mean i have to work in the mines for the next 20 hours?!

>2) that communism doesn't work
Yeah, Marx was extremely naive when it comes to government powers and paved completely wrong way for socialism. Corrupting dangers of state were not accounted. And after Marx there was no prominent theoreticians that could solve state problem. Syndicalist may be on something but they had not theoretical titans to lead others and all other socialist movements were overshadowed by "USSR success" which burred socialists movement as whole with its fake perverted socialism. Also USSR poisoned concept of Democracy too with its system of faking peoples vote.

Hey, dumb fuck, in order to abolish private property you have to abolish every single human being who maintains exclusive dominion over their personal property, i.e. their body, time, free will and all the fruits thereof.

The most fundamental means of production is the individual human mind and body and happens to be private fucking property faggot sage

"Represent" in what way?

>People's Respublic of China.
>USSR prior to Brezhnev.
>Singapore.
>Baathist
This was not the communism.

>Hitler was also a capitalist. He privatized the German market hugely and executed leftists and socialists national or otherwise, his economic policies were fairly Reaganesque actually

In some aspects yes, but in other aspects definitely not.

Nazi Germany literally had more social welfare programs that the UK and France did at the time, so quit bullshitting.

>inb4 "welfare isn't socialism"

It's still on the leftist spectrum, and the Nazis also created workers rights bills that gave them holidays, and the Strength Through Joy program even gave them paid vacations.

Hardcore commies are just butthurt that Hitler executed globalists, anarchists, and Bolsheviks that wanted to destroy or give-away Germany's culture and sovereignty.

inb4 you pretend these don't exist:

>Nazi welfare bureau:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People's_Welfare

>Nazi Labor Front (biggest organization in the German government at the time):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front

Hillarious.

What do we need capital expenses for, the means of production already exist and always will exist, lmao

from your link
>Marxist literature defines state capitalism as
literal oxymoron made up by marxists to excuse their failures that also broadens the definition of capitalism into meaninglessness
I already gave you a definition for capitalism. If you don't like that one you can google another. They all say the same thing