Prove Me Wrong- Capitalism Works

Ghost of Milton Friedman here. I don't understand these anti-capitalist tensions that have been tearing both sides of the political spectrum apart. Capitalism is the greatest system to have ever existed in all of human history. No other system has been able to provide as much freedom and economic output as capitalism. Capitalism is superior to every other system that can possibly be listed:

Examples of inferior models:
>Communism
>Socialism
>Anarchism (I could see some legitimate arguments for anarcho-capitalism, but meh)
>Syndicalism
>Social democracy
>Nazism
>Falangism
>Nationalism
>National socialism
>National syndicalism
>Fascism
>Internationalism
>Neo-Globalism
>Anti-capitalist liberalism
>Anti-capitalist conservatism
>Republicanism
>Neo-conservatism
>Keynesian economics
>Monarchism
>Authoritarianism
>Totalitarianism
>Marxism
>Leninism
>Trotskyism
>Marxist-Leninism/Stalinism
>State-"capitalism"
>National Bolshevism
>Aryanism
>Maoism
>Trumpism
>Clinton-Obama social authoritarianism
>Bernie Bro Social Democracy/Socialist
>Theocracy
>Crony capitalism (i.e. capitalism with lobbyists)
>Sup Forumsackian "libertarianism"/edgy Republicanism
>Any other form of statism, communism, socialism, authoritarianism, fascism, anti-capitalism, and/or anti-libertarianism

Prove me wrong.

>Pro-tip: you can't

capitalism doesn't work, it's a system that opresses the inocents and divides with hate, it breeds hate within the brothers and sisters of the earth

if only there was a pseudo-capitalist country left

Capitalism is fine, central banking and stocks are Jewish tricks

And how will become the system when robots arrive to the party?

What are you, some kind of hippy?

Capitalism doesn't breed hate between people. People themselves choose to do that, and most of the excessive tensions that exist nowadays are ultimately a result of a corrupt government that is intervening too much.

>But muh "fake news = necessity for regulation of the press"
One word: lobbyists. Would lobbyists be seeping into news organizations (organizations that would have otherwise failed under a capitalist system) if the government's role was greatly reduced to just being a watchdog state/referee? No, I don't think so.

1)
>capitalism exploits holes in the market
>demand and good demanded, in particularly of luxuries, varies based on culture
>more cultures thus create a more diverse economy
>more diverse economy is more robust
>multiculturalism thus benefits capitalism more so than hegemony

2)
>idpol creates subcultures within cultures based on disabilities
>subcultures generate more diverse thus a more diverse economy
>capitalism thus greatly benefits from idpol.

Putting the two together:
>the acceptance and growth of multiculturalism and idpol is accelerated and is largely possible due to capitalism
>most of the current problems in Western culture is due to capitalism.

1781 was a mistake.

Intellectual property. Plus, there will always be a demand for people who can maintain the robots.

There would also be a need for assembly workers that can help assemble the parts for the robots. Unless, if we have robots to that. But then, we would need people to assemble the robots that assemble the robots that- aw, screw it. Just stick to intellectual property, creative math, and maintenance of these robots.

From what I can tell, most employers would probably be more reliant on pure AI than robots, but they would only probably use AI as an extension of the worker's abilities. An employer can't operate the AI (or the machinery, in the case of robots) his/herself. There will always be demand for human workers and human entrepreneurs.

Same thing that happened in the Agricultural and Industrial revolutions, the economy grows and people move on to new jobs.

Don't fall for the lump of labor fallacy. Yes, a lot of jobs will be replaced by automation, but there will be jobs for humans still, some of them new jobs created by the automation. And because jobs are not some fixed amount that is fought over, but rather it grows to accommodate the new labor force, the majority of people will have jobs even in a massively automated capitalist society.

Capitalism wasn't a mistake. Statism was a mistake. Governments were always the root of most of the atrocities that were committed in the last two centuries. The current problems in western culture are all a result of government. What you perceive as problems with western culture is you not wanting to accept the fundamental rights of other human beings to live with liberty and freedom- this is exactly how this corrupt government wants you to think right now.

Also, I'm not from /leftypol/. No, no, no, this is right-libertarianism. This has always been right-libertarianism. The narrative of "multiculturalism" was created by neoconservatives to undermine capitalism. It's just like how modern liberals are undermining capitalism by advocating state-sponsored social-justice. In a truly capitalist society, most minorities would actually live in better conditions and would be less of a burden on the state than they are now. Unfortunately, it's hard to realize this when the Democrats are literally strangling the negro's status in society by trapping them in a perpetuating state of welfare-slavery. If the Democrats didn't encourage negroes to feed off of the welfare state so much, then they would have made better contributions to society, and there would be no need to advocate for an ethnostate or anti-western society.

I want to start a business but I dont know what the fuck to sell, I dont know what the business will be about..
What do?

Yes it does.

Otherwise itd be fascism.

>Proves you wrong

Research into some of your general interests and pinpoint the ones you are knowledgeable about. If you are not that knowledgeable in any field, then start building your skills. For example, if you want to pursue entrepreneurial ventures in something like computer science/programming, learn programming languages and how computers function. This is how you gain the minimal amount of human capital needed to successfully start up a business. Then, find a way to fund your shit. Most people would get a loan, but keep in mind that there are many other ways to get access to funding nowadays. Crowdfunding seems to work well with intellectual property and extremely ambitious projects (keep in mind that everyone expects you to reward their donations somehow though).

Also, now's the best time to invest in cryptocurrencies. A single unit of bitcoin is worth around $5700 and it will probably jump to $10000 in a few months. Expect your money to increase by at least 100% if you invest some money into this, but I would recommend diversifying your money into other investments if you're older. I'm advising this just in case some random event causes the value of bitcoin/any other cryptocurrency to massively drop.

There's many other ways, but I don't want to write an entire book on this. Just find what works best for you.

Once you have accumulated the financial resources necessary to fund your project, you will now have better access to physical capital. However, if you're not pulling out a loan and you've actually found a way to safely fund your project, you can always pause at that moment and make any adjustments to what you really want to pursue now that you have some financial power.

I can't tell you what you can sell, and I'm certainly not going to go into full detail because I'm not sure how rough regulations are in Argentina, but as long as you have some business sense, deep knowledge on a couple of skills, and the resources, you may have a clear vision

you look at the available job market and move from there.
what, you really think that you're some captain of industry? you really think that basing your argument on the very few that actually create corporations and the vast majority of people who work for them makes your socialist utopia that has never worked, work?
you might as well say this:
>i want to be a professional footballer
>there are few positions at various clubs and the top of the top end up being the players
>this isn't fair!
stop thinking of others, work on yourself you ignorant faggot.

>Yes, it does. Otherwise, it'd be fascism.

Well, if you're meaning that capitalism allows people to hate each other, then yeah. However, implying that capitalism actively promotes hate is absolutely absurd. Hate is more so a consequence of freedom that we are all capable of handling on a personal level than it is a direct cause from capitalism. Otherwise, it's a result of the government deep interference.

Thanks for your time Milton I apreciate your comment
Why so mean?

I don't think was implying that socialism was better, it sounded like he/she was legitimately asking what he/she should focus his/her business ventures on.

Actually, I'm not even sure what you mean by your response to that person. The third sentence and the last line really throw me off by making me believe that you're ranting about socialism, but the other lines have this anti-capitalist vibe.

>corporatism

Literally the downfall of Western Civilization

Which could fall under crony capitalism.

Faggot.

And?

I feel like you added "crony capitalism" implies that capitalism is a flawed system as the rest of them. Its like the milk is still easily taintable like all the rest of these economic systems.

Capitalism is great. Neo-liberalism is not. The day we return to the former, the better.

Neck yourself Zapata

No problem.

Also, I forgot to add that it would really help if there was a demand for your idea. Of course, there is the more tedious and difficult route of marketing your product to the point of convincing the free market that your product is desirable.

But yeah, take care man. I hope you pull it off.

Pic related. The single most destructive force in the universe. Nuclear bombs are a joke in comparison.

hows hell treating you milton? death to capitalism

>Crony capitalism (i.e. capitalism with lobbyists)
>(capitalism with lobbyists)

What I meant by "crony capitalism" was a mutilated form of capitalism that occurs when an expansive and corrupted government allows some of the larger companies to lobby politicians and influence what gets passed into law. As a result, the government will interfere by giving these companies special stomping shoes to create an unnatural oligopoly/monopoly over a market in order to control people more. This isn't real capitalism, this is capitalism being stabbed by big government and lobbyists that want to appeal to big government.

>No other system has been able to provide as much freedom and economic output as capitalism.
To what end? To create degenerate, deracinated, spiritually and culturally sick societies doomed to failure? Show that "freedom"is a worthwhile condition. Show that increased economic output doesn't have greater costs to a society.

We need both. Otherwise humanity will never conquer the stars.

Based Milton

And you're actually a retarded kike, Milton

>To what end? To create degenerate, deracinated, spiritually and culturally sick societies doomed to failure? Show that "freedom" is a worthwhile condition. Show that increased economic output doesn't have greater costs to a society

I'm not going to deny that there are costs to freedom. However, there is no way that what you perceive as "degeneracy" or "spiritual/cultural sickness" outweighs the many benefits of freedom. In fact, "degeneracy" and "spritual/cultural sickness" is a result of government interfering more than it needs to.

"Degeneracy" is only a thing because minorities tend to do shitty things and play the victim card when the government (specifically, the Democrats in the US) encourage them to live off of welfare. The government literally encourages these minorities to create welfare families, practically enslaving their bloodline to the government once again. In a capitalist society with minimal government and greatly reduced intervention, minorities would eventually stop playing the victim card and properly learn how to adjust within a capitalist environment. And in a capitalist environment, anyone can thrive. I'm pretty sure minorities would actually do a great job at contributing to the economy if the government would stop economically and mentally persecuting minorities to the point where they become a burden on the state.

Would you have a problem with the negro man if he had an average IQ an actually held financial responsibility for once? Would you have a problem if they actually managed to adjust themselves in this society? Would you have a problem if they actually learned to value the fact that everyone inherently deserves personal liberties? I imagine that you probably wouldn't have a problem. However, it is a problem because negroes, for the most part, have failed to realize this. It is not that they are incapable of understanding this though- it's that they've been trained so much (to be continued)

by the government to accept welfare slavery to the point where the negro doesn't know what to do right now. If we can fully enlighten the negro on this issue and encourage them to part ways with modern liberalism, then the IQs and living standards of minorities could greatly improve within the next few generations- and it would actually be legitimate (to be continued again)

the one country that tried his "theories" full throttle ruined it's economy for a decade.

The "cultural sickness" is a result of the government intervening so much to the point where millennial liberals are outraged.
The thing is, their outrage is misguided.
They're mistaking crony-capitalism and government expansion for real capitalism. Funny thing- a lot of them were the same people that protested against the bailouts during the recession that hit the US last decade. Capitalism isn't supposed to allow government bailouts- yet, these millenials are still delusional in regards to this (to be continued)

We would have been actually stronger right now if the government didn't bail anyone out.

In actual capitalism, the government doesn't do bailouts.

The economy is expected to have its downs, but it always comes back up stronger than ever before in real capitalism.

pure capitalism is too unjust, so it will always lead to violence and unrest, because when sufficient amount of capital is concentrated in small group of hands it becomes impossible to be socially mobile, it becomes impossible for poor to gain wealth unless you are once in a lifetime genius and for rich to loose wealth you would really have to be once in a lifetime retard. which in effect would create slavery all over again. and makes society much less productive.

but when you rein in the power of capitalism like when you have a socialist democracy with capitalism, when capitalists can operate freely with technology inventions and that sort of thing and government controls natural resources from which benefit all it becomes much more fair. and once capitalists have less control over working class and working class have less stimuli to slave for capitalist because alleviated requirements of sustenance based on justly dispersed natural resources. so capitalists have to be more just to workers and be more productive to stay appealing to working class, and working class have easier way of social mobility because of less strain and more free time to be inventive and creative.

but that's never gona happen because it's much easier to control starving people with a loaf of bread, so they're going to bribe to leave it as it is and those who can't be bribed definitely can be shot

Without freedom, how else can man discover and pursue the meaning of their life?

Without freedom how can differing peoples coexist and interact peacefully, in a way that allows completely different people to pursue their lives while benefitting from eachother?

Without freedom how can the human condition progress and unite humanity into the next stages of moral, intellectual and material development?

Conflict holds us back.

"Spiritual sickness" is complete bullshit. Religion does not necessarily have to play such a large role in society. I'm not saying religion is bad, I'm only saying that it's not necessary for everyone to function in a society.

I hope you're not implying that religion is necessary to assert moral values. It's not. From what I've seen, history's greatest atrocities correlate more with religion. However, I'm also not going to ignore the atheists (Stalin, Mao, left-statists, etc.) who were also responsible for some of those atrocities. Ultimately, correlation does not equal causation though. Immorality on a national scale is more so caused by how much the government or governmental institutions are willing to go to dangerously extreme lengths in pushing for radical change. (might continue more)

So ultimately, all forms of statism inherently cost more than freedom.

no atrocity is ever done because of the religion, the religion usually is a mere justification.

95% of the communist party command were Jews so you can judge what their agenda was pretty accurately.

Why'd you turn into such a blithering retard, Milt? You're confusing economic models to political models and don't seem to know the difference.

All it does is build weapons and destroy everyone around it and then itself.

It's a fucking cancer of the mind, and of the species.

Gerald Ford should have fucking shot you himself. of

That's quite a statement. You've got several thousand years of warfare in Europe alone to figure out how to explain without a primary religious motivation.

Heh. This will be too easy.

Capitalism is inherently exploitative. All labor is done for a wage which is dictated by the owner of a business who gives them enough to sustain them and keep them in line while profiting from their exploitation.

If this "profit" were simply to be taken from the hands of tycoons and the bourgeoisie and collectivized by the workers to meet the needs of society at large each and every individual would be vastly more wealthy than the exploited wage-cuck.

>w-who would organize labor if not for your capitalist overlords

Worker's unions.

>b-but no one will be motivated to do anything without profit!

This is simply a LIE enforced by consumer culture at large. Every individual has the innate desire and RESPONSIBILITY to better their environment.

A child should not need an "allowance" (which is a meme capitalist cucks use to indoctrinate children early into their wagecuck system) to do chores. They should have the wisdom to help the household run as a COMMUNITY and do THEIR PART taking only what they need and not being wasteful or greedy at the expense of their family members!

>T-that's Utopian! It will never work! You can't force people to be good!

NOT TRUE. If fools want to be lazy without reason they will be punished like a child who refuses to do chores. They will be grounded and privileges will be taken from them until they act responsibly for the good of the family.

Communism is the most natural form of government because it can be seen within the family, tribe, and community level naturally but disappears when workers are exploited and duped into thinking the fruits of their labor should be given to the man that tells them what to do.

as I said... it's just a justification for war, not the reason.

for the obvious reasons the atrocities always are blamed on some irrational shit, when there always is a rational shit behind it. it's much more pious and noble to say that so and so killed that man because he offended some god, than he killed him because he wanted his shit.

Right, no one wants to debate an actual communist, only the straw-men they construct of communists in their head.

Give me a moment, I'm actually preparing a response.

I was about to return to the Netherrealm earlier after I finished my replies to that one Nazi, but I ended up using the shitter and returned to find even more replies than I anticipated.

>claim to be the ghost of Milton Friedman
>including "Keynesian economics"
I don't think you're really the ghost of Milton Friedman.

>Right, no one wants to debate an actual communist, only the straw-men they construct of communists in their head.
shut up dude ur gonna die from starvation dummy

...

Why would anyone read past the first sentence? No one forces you to participate in capitalism.

>All labor is done for a wage which is dictated by the owner of a business who gives them enough to sustain them and keep them in line while profiting from their exploitation

But all labor in a capitalist society is voluntary. Workers are not being "exploited" if they are willingly choosing to work for a business owner. It's not slavery. Hell, even if it is "wage-cucking", it's not the capitalist's fault. Workers have plenty of opportunities to move up the social ladder in a capitalist society. In a capitalist society, workers would be capable of leaving their business to start up a new one. With the mutilated form of capitalism that exists in the US right now, business owners are only paying their workers as low as possible because of the many regulations that the government has imposed on all business- whether they be small or large. With socialist-leaning systems, there is no real way to move up the social ladder (unless you become a politician, but having a society where the social classes are only divided by who's a Joe and who's part of the government would be madness).

(to be continued, unless I fall asleep. I'll try to stay up though, I've actually always wanted to debate against a real communist)

That's false. The control methods of the bourgeoisie give the illusion of choice but in reality there is little.

Unless you are a part of the bourgeoisie yourself and you want to function and live a healthy life in capitalism you are subject to and enslaved by

>Transportation costs
>private insurance
>Mortgage
>rent
>utility bills
>education costs

as well as the interest accrued from taking on such debts.

>Milton Friedman here. I don't understand
You got that right.

inevitable problems:
*stagnation, no innovation, workers would work, but there would be no stimuli to improve anything and quality of stuff suffers significantly
*vandalism, if nothing belongs to someone and everything belongs to everyone then nobody feels obligation to protect the property
*because of mandatory "planned economy" there would be lot's of shit nobody needs and no stuff everybody wants.
*since there would be no private property, most everyone would live in the same small flats, depression, drug addiction, alkoholism

just too many problems with little benefits. I've lived in USSR, I remember shit

Well clearly no one forced you to pay for an education, no one forces you to live in someone's property, no one forces you to buy a car.

Maybe you should take some personal responsibility, this system you claim to be constrained to is only containing because you don't have the willpower to leave it. Because it's actually better than the alternative.

I imagine your issue is that capitalism distributes goods based on merit, and you're apparently quite insecure and unable.

>Workers are not being "exploited" if they are willingly choosing to work for a business owner.
They are though. First, because they have nothing to sell but their labour power (that's what makes them proletarians), so they have to work for a business owner. Then, because what they'll get for this work is the value of their labour power (it's what they sell, after all, so it's only fair), which is inferior to the value generated when this labour power is used. The capitalist exploits their labour power like he would exploit any other tool; there's no moral judgement here, just a fact.

There are methods to become wealthier in a capitalist society, that is true. However, Communism posits that it is all through the exploitation of others.

Wealth is not generated from thin air, it begins with raw materials and those raw materials are assembled into goods. If at any stage one "partner" in a business or labor union earns more than another, it is due to exploitation. All people involved in the production of that good are integral to the end result regardless of their education level or the amount that they sweat.

Those who have a penchant for desk work and management will have the luxury of working in that environment (provided they have the skill set) while still receiving only their equal share in the production with all other partners.

If you could be more wealthy by forming labor unions under a communist government (which 99% of the population would be) why wouldn't you do this instead of working hard to eventually be in a position where you can earn more by the fruits of another exploited man's labor?

how can you leave? by swallowing the lead pill?

nothing in capitalism is based on "merit", it's all based on control.

>so they have to work for a business owner
Is this what they teach you in university these days bud? no wonder you commies are so assblasted

>nothing in capitalism is based on "merit", it's all based on control.
we can argue the semantics all day but I think we'll both agree it's better than theft

You don't think factories, and big businesses in general, are necessary to the current level of production of our society? You think we could do without them?

I was implying you're completely incapable of running a business and there's a reason you're an assblasted prole. Probably genetics.

well and theft is better than murder... what was your point?

Capitalism is the best system for distributing resources effectively. If you want to achieve other goals, in particular controlling or at least directing to some extent the culture of your society, then capitalism is a limited system.

Do you have an alternative to capitalism which doesn't clash with the magna carta?

>I was implying you're completely incapable of running a business
How is that relevant? What if everyone was genetically predisposed to successfully run a business? You think everyone could then?

>You don't HAVE to work for a business owner

You do if you want to live in a capitalist society and don't have the capital to start your own business.

>just work for the capital or take out a (((loan)))

Why would I want to be exploited for 10 years to finally build enough credit and capital to leverage a loan that could potentially ruin my life when the bankers earn their money from NOTHING? Even if my business were to succeed it would succeed by nature of me exploiting people who were just like me 10 years ago.

It's not moral and it's not intelligent.

Simply seize the means of production and unionize for the good of society!

You're a fucking idiot if you think capitalism is a controlling system. You are simply equating the human nature to control to the capitalist system because you live in one. Your critical thinking is absolute shite mate.

>You do if you want to live in a capitalist society
YOU DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A CAPITALIST SOCIETY

You're asking to be punched in the face and crying when you get punched.

Society would function if every single person was running a business. Clearly showing a communist level understanding of the marketplace champ.

most capitalists are incapable of that either... they just hire people to do shit for them, their only qualification usually is owning the capital. you might be referring to people who borrowed capital to make a business, but they are the same slaves as those other slaves, just a tad higher paid.

How is National Socialism inferior when Germany made a complete 180 from the hyperinflation under the Weimar Republic to the strongest nation in Europe in under a decade? Capitalism led to the Great Depression at the same time. Germany had a struggling global market surrounding it and still made this remarkable turn.

>Simply seize the means of production and unionize for the good of society!

Nice bait mate but I'll bite. If you think that you are owed a good/enjoyable/fulfilling life then you are wrong. You don't deserve it and based on your attitude you will never attain it. No political system will be able to give it to you. Just because you suck at life doesn't mean capitalism is broken.

I am telling you why Communism is superior to Capitalism.

There is no Communist society on this Earth and the ones that come close are being repressed by Capitalistic oligarchs who embargo them and threaten their nations if they even attempt to undermine their global dominance.

I want a communist state here in America INSTEAD of capitalism! I love America, why wouldn't I stay here and do what's best for the proletariat and my exploited countrymen?

>Society would function if every single person was running a business.
If that was the case, there wouldn't be a single factory in the world. You really thing "society would function" then?

You're showing an unbelievable amount of ignorance as to how businesses work, have you ever had a job?

sorry I thought you were making an argument not writing a blog post

>I want to start a business but I dont know what the fuck to sell, I dont know what the business will be about..
Usually a bad idea. You need a bare minimum of genuine interest to launch a business.

Corporatism is better.

You raise some pretty good points but global communism wouldn't work. We see in Europe today what forcing different cultures and races into the same borders does to social order. It is as you said, it is seen to work within small communities. So long as the argument isn't internationalist, it functions. National socialism accounts for that. Added bonus, the stimuli to improve the environment rather than a utopian assumption is pride in one's country and a desire to prove that they are the best people.

>You're showing an unbelievable amount of ignorance as to how businesses work
You are the one that seems to ignore many businesses have, and need, employees. You can't have a world full of business owners only, for then all these businesses would be 1-person businesses. Do you understand that much?

I'm not proficient in English law, what exactly doesn't it have to clash with?

as I mentioned earlier I believed that an impossible socialist democracy with restricted capitalism would work best. you just have to take best parts of everything

It always comes full circle back to these pitiful personal attacks...

I am not "owed" anything, I am a part of the proletariat. I work hard and I deserve to have my needs met by this work because I am an integral part of society just as every other proletarian is. We all deserve an EQUAL SHARE in the societal wealth that our unified labor creates.

No exploitation. No usury. No money.

Just human production reduced to it's rawest and most pure form, to better his environment and the environment of his community at large.

...

If you have freedom, as in legal independence of people from each other, to a large extent at least, it's obviously harder to impose a "vision" in capitalism.

>I am not "owed" anything
> I deserve to have my needs met by this work
Pick one.

>Eating this shit is the best fucking thing ever mate! Try it! Prove me wrong!
>I don't like to eat shit. I can smell it from here and I want to vomit
>I AM NOT FORCING YOU TO EAT SHIT
>Of course not, I am telling you why a healthy diet is a better alternative to-
>NICE BLOGPOST FAG HAHAHA not an argument!

how is it not controlling system? it's epitome of controlling system, there is no way around it... you have two choices either be butcher or a goat, and the choice is given on rare occasions. capital has absolute control over everything, law, media, workers, law enforcement... everything

>Your labor that benefits society at large doesn't justify a living within that society

Capitalists, everyone. Thanks for this reply, it really does typify the average capitalist in a way I couldn't. The (((bourgeoisie))) have done a good job with you.

>greedy at the expense of their family members!
You know jack shit about human nature i can tell

fun fact: there were high tens if not hundreds of US multinational companies investing in Germany, IBM, GE, Ford these sorts of companies... AND they couldn't take any money out of Germany... AND they new WW2 was coming... even Prescott Bush the daddy and granddady of the US presidents was sanctioned for "trading with enemy"... so most every corporation helped Germany get out of the hole and get ready for the inevitable WW2... USSR made millions of Ukrainians starve to death to feed Germany...

Who are you to say that your labor benefits anyone else?
In capitalism, people are willingly spending their money on you.

I made a mistake by staying on this thread until 4:30 AM. I know I'm not an idiot when it comes to economics and politics, but I'll admit I'm an idiot at one thing-

Picking a proper fucking time to even have this debate. I didn't think I'd actually have both communists and Nazis to debate against.

I literally have no time for this at this point. I really wanted to debate this, but I didn't know what I was pulling myself into. You know what I just pulled myself into? Sleep deprivation.

If I knew that actual communists and Nazis were going to enter this thread, I would have chose a better time frame and properly prepared arguments rather than pretend to be Milton Friedman and constantly echo some of his ideas.

Luckily, I have some people on my side, so I'll let them take over for me. Good night, everyone. I'll actually try to start one of these debates during a proper time frame where I can actually stay up.

(I feel so terrible. I've always wanted to debate communists and Nazis, but I've never had the chance of doing so. I guess the post that I started this thread with was a bit too edgy, because I pretty much tried to list about everything I could think of under three minutes.
Also, I'm not even really as extreme as Milton Friedman on the economic scale. I just kinda experimented with larping as the ghost of a right-libertarian economist, contrasting with Sup Forums's "libertarianism", which is really just edgy republicanism. Oh well...)

Ah! I missed this comment.

Communism doesn't have to entail multiculturalism. Marx lived in a time where racial exploitation was still rampant the world over and wanted to destroy ALL distinctions that lead to the exploitation of the proletariat including race.

This causes more harm than good in multicultural societies because people will use Marx's idea of destroying race as a means to exploit those they perceive as being more "privileged".

It's really a bastardization of his ideal.

You should check out "The Green Book" by muammar gaddafi. He didn't see a homogeneous society as a barrier to a communist/socialist society and in fact encouraged it.

Despite all of the autarky policies? You're making baseless claims. The idea of self-sufficience was the core of the third Reich's policymaking.

I'll bite... how come you are not "owed" it? if you claim to be democracy and nation owns vast natural resources how come you have no gain from that? why some corporation should get all the profit? if you consider a nation as corporation by the people for the benefit of the people, why the people should give away their benefit for a small fee and corporation should make billions?

>not making your own little community innawoods
Fucking bleb