Pt.2

Pt.2

...

Oh fuck

Were you the piece of shit capitalist in the last thread ?

No I'm the ancom who debated about tokens and IOUs

Oh my bad bro

COMMIE MEME THREAD IMMINENT

...

...

...

...

Your memes kinda suck bro

They are ironic Nazbol memes. Nazbol are basically just Nazis but with a communist economic idea

...

So national communism ? Explain

Nazbols(or national bolsheviks) believe in nationalism and fascism, but want the state to control the economy. They basically post shitty alt right memes and are on board with pol about Jews and stuff but they are certainly always retarded

Both nationalism and fascism two equally stupid ideals

...

...

The only truth

...

>communists
>rational
pick one

How is nationalism stupid?
How is it necessarily equal to fascism?

Being proud of the country you were born in is pretty stupid considering you have no choice and you were born there are so to have pride in something you have no control over seems pretty stupid to me also fascism favors the rich

The end goal is a utopia

>implying that nationalist sentiment is only limited to arbitrary chance
So can people not be nationalist for being proud of what their country represents and what they have contributed to that cause by being a functional member of that society?

>utopianism
>rational
pick one

If they have done nothing for it yes. Believing in your nation above your individualism is bad tho

...

You just have to brutally slaughter billions who disagree with you first, then hope the top people don't corrupt... the thing that always happens. Oh don't worry, your "real" communism is perfect. Unfortunately it's also impossible.

No

Both faggot

Agreed

People have been slaughtered for capitalism too. No ideology is without its blood.

Is having nationalist pride and an individualist philosophy mutually exclusive?

What if its a nationalism in support of a culture that values individualism? To certain extents, collectivism is beneficial to society.

Collectivism makes the biggest group the subjugator of anybody they oppose.

>socialist
>peaceful
>anarchist

So how do you suppose you prevent the capitalists from consolidating wealth within themselves and oppressing the working class?

I prefer peace. I am not totally opposed to violence. The working class must take up arms when porkie makes an attempt to sequester working class rights

Lmao, isn't utopianism considered irrational by its own definition?

You little niggers crack me up with your commie memes

>agreed

So you're agreeing that placing collectivism about individualism is bad for the society, yet you're advocating for an inherently collectivist ideology, communism? Did you think at all before deriving your political opinions?

Compare the two moron

no ideology is as ruthless or brutal as communism. Hitler (if you believe the hype) killed about 6 million people. Stalin killed what 20mil? Mao 80mil?

Leftists have always been more violent than righties.

Every ideology is utopian. Capitalism seeks to create a space in which every bad company dies out, in which every worker uses his profit to support only the best the market has to offer. It doesn't always work the way it sounds. I used to be an ardent capitalist until I realized it's faults

>capitalism
>a system in which transactions are made between consenting parties

Don't conflate the system of capitalism with that of the interests and coercive nature of the state.

But collectivism would be necessary to ward off the other proponents of collectivism (invading empires). Its the unfortunate conclusion of game theory and hence its necessity to a very limited extent.

How'd I do?

>socialist
>anarchist
So how do you stop porkie when he hires professional defense and pays them more than they would receive through your system?

Because capitalist hegemony has put dictators into a place where the working class sees it justified to murder those who they oppose. It's not right by any means, but it's also the wrongs of authoritarian communism, which in itself has never produced communism

But you claimed that one can be both rational and utopian? Utopianism is by its own defintion at odds with reality. Can one be rational yet deny reality?

Shitty.... You did shitty

...

How so user? I'm open to hearing how I'm a piece of shit

...

You will never produce "communism". It's "good in theory" (I'd disagree, it stifles the need for growth, innovation, excellence, etc.) but it will never work in practice due to human nature. Commies need free helicopter rides, because their plan is to kill the smartest most successful people, and drag everyone down to squalor, instead of just trying to make the best out of a situation with equal opportunity,

>every worker uses his profit to support only the best the market has to offer
The consumer purchases what lines up the most with their preferences. Taste, being unique to individuals, can differ from person to person and does not necessarily prefer what might seem to be objectively the best product in terms of utility (ie. junk food). The firm that generates the most incomes must logically be the firm that satisfies the tastes of the most individuals while minimizing the costs of the product (generating the most efficient use of scarce resources which have alternative uses).

I think capitalists would be the first to tell you that no system is perfect. I doubt communists would ever be so honest.

I'm not a socialist those are just my results. Every test is different.

>not 90+% capitalist
Into the furnaces for you, Silverstein

I bet you like gary johnson

Getting warmer, just another 8 points to the right, user

>human nature
>what are tribes
>what are hunter gatherers
Communism has nothing to do with murdering smart people. It has to do with the removal of a subjugator>subjugated relationship and the removal of economic hierarchy. I also don't see where you piece together being smart and being successful.

...

Lol profits as surpluses meme

I'd recommend challenging Thomas Sowell's Marxism with that belief system of yours.

Anyways, whats the incentive for innovation and minimizing costs without the profit motive? What is the use of fiscal capital if it were hoarded and not reinvested into the economy to generate further growth in the job markets?

No, I didn't vote. I hated both Hillary and trump but thought Hillary would win by a landslide.

Kek, I'll work on that

Communism is inspired by the egalitarian nature of tribal man. In those societies, communism is a function for survival of the collective.

However, capitalism has clearly removed man from the natural selective processes of his primitive environment and allowed for the thriving of civilization.

So you're new to this game and haven't settled upon any ideology that you believe best suits your beliefs? That's fine.

...

No I was 1% off from communist. I already know I'm an ancom those are just my results goddamn. Do you assume everything about someone over tests with varying results?

PINOCHET! Welcome aboard!

WINRAR, best compass so far

lmfao this
>castrate all cisgender males.png

So you're an ancom?

Well the questions that I proposed are still very much relevant to your political ideology.

>So how do you stop porkie when he hires professional defense and pays them more than they would receive through your system?

Wage slavery is exploitation; such being the rudiment execution of Capitalism.

Profit off the services of another is exploitation; hence the whole "owner"/employees arrangement; whereby the former pockets a profit off the services of the latter is merely fundamental exploitation

The exploitation then of the need for the worker to survive, and no alternative available to meet such an end except to take a job, the employee is a slave to circumstances of need, and the employer is exploiting the needs of the worker to his/her personal benefit (usually with little if any regards to the actual needs of said laborer, and with likely even less regard as to any questionable ethics in the exploitation of the same).

What does he pay them with in a communist system without money?

>Wage slavery is exploitation
So coming to terms on a mutually agreed upon salary is "exploitation"? If the laborer believes there exists a better use of their time (taking into account opportunity cost of that job) then they can simply choose to forgo that job. If the wage slavery meme is so undesirable, self-sufficiency is still an alternative. Labors choose to engage in "wage slavery" because it increases the quality of life that they would have had doing other jobs or providing their own crop.

>Profit off the services of another is exploitation
excess charges meme
Is it still exploitation if the laborer benefits from the agreement and chooses to offer his labor in the jobs market? How do you suppose that industries expand if the owner cannot generate a profit? How do you suppose the most efficient use of scarce resources be achieved by not gauging competitive industries with one another in the aim of profit seeking?

>the employee is a slave to circumstances of need
Do you think a system should be established on the good nature of the labor market choosing to participate in the generation of resources without the compulsion of need?

Money is merely a medium for which makes transactions easier by being a placeholder of value.

In the absence of money, economies regress to a barter economy. This includes primitive societies (even some primitive societies have "money" in the form of seashells for instance) to modern barter economies such as the rearming period of Nazi Germany (the Germans offered intellectual labor for Chinese resources during the build up to war).

On top of that, even communist societies find it difficult to abolish the concept of money. The USSR failed, for instance.

Under the barter economy, how do you stop porkie?

Under the more "modern" fiat currency economy, how do you stop porkie?

>

Ura comrade!

You're thinking of the green quadrant mate.

>tfw when user doesn't realize that feminists are communists

How did I do?

Karl Marx didn't die for that shit.

Wage slavery which refers to a situation perceived as quasi-voluntary slavery, where a person's livelihood depends on wages, especially when the dependence is total and immediate. It is a negatively connoted term used to draw an analogy between slavery and wage labor by focusing on similarities between owning and renting a person. The term wage slavery has been used to criticize economic exploitation and social stratification, with the former seen primarily as unequal bargaining power between labor and capital (particularly when workers are paid comparatively low wages)

>where a person's livelihood depends on wages
So you don't want a system where necessity generates cooperation? Why should anyone do anything, or at least a respectable amount of work, if an alternative system provides them with their basic needs?

Also, as if those under the capitalist system are short of needs so long as they manage their expenditures wisely. Should people who are foolish with their wages dismantle a system where the vast majority see an enormous increase the quality of their lives due to it?

Communists BTFO