Communism

What do you think about communism?
I consider myself a communist.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=uhg0SUYOXjw
youtube.com/watch?v=tuysoNnRiwk
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

read an economics book

It is to economics what a perpetual motion device is to engineering.

It is to economics like alchemy and magic is to chemistry

Economic Communism is cancer.

Polical Communism with a capitialist economy is perfect.

Don't ask how to achieve this though.

hang yourself desu

It's retarded. Why would someone go bust his balls and learn differential equations in order to build the really cool stuff or be able to analytically solve various problems, when all of his efforts are going to be redistributed among 'people' who were sitting with a thumb up their ass??????

No. If you do not get all the fruit of your labor, you probably wont even labor for that long. There is a reason Soviets were starving to death.

>I consider myself a communist.

How is college working out for you?

One of the worst mistakes we've made as a human race.

I think that, a well developed understanding of Marixan political economy must inevitably raise the question of how Marx's notion of communism could be practically achievable when all other historical modes of production have arisen contingently out of historical events and without any form of deliberate planning.

If a mode of production has never been imposed on existing conditions through collective conscious directed action previously, what reason is there to believe it is practically possible to do so?

In the end, I fear that only a technical solution able to for all practical purposes end scarcity would be sufficient to make Marx's dream achievable.

Even if historical materialism was a correct approach that still wouldn't prove Marx' vision of where history is going right because it's all based on "muh alienation" philosophical voodo.

t. suburban fagboi

As cliche as it is to say (pretty much the reverse version of 'not real socialism'), beautiful in theory, impossible and awful when attempted in reality.

Move to Cuba or Venezuela. Put your skin in the game.

This board is 18+ only

read about frederic lordon and bernard friot, friot is the french theorician of the "salaire a vie" a viable alternative of capitalism, you could call this like you want either way it can work.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=uhg0SUYOXjw if you dont speak french i dont know if there is an english version of his work.

>Believing the jewspiricies

>beautiful in theory

It's not even beautiful in theory.

a retarded pipe dream that somehow is still taken seriously

Never give up the struggle, Comrade.

Ignore these fascist tools.

Long live the Bolshevik Revolution!

Very much this

I recommend killing yourself.

You wouldn't be a communist if history interested you in the slightest.

On paper, communism is great.

I mean, who wouldn't a society where everyone has a nice condo, nice car, a job they enjoy and plenty of food and entertainment?

Then you attempt to install communism and the problems begin.

It is not so much lack of motivation, many work their ass off just so their kids don't grow up in poverty. Rather it is the severe administrative faults and lack of checks and balances against corruption.

>I mean, who wouldn't a society where everyone has a nice condo, nice car, a job they enjoy and plenty of food and entertainment?

Me.

That is not what it is on paper, in communism there is no individuality, forced equality of results and slavery, since men have the fruits of their labour stolen by the state and redistributed with or without their consent.

Communism is in theory a dystopian nightmare, and in practice it's attempts only lead to genocidal totalitarism.

It's basically an unattainable dream of a better lifestyle.

Communism would only work if human dveelopment always revolved around it, for thousands of years people have lived with basic capitalist ideals like trading livestock for land etc. If the earliest civilisations worked with communism and all the foundations of our society were molded around it, then it would work. But now, in a capitalist world, its simply a dream.

It's always been an absolute mess but basically everything (pre-manifesto) the Marx wrote is still correct

So an even more self righteous nazi that thinks society and culture are his plaything ? Good for you, I just hope you finally learn from the millions of death your budies caused that human society and social structure is not something to fuck with.

Daily reminder that every form of Communism is authoritarian and dictatorial. Ancoms are stalinists in denial.

Communism is complete individuality. Nothing is forced and the fruits of labour aren't stolen, it is freely given by workers who want to work. The class, money and the state don't exist in Communism. People work because jobs need doing. Take your family for example: everyone does some chores right? Chores need doing and so you organise yourselves to do them. That is literally all you need for society to function. What about innovation you might say? Well historically the vast majority of the innovation was done by people of aristocratic and later capitalistic backgrounds. They hence had the free time to turn their attention to more expansive pursuits, and those that were personal interests of those involved. Think about Marx for one example. He spent most of his London days at the British Library just working because he wasn't restrained by his social class and had the free time to work on his own things. Newton invented calculus when Cambridge University was closed due to the plague. When you give scientists free time and free reign over their time, they begin to innovate as they want. Look at French, then German, then American scientists since the 1700s. You should be trying to free the time of the workers as much as possible through automation and other means so that more people have the time to innovate. Innovation flourishes under Communism. Everything does. Google search gift economy btw desu familio

Fantasy and fairy tales, much like anarchism.

>antisemitism
Opinion discarded :^)

I never read the communist manifesto, but based on what ive heard it sounds like he straight up contradicts himself.

No, that's not what it is in theory.

In theory it's complete freedom without a state or hierarchy.

I can't think of any reason to oppose this except some retarded romantic 'le life is meaningless without struggle' or 'le divine right of kings' bullshit.

That sounds more like anarchy.

What's wrong with anarchy?

It's what Communism actually is, but because most far left ideologies have been authoritarian in recent history, we must label it anarchocommunism.

Adding an appendage to anarchy seems pointless to me.

>Communism is complete individuality

Lel it's the literal opposite of that you autist

This, reading anything on economics is enough to put an end to commietard nonsense

The dialectic predicted this thread would turn to shit.

And it did.

Not an argument.

Kill thyself

"alt-right" fascists =/= libertarian you cumguzzler

You first classcuck :)

Actually yeah they are. The Alt-Right comprises a wide range of ideologies from Libertarianism and the Neo-Reactionary movement to Populism and White Supremacism.

The only thing it comptises are sodomites and homophiles worshiping at the feet of the natural aristocracy

Communism does nothing to stop the gay mafia, if anything it hastens the tidal waves of poz, it can protect no one from the loads, it can protect no one from the toxic cock. Communism will only speed up the worship of sodomites.

>this thread

Hindsight and foresight are two very different talents.

Communism can work and it most likely needed when automation replaces most of the low skill jobs out there.

Eventually this will happen. There will be millions of plebs unemployed and unless you want to put them all in camps guarded by robots, you really have to deal with mass unemployment which leads to unrest.

These posts is why I've given up on this board.

Good point.

He's hard to disagree with, I know. Join us, porky :^)

For real though, when there is mass unemployment, where does the profit go? Inequality goes further and further up, and it has to collapse at some point. Fortunately, increased automation suits the capitalist for profit (McDonalds for example) but it also suits the Communist for what it will eventually lead to.

What would communism do to stop the tsunami of loads and dethrone the natural aristocracy?

These posts are why*

And yeah I can understand how the average Sup Forumstard would probably get a headache whenever he encounters any sort of serious discussion on here.

Everyone is equal, and by that i mean equally worthless. Instead of valuing the individual, the group as a whole gets the same treatment, which will generation after generation breed an always lower, weaker, mediocre class of "workers".

well, the music is pretty good

youtube.com/watch?v=tuysoNnRiwk

Nah they'll just provide the plebs with something like basic income and begin a gradual process of depopulation, since there will be no need for billions of humans for menial labor anymore as machines will be able to do their talks more efficiently all the consuming less resources and energy.

>sitting with a thumb up their ass

No. That's literally not socialism at all. In a socialist society, you have to work. Oh you don't want to? Screw you asshole, you don't get free housing, free goods, or free anything. Fuck off and live in a mud hut or something.

In an ideal society though the ghetto mentality of "why should I work the gommament's a gonna gibs me da free shit" would be abolished, as would the primacy of the individual over social welfare.

Socialism is a privilege that only rich countries can take part in.
Capitalism grants too much power to too few people, but poor countries can grow with it with sacrifices along the way.

Mixed Economy is usually the best way to run a country.

Not quite. Pure anarchist capitalism hasn't actually been tried, so we don't know how that would work out. The "laissez-faire" capitalism of the 1800s wasn't laissez-faire at all; the US government subsidized and was supported by corporations and corporate interests, so that wasn't free market.

I'd like to see it in action, but it would require a leader to literally forfeit almost all his power.

Yea, it would need a cultural shift just as communism would.

I did, many. Guess what, capitalism still sucks balls. Supply-side policies are fairy-tales. The monetary system has turned into one big nasty joke and so has monetary policy in a world where China doesn't float its currency, the Fed prints money indefinitely and Greece and Germany share the same currency. Keynesianism doesn't work unless everyone is under one central bank and uses one currency and even then we don't know if it works. The market is inefficient as fuck and constantly results in oligopolies and monopolies, perfect competition is basically non-existent in every single market sector except for a few meme examples, etc.

Not supporting communism by the way. But if by reading "muh economics books" you got any other impression other than that our system is fucked, then you weren't reading very carefully.

>commie shills is nearly every thread on /his/
>except the commie thread because the initial commie got btfo
I feel like I stumbled onto the wrong board because something isn't quite normal in this thread

Literal trash, I for one enjoy toilet paper and not standing in food lines

Never worked, never will work.

Greek here.

The reason our economy is shit is because of big government and high regulations. Greece is one of the most unfree economies in the world, and in the 80s-90s this was even worse. The government was handing out benefits to everyone for votes and the deficit kept increasing. Bureaucracy is huge and nowadays you can't open a small business without the government taking like half of your revenue.

I fucking cringe when retards say that "capitalism" and "neoliberalism" brought Greece to this condition. It was statism, corruption , bureacracy, high government spending, hostility to businesses that destroyed us.

We were never really socialist though.

>Keynesianism is the only school of Capitalism

Read more economics books

>this thread

Keynesianism was just one of the schools of thought I alluded to fucktard or did you miss the supply-side bit? The two main "factions" are supply-side folk like the Austrians and demand-side folk like Keynes. They both suck cock.

It's okay I guess, but the world isn't ready for it.

Now mutualist anarchy, that's where we need to go in the near future.

Congratulations on the irrelevant post, I never claimed neo-liberalism destroyed Greece.

Greece failed so that Greece's ultra-rich could remain ultra-rich. Greece is a cleptocracy, its problem is not one of being "too commie" or "too capitalist", having too big or too small a government - it's one of being a corrupt shit-hole.

The only reason Greece was even brought up, was to illustrate the absurdity of the Euro and specifically the Euro in a non-politically/fiscally integrated EU.


t. also Greek

Why do so many ignorant vulgarmen act as though their virtue signals pass for serious criticism? This thread wouldn't look much different had it been posted on Sup Forums and it's a surprise it hasn't been moved there.

Sup Forums(like any western fag in every corner) is an anti-marxist board

If you actually bothered researching Marx at all and perhaps had some self esteem, you'd realize why Marxism is spat upon

Why?

No, seriously, tell me. What's your scathing critique of Marx?

He can't because he's never read him. Neither have I, but that's why I don't pretend to have an opinion on his work.

I call myself a commie but I'm really just a Marxian state socialist in practice

I don't know if an anarchic society is actually preferred, but I fully support movements to create a transitory society

Samefag OUT

If you don't think an egalitarian society is desirable even as a hypothetical, you're legitimately a bad human being.

It's ethnically wrong for some people to have easier lives than others due to inherited wealth or status.

>people don't deserve to pass the fruits of their labors on to their children

>People deserve to live massively privileged existences just for being born.

>easier lives than others due to inherited wealth or status.
Yeah I guess the responsibility of managing an entire goddamn country was the best thing to ever happen to Frederick the Great. What a trust fund baby!

>the world revolves around what you think people do or do not "deserve"

>Kings
>Working hard
How bluepilled are you?

Why should some children be better-off than others?

>the world revolves around what you think people do or do not "deserve"
I agree actually. There's no point in making an ethical argument.

But this is equally true of inheritance, it's not a matter of who deserves what. It's a matter of the fact that people will do it and what is to stop them if someone else is so inclined.

If you don't think being a fucking monarch is more comfortable than serfdom, you're delusional

Because somebody worked hard to create a better life for their children.

And?

Stop all this shit-chat both of you. Inherited wealth isn't a prerequisite of capitalism, in fact many capitalists oppose it, because it creates a skewed playing field for people to become upstarts.

Likewise, communism wouldn't just abolish inherited wealth, it would abolish wealth, money, etc. the whole shabang.

But that isn't fair. Some people are fortunate enough to have hard-working parents, but some people are not.

It's also dishonest to connect effort to wealth. Usually somebody can only become wealthy because they inherited startup capital to get going, also benefiting from social connections associated with class.

They're not gonna do it if their kid is still going to be raised by the state.

As well they shouldn't, being that they spent their lives creating goods and services for other people to enjoy.

The heredity of capital is one of its greatest harms IMO, and the biggest determinant of inequality

>the state
Hold up.

Where did that come from?


>As well they shouldn't, being that they spent their lives creating goods and services for other people to enjoy.
I thought their goal was to create a better life for their children.

Life isn't fair and people need to get over that. No need to be punished for being successful.

How are you going to keep children from having a better life than the others?


>I thought their goal was to create a better life for their children

How exactly are they going to do that without creating something that people want?

Life isn't fair. This is true.

But accepting the unfairness of life is a retarded conclusion to draw from this observation as opposed to deciding life should be fair and how it could be made so.

Not an argument

>state

You do realize you're arguing against a group of communists?

We don't want a state.

Literally the only reason we have laws is to make life fair

A society that unjustly punishes people for their hard work and efforts is not a healthy society. There will always be people in society wealthier than others.