Commies/socialists why do you hate private industry

Commies/socialists why do you hate private industry

whats bad about it

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=ysZC0JOYYWw
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Read the Communist Manifesto.

I really appreciate the irony in that image

People who produce the profits not being the same people who decide what to do with those profits.

In a capatalist company, wealthy majority shareholders elect representatives to the board of directors through plutocratic one share = one vote system.

In a socialist company, a worker cooperative, workers democratically elect representatives to the board of directors through one person = one vote.

Rather than the profits being distributed to wealthy majority shareholders, who have contributed no labour to the production of that profit and are essentially unnecessary middlemen, they can be shared more evenly among the workers.

The workers getting a greater share of the profit of their labour means they have greater spending power in the economy, leading to economic growth.

I definitely need to. I started to but it's always hard to read at home due to noise. Gonna have to start it though, to learn about what these people talk about

Why is it easy for people to look at a communist country that was overrun by USA and turned into murderous douches as evil, but bombing innocents and ruining countries that were doing alright for oil and money is okay?

It's more patriotic to say that than not honestly, it's just that our leaders haven't been very patriotic. Trump isn't, he doesn't care about the integrity of this nation.

BUT HOW DEY BUILD DA BUILDINGS 2 WORK IN? DEY CANT SUSTAIN CUZ DEY AINT WITE

But the worker didn't own or create the capital it used to generate the profits. Fuck leftists are retarded.

The bombing and shit is fascism more leftism

Investors have the right to be repaid in the same way you repay a home loan, but I dont think they should decide how the profits are managed or have a claim of ownership in perpetuity in the same way I dont think a bank should have a claim over your property after you have paid back the loan or have a say in how that property is managed.

the whole point of the free market is supposed to be that industry will preserve resources so they have a source of revenue in the long term, right?
and will treat their employees well so people want to work for them, right?
and will maintain minimal involvement with the government and vice-versa, right?
look how well that's worked.

You can't pay them back forever buddy, at a certain point it's the workers who become what's valuable. Well ideally, in the world you prefer you have no say over the occupation you spend a chunk of your life doing

>communist manifesto before capital
no really, read capital by marx. it's literally designed to answer your question op

Is US fascism??

Maybe that will be easier to start for me actually

I'll start with one of them though that's for sure

marxists.org seems to be neat

I checked this out marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

>The Principles of Communism
>Engels

Not sure much about him but I've heard plenty about him

in many ways it might as well be

it's populist, imperialist, anti-intellectual, post-truth, and an oligarchy. all the ingredients for fascism are there

What's it missing to be considered fascism?

Check on Professor Richard Wolff on youtube too.

Maybe a good one to start with: youtube.com/watch?v=ysZC0JOYYWw

>overrun by USA and turned into murderous douches as evil
Even if a country was ruined by the US it just proves the point that communism serves the people in power. The leaders that arise are self serving and you're stupid enough to hand them complete control so try harder.

engels was marx's best buddy / right-hand man / editor

he might have been responsible for just as many of the ideas in capital as marx

marxists.org is a good resource but keep in mind it's mostly verbatim transcription of marxist theory, much of which assumes you have a sturdy basis in the associated terminology

which, incidentally, you learn mostly from Capital

You can read the Manifesto in an afternoon. But get the Haymarket Press edition.

Vol 1 of Capital takes a long time to fully understand.

...

my problem with the manifesto as an introductory text is that it's mostly a political pamphlet for a party that was already relatively well established. it almost assumes you're already a communist. a lot of the revolutionary theory just isn't there.

...

...

the ceo of your company makes ten billion dollars per year.
you make fifty thousand dollars per year.
do you really believe the ceo works two hundred thousand times harder than you? produces two hundred thousand times as much value as you?

Nothing bad about private industry. What’s bad is government protecting corporations while stripping protections for people. The root issue is that elected officials aren’t beholden to their constituents, but instead to their donors. Which is why they shouldn’t be able to receive such “donations”, swaying their positions to be pro-corporate and anti-consumer

So because you're a basement dwelling faggot you think you're entitled to more? You have no fucking risk, you dont have to carry insurance in the company deal with lawsuits or anything else that a CEO has to deal with you socialist fuck.

>All applications of his theories have ended in failure.

yeah man as badly as communist countries have had it, you'd think there was some like... super-powerful megacountry with a vendetta against them or something.

hmmm.

He was an academic in a time when less than 1% of the population had any sort of education at all, was born soon after the French Revolution that attempted to create a society based on liberty and equality for all after Feudalism, lived during the industrial revolution and was critical because they basically had child slave labourers working for wealthy factory owners and was obviously critical because it didnt seem that much better than feudalism for the people at the bottom.

The socialist workers union movement is the reason we have 5 day work weeks and child labouring isnt the norm.

...

so you're a bootlicking shill who thinks some fatass in a suit deserves more than you because... mandate of heaven, i guess?

also

>carry insurance in the company
>deal with lawsuits
that's what legal teams do, you twat. the entire job of a ceo is to make capital gains and pretend to be in charge, and if you haven't figured that out yet it's too late for you.

He still knew economics, why would he work in a system he despised?

Do you think someone with the political ideas of Marx would've been allowed to hold a government position, no man, they made his life miserable.

So writing political theory, studying and lawyering isn't having a job?

He was indeed supported by Engels I have no excuse for that.

I've seen that and loved it! Anyone else on YouTube I could check out? Thanks for being willing to share knowledge on an anti-intellectual board

i mean there should be no excuse needed. if these ancap asshats really believed half of what they said, they shouldn't have a problem with engels spending his money as he pleased, nor with marx taking a good situation and running with it.

A CEO isn't mindlessly producing some shelf product. They're making decisions on the company's direction and where to invest. If you gave a 50k employee that position they would drive the company to the ground you moron.

...

A fascist leader and lack of free press.

>it just proves the point that communism serves the people in power. The leaders that arise are self serving and you're stupid enough to hand them complete control so try harder.

How are those leaders self-serving if they were removed from power against their will? The problem with poverty is that it isn't solved right away, and if the people are dumb then that is ripe for abuse. Fill their heads with shitty ideas and suddenly they're sodomizing their leader and selling slaves on the open market (Libya)

>single state
>communism
try again

>marxists.org is a good resource but keep in mind it's mostly verbatim transcription of marxist theory, much of which assumes you have a sturdy basis in the associated terminology
>
>which, incidentally, you learn mostly from Capital

Well shit that's at least good, I think I will start on Capital then

Any resources that doesn't assume I've been doing this for years?

The problems arent CEOs per se, its how they're appointed.

When they're appointed by wealthy majority shareholders then they have a perverse incentive to increase the share of the profits that go to those shareholders in the form of dividends and can demand compensation for this function.

This leads to wage suppression and offshoring jobs to 3rd world shitholes.

When workers elect the CEO and board there is no incentive to do those things, jobs will no longer be sent overseas.

...

Private industry and the markets need to be properly regulated as with all things


Dumbasses

I think it's good to get a feel of it then go back after you have more context, but you're right it's not for everyone who wants to start off that way.

>applications of his theories

It's sad you guys will never understand that some countries that called itself communist did not apply his theories as they should, or had a ton of problems to begin with. You kinda can't do it if your people are against you, for example.

Aaaaaannd...

/thread

He has lots of other content if you havent already had a look.

Im not aware of anyone else who has the credentials or the ability to communicate knowledge as well as he does.

>making decisions on the company's direction and where to invest.
again, no, that would be the board of directors. fuck you for thinking that job takes even a breath of effort, much less 200,000 times more than any on their employees.

i mean it. you've fallen too hard for the propaganda and the survivorship bias. it's too late.

I'm going to translate this retard's posts:

>Communism and nazism is the same thing
>The US has never executed anyone, and representatives of it do not murder people who don't deserve it

>How are those leaders self-serving if they were removed from power against their will?
Sorry, must of forgotten how Stalin was removed against his will when he died. Also it was a good thing that the Khmer Rouge killed those self-serving people with eyeglasses. I'm also sure no North Korean had a single bad thing to say about their leaders so it only makes sense they can be removed if they changed their mind.

The problem your tone deaf ass didn't understand is that the CEO takes more than he is valued. He takes in the labor of more than his own duties. It's that simple!

op asked socialists and communists for why they think capitalism sucks, i gave my answer by way of an example. if you think this was intended as a critique of the merits of the ceo position, you're missing the forest for the trees.

Im not having a go at anything you said, just contributing.

>but bombing innocents and ruining countries that were doing alright for oil and money is okay?

It's not Ok, and that has nothing to do with private property or capitalism, as it's government doing it, not an economic model.

...

the great american pretense is that communism is responsible for bread lines in the soviet union, but capitalism isn't responsible for
>the great depression
>continued abject poverty and starvation in areas like detroit and chicago
>the collapse of somalia
>etc. etc.

If the workers pooled their resources to invest in the company, more power to them.

That's because those things were caused by government meddling

...

no but see the one little thing is that has everything to do with capitalism

>for oil and money

the point of capitalism is to make all the money you can. nobody's gonna argue that.

so if you can make a whole lot of money very quickly by convincing (bribing) your government to start a war and grant you access to a whole reserve of oil, why then... why not do it?

How would you feel if Trump voted to restrict his own powers as president in order to put the position of president in a more check roll.

When you purchase property with money loaned from a bank, should the bank have ownership of that property even after you pay back the loan? Should they control what you can and cant do with, on and to that property?

i don't think i can convince you to pull your gaze away from warren buffett's pubic hair long enough to show you exactly why that thing you just said is the most asinine thing on this whole fucking board

...

>that would be the board of directors
The CEO is part of the board you idiot.

your macros are shit. your strawmen are shit. go home.

>the ceo does this whole-ass job
-you, five minutes ago

It’s not the hate of private business as much as a high regulation on ones capital, mostly how it’s obtained in order to protect them from vicious capitalist institutions, in order to assure the personal liberty to do what they wish with there own capital. However it’s obtained

iirc Corbyn has a policy to require workers be given the right of first refusal if capitalists want to sell their company, and government backed investment loans to the workers to facilitate the buyback.

this shop is so fucking bad

...

What a lazy shoop

...

...

there really couldn't be less effort put into these edits

If I really said that you would of actually quoted me and not just try to pass your own bullshit interpretation as authentic.

They're funny, a tonic, and all at your expense.

Thanks for the bumps champ

Ubetcha, kiddo.

>implying this is even remotely unique to communist states

buddy do you realize the shitty things people do in all systems.

No wuckers cobber

No, but it's a lot easier when you give your government the ownership to means of production isn't it?

Most of them just hate the monopolies but dont know how to express it and arent educated enough to understand communism can never exist. Nothing can exist as an ideal, reality will always be shittier and need regulation. Not even pure capitalism can exist.

...

Replacing the capitalist owners with government owners doesn't achieve workers owning their means of production.

Only democratic worker cooperatives achieve this.

How is this suppose to disprove my point?

Just making sure you're not assuming that government owned means of production is what people are advocating for.

...

...

>common ownership of the means of production
>common ownership
A worker cooperative isn't supported by communism.

...

...

...

tbh I wasnt following the rest of your conversation, my bad.

This is what retarded commies actually believe.

>who have contributed no labour to the production of that profit and are essentially unnecessary middlemen

They're called investors you fucking retard, the ones that either started the business or helped expand it

Np, sort of figured but wasn't sure.

...

How affects communism, now that venezuela invests in crypto currency?