Anyone who does not understand why communism is the best political system can ask me

Anyone who does not understand why communism is the best political system can ask me.

Other urls found in this thread:

google.si/search?q=hospitals in cuba&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=925&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwivmdHz3r3SAhVNrRQKHaiCCdsQ_AUIBigB
democracycuba.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

why nigga?

Because the basis of communism is that workers have power. The basis of capitalism is that owners have power.

Are you a worker, or do you own a company? The answer to that question should determine which system you support.

Ain't no party like the communist party because it ain't working.

Yeah the website that this image came from made that joke.

That was to be expected.

Fidel Castro has made Cuba one of the safest nations in all of Latin America.
- Low murder rate
- Low theft rate
- Low prostition rate (considering other LA countries)

Cuba has one of the best health care systems in all of LA, as well.
- Free for all citizens
- Major exporter of doctors to regions in need
- Free for all foreigners
- Lowest infancy death rate in LA, lower than USA

Cuba has one of the best education systems in the world, esspecially LA.
- 97% literacy rate
- Some of the worlds best universities
- Some of the best medical schools in the world (including the Latin American School of Medicine, a med. school for foreigners who agree to work in low income area of their home countries, and it's free)
- Free and guaranteed education for all citizens

Kept Cuba from imperialist dominance
- Defended homeland from American invasion during Bay of Pigs
- Stood up to the USA during Cuban Missile crisis
- First time in Cuba's history it has been TRULY independant

No party murdered as many of their own people. no party like that. YOur idea is dead, never will it be accepted or wanted by majority of people including majority of working class. Never was there a successful country to survive with it. your mind is fogged and you probably are a jobless twenty-something loser who lives in his parents apartment who never tried socialism and worse communism in your life. Gtfo and be productive you fucking loser.

Your mind has been brainwashed. You're not worth talking to. Actually, I shouldn't say that. You're a worthwhile person, as we all are. But I know that nothing I say will move you. Sadly, I could point to so much evidence that simply disproves your view. But I can tell you will dismiss it. So I will not waste my time. Good luck to you. I hope you come around one day.

>Fidel Castro made the murder rate lower
>by murdering thousands of people, including extended family, who he, in his paranoia, thought were "out to get him" when most weren't.

>Cuba has one of the best health care systems in all of LA
>So, still third-world level then? Right? Right.

Kek it's amazing how indoctrinated these stupid ass kids are these days honestly. This is what happens when parents tell their kids they don't have to get a part-time job during high school; they grow up thinking shit just falls out of the sky for free.

If it's so good, why has it historically always been a failure?

google.si/search?q=hospitals in cuba&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=925&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwivmdHz3r3SAhVNrRQKHaiCCdsQ_AUIBigB

point us evidence

The Cuban healthcare system is world-class. In terms of access to healthcare, it beats the United States. The fact that Cuba is a tiny island under embargo by the biggest country in the world only demonstrates how powerful communism is to overcome those disadvantages.

As for murder, you can make up whatever lies you like. The murders of US presidents are well documented, both through foreign invasions and through their support of dictatorships and tyrannies such as Noreaga. The US has ordered the execution of thousands in the name of the fight against communism.

Approved by a STALKER.

Capitalism is currently failing 40% of the population. Why not mention that? You can walk down any downtown street and see its failure. Or look at house foreclosures. Or look at the salaries of teachers, and highly educated professors on food stamps. This, in the richest country in the world. How can that be called success?

Communist states just transfer capitalist power to the hands of the state, leaving proletarians as powerless as before. But hey, it's a "proletarian" state so it must be empowering..

why do you use capitalist merchandise then? use communist inventions and products. where are they? how many are there? your phone, tv, computer, car, clothes... what is there? they run out even of coffee every now and then

Cuba is the best counterexample to that argument, because it is a successful implementation of communism.

The USSR became an imperialist power, and did indeed concentrate power at the top. Its agenda became about power expansion. Even so, the average person living in the USSR - even during the sell-out phase after Stalin's death - was far better off than what happened when the oligarchs took over under capitalism. If you visit common people in the former soviet bloc, they are nostalgic for communism. That's because they had a better life then.

you need to be physically removed

Is it a surprise that an island nation with a trade embargo by its huge superpower neighbour would find it difficult to import products?

You can compare access to housing, food, healthcare, clothing in the US today to Cuba, and Cuba still comes out favourably, because the poorest people are well cared for. Under capitalism, the poorest are left to rot - used only for their labour. The condition of labour is insecurity. Everyone must worry about losing their job, and take low pay.

That does not mean workers had power. Capital owners in Cuba where still the masters over the workers, even if capital was now owned by the state. Communism is a fraud and as much a threat to the proletariat as capitalism

>access to healthcare
Clever wordplay you're trying to use to avoid communism's obvious failures. Access to healthcare is great. So is quality of healthcare. If everyone gets 'free access' to healthcare, but your doctor's office is a fucking chicken shack with barely any supplies then what good is the fact that it's free?

Face it, capitalism incentivizes quality, efficiency, as well as innovation 1000x more than communism ever has or will.

>Make up whatever lies you want
Ah, so falling back on the good old "fake news" bullshit now? Stop trying to rewrite history.

I'm sure your goofy ass wouldn't walk through little Havana spouting your pro-commie bullshit to people who actually lived under it and escaped. They'd set your dumb ass straight in about 4 seconds.

You should have lived in Eastern Europe between the 1950 and 1990, and then you would know perfectly why communism is not a nice thing.

To describe a Cuban doctor's office as a chicken shack only proves you know nothing of the subject.

I wasn't describing it as such. I was making a point. The fact that you focused on something as inconsequential as that instead of addressing the valid point that I made shows just how indoctrinated and uneducated you are.

My grandfather grew up in Poland during that time. While I agree that conditions were not great, I'm not extolling the USSR or its imperialism. I'm talking about communism. At that point, the USSR was enacting imperialism.

Even so, to understand communism's effects on Eastern Europe you have to consider the historical conditions there. Eastern Europe has always been underdeveloped - as has Russia. With the first decades of communism Russia in particular leapt ahead as an industrial power, providing cars, rail, factories, goods, electricity to huge swathes of the population. This is always ignored by critics of communism.

dude, people here lived under that shit and its hell. YOu run out of basic goods. whatever free we were provided was shit quality. Its a system for lazy people where no mater if you work you get paid. people who are in power are stupidly rich and never change. democracy doesent work there and working class stays poor. Reminds me of it when i see shit cars they still drive there. You never tried it yet you talk like an expert. Its a SHIT system that will never bring quality life to no one but country leaders. i see others who lived it try to tell you that. yet you listen to some communist shit propaganda

OP it's funny how you don't want to talk about that great working bastion of Socialism (aka communism lite) Venezuela. Karl Marx himself said that socialism is only the first step towards communism. Even China has learned that it needs capitalism to survive. No where and at no time has communism worked. Not very good bait man, but good enough to make me show everyone else what an idiot you are.

Bait needs more jpeg

If you are an acolyte of Hayek, I can see there's no point in discussion with you.

Enjoy your brutal dog eat dog world.

>Even so, to understand communism's effects on Eastern Europe you have to consider the historical conditions there. Eastern Europe has always been underdeveloped - as has Russia. With the first decades of communism Russia in particular leapt ahead as an industrial power, providing cars, rail, factories, goods, electricity to huge swathes of the population. This is always ignored by critics of communism.

Sounds just like any liberal defender of capitalism
>hey capitalism is oppressive and kills a lot of people!
>naw its okay because it develops economies

You don't have to visit the moon to talk about it. I can describe its motion, and where it will be in the sky tomorrow, yet I'm not a physicist.

I've read a lot on the subject of communism. I know people who have lived in the eastern bloc, and been to Cuba. Most importantly, I understand the propagandistic nature of our society. From elementary school we are indoctrinated in the value of the free market, and never connect the dots about inequality, starvation, and the shit conditions we have to work under. The media supports the view, and distracts us at every turn. Trump vs. Clinton - great choice. Both billionaires and power brokers. It's astonishing to me how people consider this a democracy.

Well, of course it wasnt true communism. Also Russia exploited other countries so that it could improve itself. Planned economy was a success story at first, although as youve said they leapt ahed with planned economy, but the products were very poor quality and poorly built, because they went quantity over quality.
But importantly, communism dragged Europe back and now these parts are even more behind the west than they were 100 years ago.

As a result of communism, Russia industrialized and modernized. That is not debatable. The idea that that is a step backwards is ridiculous.

Russia yes, other Eastern bloc countries wouldve done better without communism, that what im saying.

>"If you quote anyone smarter than me, with more knowledge, experience, and basis for their opinion I'll just ignore you."

Every. Wannabe-commie liberal. Ever. You're a shining example of why no one takes you idiots seriously.

>hayek fanboy
>calling other people liberals
wat

Communism is the perfect equation
Unfortunately people are not stationary variables
People change
Perfect communism is in attainable
Fuck off commie

Still waiting for a response to this....

It is possible. But that is debatable. Europe at least has implemented a pretty socialized economic model, which provides a good life for most people. The issue is that the power still remains with the wealthy. And inequality continues to grow, even in socialized Europe, because capital governs.

Oh, did you think it deserved a response? It is false. There.

Don't feel too bad, I'm waiting for a response to this too

I'm not a hayek fanboy, I specifically used his quote to show that even moderate liberals are smart enough to know that you far-left idiots whining about "how much better socialism and communism would be" say that you are wrong. The fact that you can't see that, even when people on your own side say it's true, just shows again that you are nothing but a tool without the slightest grasp on critical thinking.

Yes, since tankie scum like you are as much oppressors of my class as any bourgeoise pig. But please tell me about Marx prophecies on class liberation

Then what do you say to those who fled and came to America for a better life and have prospered under capitalism?

What do you say to those in a country of, for, and by the people, who fought a war to keep such a system at bay?

Why do you place the word of a few russians over the whole of the western world?

>neoclassical drone
>accussing others of being incapable of critical thinking
hoo boy

Look up tankie. Or read what I've written.

If the USSR was an inferior implementation of Communism and Cuba was better, then how do you know that their implementation of Democracy was any better?

Why are claims on personal property necessarily illegitimate? I understand that ownership of capital, especial capital owned by those with no creators claim, results in the subjugation of laborers. As all capital is derived from labor and/or capital, and all value is derived from the intersection of labor and capital, labor is the font of all value in society; as such estrangement of labor is inherently unproductive.

However, I do not see the public welfare obtained from voiding personal property rights. Why is there the need to extend beyond collective ownership of production if illegitimate rents are destroyed?

I'll do that when you've responded to my claim that communist states just switch class oppression in the hand of private hands to the state

The appeal of communism is fantasy. I, like everyone else, wish that everyone’s needs would be met and society wouldn’t stratify men and women into socio-economic classes, some to forever live better than the others. If there was any evidence that communism worked, I’d be at the front of the line, demanding and fighting for it. But the truth is that it does not. A basic understanding of math, human psychology and evolution, and elementary economics will answer the basic questions as to why it cannot work.

The bedrock of capitalism is that everyone has something, and wants something. And that to get something from someone, you have to give them something in return. At the same time, some things are not owned by anyone, and so we have the government watch over those. It’s the barebones of capitalism. If you want something from someone, give them something in return. Communism on the other hand, believes that everything there is belongs to everyone and no one, and so government should organize everything and give everyone what they need, end of story. Which is all well and good if we were all farm animals without the ability to create new things, but unfortunately, we do. And naturally, as a human being, when you create something, you want to use it or get the benefit of it, not have everyone else lay claim to it. If everything you made was immediately turned over to everyone, whether you wanted to or not, soon, you’d refuse to make things anymore.

This is at the heart of why communism doesn’t work. In capitalist societies, whatever you create is yours. If others want to use it, they will have to give you something in return, something you think has just as much value or use as what you’re giving them. We simply invented money as an accounting system to tie all those values together and make it easy to exchange. It is, at it’s heart, a very simple system. It’s also a system that gives people the most incentive to create as many things as their energy will allow, for others to use. This is why capitalist societies prosper, while communist or socialist ones generally don’t.

Communism is not a 'political system', it's evolved capitalism.

COMMUNISM IS HERESY, IN SUCH A SOCIETY, THE LAMBS OF GOD ARE FORCED TO WORK TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEMONS, HERETICS, AND THE SINNERS!! IT IS A HAVEN ONLY TO VISCIOUS BLOOD-DRAINING PARASITES!!!

SUCH A SYSTEM IS UNHOLY!!

LOOK TO ROME!!
LOOK TO ANCIENT GREECE!!!

THESE ARE THE HOMES OF OUR ANCESTORS, BASTIONS OF DEMOCRACY AND HOLY REPUBLIC!!!

HEAR MY SERMON, SINNERS AND BE ENLIGHTENED BY THE HOLY WORD OF GOD!!!!

I am not sure what you are asking here.

Cuba is a good example of democracy if you ignore Western media accounts of it and actually investigate it. There are academic papers written on the subject (obviously not the ones written by Rand corporation, etc.) as well as books. You can also observe their parliament in action. If you live there you get a better feel for it.

I lived in South Korea and got a feel for the politics while I was there. The mayor of my town was indicted for corruption. The principal of the school where I taught bought his job, and used it to get bribes from local businesses. Corruption in that "democracy" is rampant. Just look at Park Geun Hye.

That's not a falsifiable claim. Wtf am I supposed to do with that other than post it on fb and hope people mistake it as profound?

>In capitalist societies, whatever you create is yours.

Simply not true. What workers create gets taken by the capitalist to be sold on the market

Hm? Personal property is not void under communism. Common misconception. People own their cars, their houses, etc. If the country goes to war and the state needs the steel, it must be given up. That's logical as it is an existential threat. But otherwise it is owned privately. What is not allowed is the use of capital to build wealth. Instead the state builds the economy for the benefit of all citizens.

There are academic papers written about everything, friendo. Cite something for me to read.

Now, because real life examples are always better than theories, let’s run through one of the sharpest capitalist-socialist experiments we’ve witnessed in the years since A Communist Manifesto was written: China and the Koreas.

China with its vast lands, population, technology, decided to adopt communism. It plunged into a poverty so bad that millions of people starved to death. Nothing was being produced, not food, not houses, not clothing, nothing. Until they got fed up and switched back to a state directed capitalist expansion, which has seen them unleash prosperity on a level that has them now as the second most powerful nation, behind the US. And the Western powers had little to do with their communist fall, and their current capitalist rise.

Yeah, you have a basic misunderstanding of capitalism here. Ask the GM worker if he owns the car he just built.

The Koreas: during the Japanse occupation of the Korean peninsula, the then allies America and Russia got together and freed the two Koreas. The Soviet occupied North was pushed towards Communism, while the American occupied South was opened to capitalist democracy. Decades later, what is the result? Seoul is a financial center, has hosted the Olympics, Korean film and entertainment has poured out into the world, exporting their culture, Samsung, HTC and more are leading the world in mobile technology, and the country has the best Internet, some of the wealthiest citizens, etc. It has, even far more than China, moved from third world to first world. What about it’s Communist North Korean brother who started in the same spot with them? We all know.

>Low prostitution rate
What a dick he is.

anyone who belives in communism today is either mentally handicapped or a child...

Stop trying to use buzzwords to sound smart and explain how the numerous valid points ITT are wrong..
You're a vapid, indoctrinated tool with nothing but name-calling and hot air about "muh free stuff though!" It's amazing you don't have the self-awareness to see that.

Sure, that does not mean that workers own the goods they produce through their labor. The capitalist does that, and he sells them on a market for a profit

We can go on and on. African communist failures in Ethiopia (mass starvation), central Africa (dictatorial leaders, mass starvation), Cuba (great education, but mass poverty, people swimming over the oceans to escape to better countries-including Tony Montana lol), Vietnam (only just abandoned communism, still incredibly poor although its economy is slowly picking up).

When all these people have gone through these theories and proven that communism is never workable in a large scale society (unfortunately, we can’t all live at Indian tribe level forever), I don’t understand why ordinarily smart people will keep preaching about it. When you say “everyone will have everything”, first understand that if no one makes those things, no one will have them. Criticize capitalism if you must, but when the poverty level in the average capitalist country is a princely income in most poor countries, and an astonishing sum of money in any communist one, you’d have to be a little off to think the communism is the way to go.

Ah, I see. Then what's the difference between Communism and Democratic Socialism? The State as a formal economic administrator as opposed to collective worker groups?

democracycuba.com/

You are misinterpreting the shit out of his statement. Those cars are owned by the owner of the company. The worker is paid by the owner for building the car. The Owner has a car to sell and the worker has money to feed his family. The scales are equal here, bucko.

Comrade!!

>Stop trying to use buzzwords to sound smart and explain how the numerous valid points ITT are wrong..

No. It's more fun to mock you for your dumb posts

Democratic socialism is another name for capitalism with strong social programs (at least as it is implemented in Scandinavia). Communism at base is the dictatorship of the proletariat. Yes, the collectivization of workers, and the formal incorporation of those collectives into the system of state power.

Except the strongest incentive in modern capitalist society *isn't* to create things.

The strongest incentive, by far, is to merely *own* things and collect rents. It disproportionately rewards unproductive behavior. Look at any real estate mogul; they aren't creating anything per se. They're just engaging in arbitrage (no value added).

But muh cuba

How could "In capitalist societies, whatever you create is yours" be interpreted as "In capitalist societies, what you create is not yours, but you will be compensated for a small sum of the value of your creation"?

He stated that you own what you make. He is trying to criticize communism in saying this. He is saying that in communism you don't own what you make. But actually, you don't own what you make under capitalism. Ask the software engineer working for any software company, do you own your code? No. The company does. That's capitalism.

Ah, gotcha. Additionally, where do Communists derive the moral authority to enforce said dictatorship? Standard consent of the governed argument, or something else?

> Implying the owner invented the notion of a car
> Implying the owner invented the model of car he sells
> Implying the owner invented any of the equipment used in the creation of said car
> Implying the owner does anything bu collect rent

China is able to 'game the system' due to control over economy by a central government. Freezing intrest rates, setting artificial currency exchange rates ect. This has allowed the chinese to manipulate world market's to their advantage. As an example how many 'made in America' are only assembled on American soil using Chinese steal? I'm looking at you auto industry.
The theory of Marxist economic progression remains solid. Capitalism to global capitalism to socialism to global socialism to communism. The succes of china is their ability to retool their economy from a communist one to a nationl socialism. The failure of north korea is the same as the failure of the USSR. Namely their failure to transition to a socialist society and instead the adoption of an oligarchy dominated by a dictatorship regime.
TL;DR The communist train is coming it's just going to take a couple of centuries.

> communism is never workable in a large scale society (unfortunately, we can’t all live at Indian tribe level forever),
fucking this

Hmm, so in communism the worker does not own what he created, and in capitalism, the worker does not own what he created..
Does that mean.. that communist nations where in fact state-capitalist???

>In capitalist societies, whatever you create is yours.

Absolutely false. The vast majority of wage slaves in capitalist society produce more financial value than they make. The inherent mechanism of capitalism promotes a upper class paying people less than the value of their production, which you then in turn, sell for profit.

The easiest way to look at this, is how children who make your clothes in Bangladesh get paid almost nothing, to work 16 hours a day in a sweatshop. A product of capitalism. You can't sell the lower and middle class pants that they make themselves in America, because the profit margins just aren't there. You would have to charge too much to make any reasonable amount of money. So you go to a country that's impoverished, establish a factory there, and pay them dirt for something you will ship back to the wealthy nations to sell for a real markup.

The best part? People will pay hundreds of times the amount it cost to produce these pants, and then donate them to charity when they're done with them, to be shipped back to the country that you've established your business in.

That's how capitalism functions. You don't own what you make. Someone else owns what you make.

And bringing up money shows how clueless you are. Financial systems existed far before, and will exist far after the current political systems were in place. Money isn't tied to a political system.

You're talking about two different things. When a worker takes a job, he works for his pay.
When someone builds a car on his own, he owns the car. He can't just build a car though because he doesn't own the materials. If he wants to, he can take out a loan to buy these things and build the car. Then it is his. Nothing is free, my friend.

No? It just means states are inherently tyrannical institutions and all of them need to steal to prop themselves up.

Communism has never worked. Unless we're talking about killing civilians.

Btw, bitch.

Welfare and other social program's created by whites kept the black race from extinction.

the low IQ ethnicity that are blacks simply cannot survive without help from superior races.

Women only fuck black boys if they are paid an incredible amount, if they were sexually abused or if they have severe issues with their father.

Even with assistance, the black race is dying. The facts behind this divisive, rare fetish are that a handful of rounded up black males fuck women with deep vaginas that are paid a higher amount to be with the them than they are when they fuck their white male counterparts.

The black race is lower IQ and inherently easier to control and manipulate. It is in the best interest of corporations to keep them alive and make them seem relevant in the gene pool. If black people were to be the majority, the population would follow trends to an even larger degree, mindlessly buy things they don't need to an even larger degree, and be far more addicted to instant gratification.

When a lowly woman decides to have sex with a black male, she is forever completely debased. This is why she does not usually share this fact. There is no going back because she can never gain even 10% of the respect she once had.

This is why black women are actually much more likely to date a white man then white women are to date a black man.

Black males have no discipline, no work ethic, little intellect, little cleanliness, no ambition, and are addicted to hedonism and instant gratification. This is why they need government assistance in the financial realm, and government assistance overall to control their every move. Without the government, they would live in huts, spread disease, enslave and kill each other, literally huff shit to get high, inbreed, and eventually die off. They cannot think for themselves, let alone think for the righteousness of humankind as a whole.

The moral authority stems from the theft of power that has been perpetrated by any oligarchic system. The majority has the authority to govern. The productive people are the ones who build society, not the alleged "job creators" who do nothing but skim wealth from the labour of others.

Why is "buying something" a legitimate claim on that thing, especially with respect to capital?

Why does the fact that someone hypothetical traded electronic abstractions of pieces of paper trump natural law?

Tell me, why doesn't the software engineer make the software on his own?

You are mistaking the commune for communism. For an example of a functioning large scale communist economy, see the USSR, 1917-1950.

...

True but this does not contradict the fact that communist nations are state capitalist

>Ask the software engineer working for any software company, do you own your code? No. The company does. That's capitalism.

Maybe ask the software engineer if they signed a contract, of their own free will, upon an agreement of salary to work for that company. That same software engineer, in a capitalist country, is free to write whatever code he/she wants on his/her own and sell it to the highest bidder without anyone getting in the way and still retaining ownership of said code. That's not possible under communism.

How fucking uneducated are you exactly? The mental gymnastics you have to do for this shit to sound sane in your mind is astounding.

You bitch in the future won't be any worker, only robots and machines, outdated ideology is outdated.

If the authority stems from historical oppression, does that mean communist nations lose moral authority as time passes from the revolution?

Agreed, I don't fancy the idea of fat cats dictating terms to the populace, but I similarly don't see where the state has a similar authority to steal, dictate, and allocate arbitrarily (albeit with popular input).

Collect rent, invest in new property, create more profitable homes/stores/storage/whatever, collect more rent. Do all of this with specialized knowledge and experience lowering the costs, improving quality, and providing the bankroll for new tech. When there's competition the consumer wins, when trillion dollar corporations or governments prevent that it doesn't matter what kind of -ist you are, your wallet and your tight little asshole are getting screwed. Part of the duties of a government is protecting the little guy from the wealthy and from foreign governments; now uncle Sam is wearing fishnets and whoring out to big business. It's the people's duty to correct this perversion.

amen, the thing communists fail to understand is that capital is productive and is a part of society no matter what, the only difference is if capital id privately or publicly owned..

The owner created the company. The owner started the whole thing. It is his because he bought it. If you buy a car, it is yours. If you buy machines to make cars, they are yours, if you buy blueprints for a car, they are yours, if you buy materials to build a car, they are yours and after all of that buying, you buy the labor required to build the car and you pay the worker to build it. That car belongs to the business owner, not the worker.

In a pure capitalist system - in a vacuum, essentially - there is nothing to stop him from doing so. He can write good code, then sell it on the open market and make good money. But if he is competing with companies that own the means of distributing software, well, that code just ain't gonna sell. Because people just won't be exposed to it.