Gentlemen, how do we enlight the masses to the truth that capitalism is not a good system to live or die for?

Gentlemen, how do we enlight the masses to the truth that capitalism is not a good system to live or die for?

Other urls found in this thread:

data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?contextual=default&locations=CN-IQ
sweden.se/business/how-sweden-created-a-model-economy/
creditwritedowns.com/2009/02/did-sweden-really-nationalize-its-banks.html
mises.org/library/how-modern-sweden-profits-success-its-free-market-history
freerepublic.com/focus/news/763481/posts
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Party_of_China
itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/bhobbs/Capitalism-The Unknown Ideal.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

We show them your country

By making them into wageslaves and expecting them to be grateful for it.

We behead commies and redistribute their organs.

But shutting up and watching China overtake everyone else. MARKETS distribute resources efficiently. Capital itself is not the mechanism. Socialism market economics is the new frontier. Unfortunately, most of the west is caught up in the false choice of neoliberalism vs. half-baked neomarxism

Yes capitalism needs us to buy things to maintain the system. The difference is we wouldn't have many of the luxuries of today without it. Does this Twatter faggot want us to all start living the life of serfs who merely live to die?

Also it's rich for him to talk about shit we don't need, when he does pissant webcomics.

in this thread, we pretend that the fed's intentional inflation of the money supply so that gov't and its cronies can buy all they want while everyone's standard of living declines "capitalism"

>He thinks the idea of having property is a bad idea

Ok, so give me all your stuff. I promise to let you use what you need.

> actial capitalism: Free people cooperating freely - is bad
For who?
Parasites
Niggers n mudslimes
In short:leftists.

Second statement is about corporatism/keynesianism.

Educate yourself before criticising something. Read austrian school economists.

By naming the Jews and pointing out that communism and capitalism is a choice between two sides of Jews. The only winning move is to make a 3rd choice.

Noone forces u.
U can also mot work and starve.
Or create your own company

Go join a commune if you want to live in a communist society so much. Nothing's stopping you.

To kill capitalism, you need to explain that the "elites" are degenerate not because money made them degenerate, but because they were selected to be elites due to their degeneracy. At one time, gay men were common in Hollywood because they were easy to blackmail. Now it is pedocriminals and other rapists. Trump is giving many examples as he attacks his enemies in the Establishment.

TPBP

>everyone starves

Uh, no?

And I’m sorry but that’s better than communism where everyone works in unneeded industries, can’t buy anything and you starve regardless

No it doesn't. If the business stops being profitable it's folded, the resources are reallocated, the workers find different employment. The monopolies are either straight out illegal or heavily reglamented to prevent a situation where everyone suffers the potential consequences.

if you quit buying shit the shit gets cheaper and more efficient sources pick up the slack

People unironically think America is capitalist
They see all the problems with america being a result of our evil capitalist ways
Makes them want socialism, since in their minds, thats the only option left
Yet they dont realize we’re more socialist than not.

Tricking people into begging for a system that is causing all their problems and blaming it on the system that could fix everything...(((theyre))) not idiots.

A simple formula; infinite economic growth + finite natural resources = inevitable collapse of consumer capitalism

Commies are good at trying to sound intellectual but I see through it. They're just lazy and want shit handed to them just because they exist. They should be purged.

Opposed to making a system where we only make things the state decides it needs and everyone starves anyways ?

this

Then why do they have empty cities?

>If we don't all keep constantly buying a bunch of shit we don't need, the system collapses and everyone starves
There will always be demand for food. How will anyone starve under capitalism in a society with selfsufficent agriculture?

You take over the schools and dominate culture. Then you browbeat and insult anyone who disagrees with you, construct a massive social welfare state, and when the economy fails due to unsustainable government spending on said blame the collapse on corporate greed and sabotage. Then disarm the populace, execute pogroms against the intelligencia, nationalize everything, and stave off societal collapse for as long as possible by blaming problems on outside sabotage and counterrevolutionary greedy behavior by what is left of the middle class.

Works the same in every country. Communism is like flappy bird. You will always fail, but it is fun to see how far you can go this time.

Because they plan long term. There are still 500 Million rural peasants in China. The ghost city meme is a fundamental misunderstanding of Chinese residency laws. You have to receive a residency permit to move to a different province and have your kids be able to attend local public schools. The Chinese housing boom is due to demand, and future projections. There is no private land ownership in China, and no foreign speculation allowed. I'm sure there is some graft, but they literally execute white collar criminals for fraud, investment scams, and money laundering.

>I love my countries race, people, and culture
>Supports unprotected capitalism just to make things easier for some kike on a billion dollar net worth

tpbp

Seeing as how most Whites have boy scout instincts, "everyone" starving sounds good to me.

FUUUuuck CAPITALISM

>posts about it on platform created from capitalism
>survives by people buy his webcomic merchandise, paying him to produce comics via pateron

What, are you aware of China's problems

>purposefully not differentiating between good capitalism (production) and bad capitalism (predatory finance)
>shilling for the most deadly ideology that has proven time and time again to lead to the massacre of the country's own population
it's like you want white genocide, soyboy

le edgy XDDDD

What..did the Chinese hire the Ukrainian faggots to shitpost since the Hillarybucks dried up?

>not REAL capitalism

The only reason china doesn't look like North Korea is that they liberalized the economy after the US started helping them in the 1970's. Fools like you who believe china is strong always seem to forget this or are truly ignorant of it.

If the Chinese lost the US a partner they would be unable to maintain their current status unless they could somehow replace $700 billion in trade per year, Find a way to replace almost their entire cash reserve $2.5 trillion of which is secured in USD, finds new sources for fuel, and finds new ways to educate hundreds of thousands of professionals they rely on US universities to produce. With the state of the EU today it is very unlikely China would be able to replace the US market. China is absolutely 100% dependent on the US, but the US could discard china as a partner and survive. There would be a recession, but the US could fill the void. China could not replace US partnership and would likely cease to exist as we know it.

>works the same in every country
Not really.

Capitalism is a great system, just let's not use the federal government as a cudgel
Also
Fuck Jews

without american capitalism, there would be no modern middle class in mexico

t. mexican who left after the 1994 economic crash

>some graft

I would think a Ukrainian would be far better versed in systemic government corruption. These massive construction projects that comprise the "ghost cities" exist purely to transfer wealth from the government to wealthy class of Chinese businessmen, who in turn share wealth with government officials. It is simply a way to paint a veneer of credibility across schemes to steal from the Chinese people and enrich the merchant and ruling classes. Claims that these places will one day be used are absurd, as they are not maintained. They are deteriorating. This is on purpose. The future plan is to build more projects as the current construction falls apart.

>There is no private land ownership in China
what the fuck, is that why they buy up everything here?
>I'm sure there is some graft, but they literally execute white collar criminals for fraud, investment scams, and money laundering.
amazing

Prove this. Where is a communist country where the people are wealthy and happy? The government does not rule by fear and coercion, where human and civil rights are respected?

Sweden? Finland? Some other pseudo socialist state in Europe? Notice they are social welfare states, but economies are not state controlled. These are capitalist countries.

But let me guess, "it was never REALLY tried, it will work this time. We will get it right".

How many times must a child burn its hand before concluding that the stove is, in fact, hot?

>they liberalized the economy after the US started helping them in the 1970's
this is all they needed to be a super power. Now they are no longer relying on strictly commienomics, capital is more efficiently distributed and the country is going through a massive boom

>Where is a communist country where the people are wealthy and happy?
plenty of sweden's economy is state controlled, i.e., alcohol is ran by the state. China is not doing communism, but "state socialism" which is a mix of capitalism and socialism. Socialism isn't all bad, provided it's in an ethnonationalist state, like uncle adolf wanted

Absurd, and wrong. If capital was being evenly distributed their per capital GDP would not be lower than such powerhouses as Iraq, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic. Regardless of which, this "boom" is a result of partnership with US. What happens to Chinese economy when you remove US from picture? Hm? Do you even understand? Almost a tenth of their entire GDP is derived from trade with the US. This does not count financial services, education, investments, etc. but purely on the trade of goods across the pacific. Think about this. Your position is simplistic.

China knows that its growth is dependent on US trade relations. That's why it's simultaneously laying the groundwork for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Silk Road intuitive. Their plan is to have a backup for when the US eventually pulls away or collapses. At that point, they want to pivot to the Eurasian economic and political zone, which is interestingly actually the historical central hub of global trade. I'm not saying it's going to work but the notion of replacing US trade with the entire former Soviet Union, Iran, and probably the eastern European Slavic states who are going to eventually part ways with mulitcult western Europe--it's not an intrinsically stupid plan. And it makes sense geopolitically. I expect the US to try for a few more proxy wars to prevent a stable SCO from materializing, but le 56% country may not have many more decades of economic/political stability.

For some reason white people, including English teachers like you, have a hard time imagining a world dominated by East Asians. Like whites will magically be on top forever for reasons, and despite all of the current trends.

You technically lease land from the government. You DO own the building on the land usually. In some ways it's a formality, but still, there is always a legal way for the state to claim dominion over any piece of land in the country--a bit more teeth than just imminent domain.

That's work. Communism is about not working.

Quit acting like universal pay is possible you retarded fucking child

>implying people will ever stop buying useless shit

>human rights
Take your Christian metaphysics back to America or Canada or wherever you're from. The west is on a terminal death spiral because its based on outdated modes of thought that are killing it from within, and all you can do is parrot tired liberal ideology. Democracy is unsustainable. It destroys itself. Authoritarianism based on national sovereignty, and a realist approach to human nature, and social dynamics is going to outlast the liberal experiment.

Or hoarding for that matter

Universal pay aka Communism

Its literally because of the social principles enacted. Americas population has massively increased since the 70s, not based off responsible child births, but by flooding the country with uneducated perma lowerclass citizens willing to drink beer, sweep floors, and collect poverty safety nets.

can’t tell if baiting for (you)’s or if you’re really this retarded

Capitalism never forced anyone to buy anything to achieve shit. It just offers consumers a wide choice by way of competition. If everyone would buy more carefully without wasting energy and time on useless shit, like a 700 HP family all terrain vehicle, money (a.k.a. work or energy) would be available for higher development, research or environmental conservation.

according to the world bank, chian's per capita gdp is higher than iraqs...
data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?contextual=default&locations=CN-IQ
So what if 1/10th of their economy comes from us buying their cheap shit? It isn't stopping anytime soon. The world's good are made in China
>a world dominated by East Asians
God help us.
>a bit more teeth than just imminent domain.
ah, not too far off from here then. Sounds like the government there just owns the land more formally than here.

We hang you and that twitter account owner from a nearby tree.

You don't.

If you haven't noticed, 99% of people don't care about anything except their comforts. All they want is to spend money on things that make them feel good, and to fit in with everyone else who is doing the same thing.

Try and tell someone that they don't need to eat that, or they don't need to drink, or smoke, or watch some dumb TV show.

They will fucking hate you.

Now try telling them that we need to upend the entire system that provides them with these comforts.

They'd sooner kill you, than die to help you.

The fruits of democracy and universal suffrage

Sargon recently outed this duded as a commie.

Looks like he stopped LARPing as a moderate/democrat/whatever

capitalism:
if you dont buy you starve.
communism:
you starve.

>The fruits of democracy and universal suffrage
you can blame democracy all you like, but it's the nature of man...every type of society that has ever existed has eventually decayed. democracy is the second to last stage of decay, right before tyranny

Five percent of swedens economy is state controlled. Ten percent if you include public/private cooperatives. Sweden has also been working to operate on a more balanced budget and privatize more of government owned industries since the 1990's. Try again if you feel like wasting your time.

sweden.se/business/how-sweden-created-a-model-economy/

creditwritedowns.com/2009/02/did-sweden-really-nationalize-its-banks.html

mises.org/library/how-modern-sweden-profits-success-its-free-market-history

For the record, I want to put western Marxists against the firing wall. Most of them aren't even materialists. They're revolutionary anarchists swimming in liberal metaphysics with a dash of post-modern theory. They're educated barbarians.

I fuck your mom in ears and watch your dicklady of daddy watch it.

Do you have a book on socialist market economics? I am really attracted to the idea but all the sources end up being stoners on the internet and coherent rigorous philosophies.

American is not more socialist, the majority of the economy is private, not public enterprise. And in that private sector, the majority of businesses are corporations (a capitalist structure) and not worker cooperatives (a socialists structure.

Captialism is a set of property rights regarding capital, where there is a separation of use and ownership. Capitalism allows absentee landlords, rentiers, and absentee shareholders. A socialist system doesn't allow the separation of use and ownership around capital (hence why corporations are a violation of socialist property rights theory, and worker cooperatives are not).

The US market economy is not based on socialist property rights (eg. Sole professorships and worker cooperatives), and it is dominated by public enterprise either. So it's not more socialist than capitalist.

What Americans tend to equate socialism with any form of regulation for social welfare. Attempts at regulation of capitalism to benefit social welfare is social democracy theory, not socialism.

If you want to understand Socialist property rights theory. I highly recommend the book:

Markets Not Capitalism By Gary Cartier

If you want to understand Worker Cooperatives I recommend:

Democracy At Work By Richard Wolff

and how socialist is china's? While they continue to rape wherever they please?

But that proves the point of OP. If nobody consumes the goods while production is not limited the production will collapse. Capitalism relies on consumption, not on production. Even more so, the domino effect shows that if we stop consuming Iphones, food production suffers. This is a flaw. Don't know a better system though.

Anti-capitalists are not against the production of goods, they are against the economic system in which those goods are produce.

Anti-capitalists still need to survive within the system and earn money. Also there is such a thing as non-capitalist markets.

The book; Markets Not Capitalism By Gary Cartier, explains how market socialism theory.

Indeed. We can only do the best with the times we're born into. Still, I'll put my money on any system that actually perceives the Problem of Modernity, and makes good faith efforts to reconcile modernity with pre-modernity. Liberalism is codified cognitive dissonance. The functional governments of the future are going to be various riffs on fascist, Marxist, and other explicitly modernist lineages. Explicit modernism is the only way to resist the abyss of post-modernity. The west has no cultural or theoretical immunity. It's sad watching good hearted people like Peterson spout Christian abstractions in hopes that the lie of liberalism can survive for ONE more generation.

Dozens of thinkers have noted how post-Communist countries have been remarkable resistant to multiculturalism and post-modernism. One reason for that, aside from good old fashioned racism, is that they've wrestled with modernism, and intuited the need for a synthesis with traditional culture. A little dialectical materialism is a useful thing--if not Marx, at least reading Hegel. Eastern Europeans HATE Communism, but their materialist educations have helped them see through the bullshit of liberalism too. Life is funny.

Just let it do it's thing.

Not a socialist or a communist, but capitalism sucks major dick. If you're a nationalist and unironically support capitalism, you're literally asking for more immigration while also wanting to reduce immigration.


Europe and the West at large needs cheap workers to support their welfare state whilst keeping basic goods cheap

In Germany's case that backfired because the workers they thought they were importing weren't really workers

It's a mixed system. No one in their right mind would describe what the fed does as free market

>Notice they are social welfare states, but economies are not state controlled
I don't think you understand the sentence you just wrote. The free market doesn't exist in real world.

>If you're a nationalist and unironically support capitalism, you're literally asking for more immigration while also wanting to reduce immigration.

It blows my mind that nationalists (who are not new to nationalist thought) don't understand that about capitalism.

Open borders benefits industrialists because it drives down wages, and increases competition in the labour market.

Also, marketing profoundly shapes society, and seeing as consumption is necessary to keep the engine of capitalism functioning, it's necessary to engage in the multi-billion dollar project of shaping consumers to be impulsive, overconsumers and materialistic.

I'm a cultural nationalist (a socialist nationalist), not an ethnonationalist. And like I said, it blows my mind that there are so many pro-capitalist nationalists who don't reallize that they are antithetical to one another.

By observing the progress of mankind, we can see that the things that are good for everyone are the things that have increased the accountability of the individual, the respect for the individual and the power of the individual to master his own fate. Judaism gave us laws before which all men, no matter their rank, stood as equals. Christianity taught us that each person has intrinsic worth, Newt Gingrich and Pat Schroeder included. The rise of private enterprise and trade provided a means of achieving wealth and autonomy other than by killing people with broadswords. And the industrial revolution allowed millions of ordinary folks an opportunity to obtain decent houses, food and clothes (albeit with some unfortunate side effects, such as environmental damage and Albert Gore).

P.J. O'Rourke

freerepublic.com/focus/news/763481/posts

>their materialist educations have helped them see through the bullshit of liberalism too
i don't follow you there. Definitely interesting to note how post-commuist countries aren't multicultural. The resistance to post-modernism might also be because these countries are much more poor than the liberal winners who've been on top for so long

Just talk about externalities. If someone really understands externalities then they will also understand that capitalism alone is not enough and the NAP is bullshit.

The main problem is that the things that socialized (like medicine & arguably utilities) are not (mostly), and many things that shouldn't be socialized/subsidized are. The government pays enormous sums for military technology in hugely wasteful ways ( trillion+ $ F-35), and no-bid contracts seem to be rampant, meanwhile non-commodities like health care are treated as if people actually "shop around" for medicine when they are sick instead of just getting treatment.

that should be socialized*

And I am saying these initiatives by china would fail to replace value of US trade. Look at who their new partners would be. Pakistan? India? Russia? Their combined purchasing power is dwarfed by the US, and further they are also competitors in the same markets. Would Russia buy resources from china like wood or stone? No, but they will sell gas and oil. Would India or Pakistan buy cheaply produced Chinese finished good that they themselves are already producing, and already competing with china in international markets? What do you think?

Will the EU come to the rescue? Just this year the EU refused to sign the Silk Road agreement. Trade between EU and china has been falling for several years. Do you believe this will change? Why?

And the IMF puts Iraq ahead. The point is that China's wealth is NOT distributed evenly. The merchant and ruling classes benefit. Not the majority of the country, who are still effectively 19th century peasants.

all you can do is parrot vatnik propaganda. Prove capitalist societies are in a "death spiral". You cannot. Proving the communism and totalitarianism ruins economies and results in failed states is easy however. Look around you. Where is the authoritarian state that is thriving? China? Once again, china would not thrive without the support and cooperation of your so called failed states of democratic and capitalistic countries.

>we dont need food
>we dont need entertainment
>we dont need houses
>we don't need cars
Hey, this is kind of fun.Try it out!

They're simple minded, and are skeptical to anything seeming ''communist''. I'm a nationalist, but I do not like modern capitalism.

>everyone starves
>the people who grow their own food starve

Just go on a hyperlink clicking binge starting here. Eventually you'll put two and two together even if the theory is a little oblique.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Party_of_China

You're not going to find much western analysis of China from a theoretical Marxist perspective because most Western Marxists don't care, are more interested in post-modernism, and/or just think the Chinese are fascist revisionist shitlords who have nothing worth learning from.

Just remember that they haven't abandoned Marxism or Communism, but reinterpreted Marxist historicity. They've also decided that the Labor Theory of Value was not meant to be an actual pricing mechanism (hence the switch to market driven pricing), and they've said that Communism requires abundant wealth, not just political will, or creating a "new man". My interpretation is that this is essentially an accelerationist position, and that China intends to use the creative power of capitalism to propel technologically advancement and approach post-scarcity as closely as possible. We won't get Communism until we have the replication economy of Star Trek, or something functionally similar.

Make one person responsible to get food and medicine for your whole commune. Shoot anyone anyone, who is trying to get food or something for health by himself.

Capitalists will see how you prosper and join.

>But shutting up and watching China overtake everyone else
kek
they exist because of our debt

Capitalist societies are in a DEMOGRAPHIC death spiral, you obtuse swipl leftist. You think the US is going to be economically competitive with a 75% non-white 90 IQ VOTING population? Get serious. Capitalism isn't going to destroy the west. Liberalism is.

itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/bhobbs/Capitalism-The Unknown Ideal.pdf

This is the point. There is no better system currently, yet proponents of communism persist on thrusting forward the same mutilated corpse of an ideology.

The ONLY way capitalism is to work whilst preserving an ethnic group in the contemporary world would be to reduce child labor laws, wages, and borderline reenact slavery and have a proper state (similar to the confederacy) to ensure that such a system is upheld.

Are you really willing to do that? I doubt it. Something like that would require huge amounts of bloodshed and effort.

>Liberalism is.

right, that's why the most liberal parts of the US (and the world, frankly) are also the most successful and essentially subsidize conservacuck shitholes. keep arguing "muh feelings" though, you buttfucking queer.

Better than communism where everyone just starves

>Not the majority of the country, who are still effectively 19th century peasants.
China has BILLIONS of people. Their per capita gdp is so low because of this. For the most part, a centralized authoritarian government with a free market system will allocate resources as best as possible. Don't expect to raise billions out of poverty overnight. At least they're fed this time around.

I covered in another post. China's economy is liberalized. It is not a true command economy. The government continues to control all resources and retains the power and right to step in when they choose.. but in practice the merchants are free to run their businesses so long as the government is getting its cut.

>Outdated modes
Outmode

>Just remember that they haven't abandoned Marxism or Communism, but reinterpreted Marxist historicity.
That's for sure. Look at the giant pictures of Mao.
>They've also decided that the Labor Theory of Value was not meant to be an actual pricing mechanism (hence the switch to market driven pricing)
which it totally was

The problem is mixing too much socialism in to the capitalist system.
Crony-capitalism is just fake-capitalism, and essentially the same as USSR was.

I'm glad to see you're against the blind redistribution of wealth. The US is wealthy because it was the last country standing at the end of WWII, the first country with nukes, and the last country standing at the end of the Cold War. That's all well and good, but you didn't answer my question about a non-white American. Apparently you think Mexicans, blacks, and white women are going to be able to run a prosperous society.

At one time, the US was a cultural, economic, and political backwater. The world never stays the same. You have to assess trends and make reasonable predictions. You sound like another cookie cutter white liberal who thinks because he's on top today, he'll be on top tomorrow. If people like you that people read about a hundred years latter and say "how could they be so stupid?"