SEIZE THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION

SEIZE THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION

DO IT NOW!!!!!!

Other urls found in this thread:

ctvnews.ca/canada/census-children-make-up-one-quarter-of-4-8m-canadians-living-in-poverty-1.3587472
hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1932–33
nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/world/americas/venezuela-children-starving.html
money.cnn.com/2017/05/03/news/economy/venezuela-food-prices/index.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

kill all marxists

Grandfather of North Korea

When will this leftypol leaf faggot stop posting?

Kill all normies and wagies

Seize the means of my dick you gay jew lol

Jokes aside he created pretty reasonable theory

It wasn't reasonable unless you count having no toilet paper as reasonable.

Ah yes and Africans are doing so well under capitalism

this
this
this

this
not this

kys brainlet scum

His theories if applied properly would make the world a lot better place

Communism works in theory, in practice the money stops flowing after there's no rich people to steal from.

Under capitalism those rich people steal from you, is that better?

Ah yes and Africans are doing so well under Marxism

I fucking hate canadians

sadly this
> captcha: GAYunga mexico

Never insult the BLACK BULL again

Africa is shit because they are dumb niggers, being exploited by capitalists is only a side effect of them being dumb niggers.

this
not so sure about this

why are you so aggressive little bitch
his theory works
you dont have to be a commie to pay tribute to his theories
it's really good stuff

Maybe try

Maybe try

No you first

>it's really good stuff
No it's crap. And Lenin was inforced only to bring down the Russian Empire with German funding.

all me
not this

Not a fan of this retarded /brit/ meme

Full steam ahead on Capitalisme tbf

sorry for that lad

Why Lenin? I was talking about Marx's dialectical materialism. I'm pretty sure that you know nothing about that but still you say that it is shit.

Gee did Lenin invent his policies? He was in a Swiss bar and then hiding in Finland. Or are you saying the USSR wasn't commie? Well, maybe Cuba is?

>corrupt rusnigger degenerate version of communism failed therefore communism is a failure

It failed virtually everywhere that it was implemented. If you want to disregard that then fine but the millions upon millions of corpses is something you can't.

Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, etc.

>Cuba, Venezuela
installed by CIA niggers, backed by Soviet Union.

>North Korea
Installed by Soviet Union, backed by China.

Oh man, idk who was commie who wasn't.
He explained the evolution of socio economic formations and the role of law and politics in a state. And a lot of the other things.

Yeah, right after you seize my FIST

I love having a victimization complex and bread lines! Let's do it.

Nowadays, workers have no class consciousness.

>So, how do you like living under capitalism?

so?

African shitholes are run by corrupt warlords who steal everything. That's not capitalism. Capitalism is free and consensual trade, not shooting the villagers with AK47s because they have a well.

Agreed my brother

>Capitalism is free and consensual trade
lol
good luck """"""competing""""""" against corporations, trade blocks and cartels

>venezuela is a great example of socialism and what they're doing is wonderful, just look at all this income equality, it's so...
>wait no NOT SOCIALISM! NOT REAL SOCIALISM!

If I do successfully compete against them, why should I be punished for it? If I offer something of value, surely I should be rewarded, not robbed.

>the Venezuelan humanitarian crisis shilling
debunked by non other than the UN

>punished for it
who's punishing you?

Are you saying Venezuela is doing well?

>ITS REAL COMMUNISM
>WHO CARES IF IT WAS INSTALLED BY THE US GOVERNMENT SEEKING TO DESTABILIZE THE COUNTRY
>IT'S STILL COMMUNISM

That's what communists and socialists propose isn't it? I make my money fair and square, competing against every other company in the industry, then communists take it at gunpoint and share it out amongst themselves (the party, NOT the proles) because they claim it belongs to everyone.

not well, not too bad either considering they're a country under US embargo
their main other problem is that they focused too much on oil.

>the US government made chavez install price fixing, a purely socialist policy, in order to fuck them up
So why support such measures? If the US government uses socialist policies as a weapon, why should anyone support socialism in their own country? That's just shooting yourself in the face after watching someone use the gun to shoot someone else.

no, communism proposes communal production of goods and culture and common distribution and access to said goods

Purely philosophically the idea of Marx was actually pretty neat, advance technology to a point where no man, woman, or child has to work ever again.
The problem is he never thought about how we'd actually end up in that scenario.
Communism seems really good, but in reality it doesn't work for shit. Nice piece of literature though

>Marx
>writes a lot about commodity fetishism and materialist dialectics and stuff like that to apply Hegel to state politics, his philosophy doesn't say a single word on morality
>Lenin
>let's kill people until communism

What communism proposes and what communism delivers are never the same, because it's a murderous con trick, at least by the second government. Even if the revolution is heartfelt all the way through, it's not long before it turns into a bloodbath. You take away the chance for those ultra-greedy, ruthless and motivated geniuses who will stop at nothing to become insanely wealthy, to do so in a positive way, and they will be forced to do it in a negative way, ie. using the government to take people's money by force instead of providing people with something of value to trade for their money. That's what happens every single time, which is why you never see people flocking to communist countries, only trying to escape.

We're working on it comrade.

this desu

What does that say? Is South Korea striving to be more like North Korea?

>ultra-greedy, ruthless and motivated geniuses who will stop at nothing to become insanely wealthy, to do so in a positive way
those same geniuses run wild as we speak, nobody checks them on anything
and they still manage to fuck everything up. Seems to me that those types will thrive under any system

Our ruling party politicians want to collectivise land ownership

Of course they'll thrive under any system, they're basically unstoppable. But fortunately, capitalism at least allows them to chase their goals in a non-violent way.

I think there should possibly be more regulation on what shady practices companies use to be competitive, and anti-monopoly laws could be stronger. There's also the problem of people making money in a legal but destructive way, and bribing politicians to allow it. However destructive companies get under capitalism though, they're not in the same league as destructive psychos in communist countries, where they have ultimate power.

...

>However destructive companies get under capitalism though
yes their everlasting growth religious dogma and our capitalist consumerist ethos only destroy the planet and push for a ww3.
but who cares, right? gommies killed gorillions gommies bad

Ah yes, that notable envoronmentalist and pacifist Stalin. You think the people running those destructive companies would be less harmful once they "seized the means of production?" With them making ALL of the laws, and in charge of a nation of slaves, they would do far more harm to the planet (not to mention the people trying to live on it).

Because marxists are environmentally responsible and peaceful, right?

Energy and water should cost money, this creates incentives for the people to ration it themselves; piegotian taxes like carbon tax, can be used to encourage investment in greener alternatives and revenues can be used to offset the undesirable externalities. Trade diffuses conflict and creates wealth, in fact, blocking trade is a tactic used by states to punish others.

>You think the people running those destructive companies would be less harmful once they "seized the means of production?
then we should depose them too just like the capitalists
revolution and evolution never stops

>marxists are environmentally responsible and peaceful, right?
way more than capitalists
>piegotian taxes like carbon tax, can be used to encourage investment in greener alternatives and revenues can be used to offset the undesirable externalities
all taxes that capitalists want to abolish because it hinders profit
>Trade diffuses conflict and creates wealth, in fact, blocking trade is a tactic used by states to punish others.
trade in capitalism has led to some good but also to cartel tactics, world wars, imperialism, poverty and starvation in many cases

>we should depose them too
It's a lot harder to start a revolution when so much as breathing a word against the ruling party will get you killed or gulag'd. Did you think they wouldn't think of that?

can you start a revolution right now in Canada?

It would be a hell of a lot easier. The hardest part would be convincing people to give up the safe and luxurious lifestyle that capitalism has afforded them, in exchange for a system that has proved catastrophic every single time.

>It would be a hell of a lot easier
amassing weapons and calling for a violent overthrow of the regime is legal in Canada?
>safe and luxurious lifestyle
ctvnews.ca/canada/census-children-make-up-one-quarter-of-4-8m-canadians-living-in-poverty-1.3587472

not for everybody, not in most countries
if history has taught us anything it is that capitalism eventually stagnates and jumpstarts again through war and destruction

No way life is easy as fuck here

>amassing weapons and calling for a violent overthrow of the regime is legal in Canada?
Pretty much, from what I know, although I don't think you'd get far. I know that tweeting shit about Trudeau won't get you sent to a slave labour camp in the freezing arctic.

>canadians-living-in-poverty
hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI
10th on the Human Development Index. By modern standards, that means they're about as safe and comfortable, in general, as humans have ever been in history. Far more so than anyone has ever been under communism. Yes, there is poverty, as there is everywhere, as there always has been. I can't think of a single time communism has fixed that though.

So can I say that the USSR and the Eastern Bloc collapsed because they were retarded Slavs and not because of socialism?

People living in poverty here have cars, $800 canada goose jackets and iphones. It's crazy how you can actually live a decent life in debt.

>I can't think of a single time communism has fixed that though.
Russia, Venezuela and Cuba comes to mind.

that's because there's even state institutionalised care for poor people
you know, those evil socialist policies that turn people into lazy leeches

No one said that was evil though it's capitalism with some social safetynets. Not sure why the only options is anarcho-capitalism or socialism.

then that's not capitalism

Yes it is. Canada is a capitalist country.

Is that a joke?
>Russia
People literally resorted to eating their children.
>Venezuela
Currently hunting dogs in the street for food.
>Cuba
There's a reason Cubans improvise boats to escape to the USA, not the other way around. You want to live in a communist country? Move to Cuba. I don't think you'll find many Cubans who wouldn't switch places with you.

>People literally resorted to eating their children.
>Currently hunting dogs in the street for food.
lmao, ok fox news
>There's a reason Cubans improvise boats to escape to the USA,
not really anymore and most immigrants into the US come from totally capitalist countries, why don't you go there?

no i'm too lazy

>fox news
Now you're just sticking your head in the sand.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1932–33
nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/world/americas/venezuela-children-starving.html
money.cnn.com/2017/05/03/news/economy/venezuela-food-prices/index.html

I would love to go to the USA, hopefully one day I will. I certainly would not be emigrating to Russia, Venezuela, or Cuba. The people in those countries dream of eating the kind of food you find in an American dumpster.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1932–33
>nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/world/americas/venezuela-children-starving.html
>money.cnn.com/2017/05/03/news/economy/venezuela-food-prices/index.html
ok
weren't you the ones who induced famine in Ireland and India?
>I certainly would not be emigrating to Russia, Venezuela, or Cuba
how about Colombia? they're capitalist

>weren't you the ones who induced famine in Ireland and India?
That was imperialism, which I'm not defending. That's not capitalism. It shares more authoritarian traits with communism than capitalism.

>how about Colombia? they're capitalist
And doing far better than their neighbour Venezuela, without all the oil reserves. Colombia obviously has it's problems with crime and corruption but it at least has a functioning economy. Obviously I would choose the USA (or here) over Colombia, but I would choose Colombia over any communist country, as would any sensible person.

This will do no good if you cannot manage your output.
The word "famine" comes to mind...

>imperialism
imperialism is just a stage of capitalism
you were one once it's americans now. You can't have the one without the other.
Colombia doesn't have to face embargo ans financial war by the US either.

>Imperialism
>Not capitalism
>capitalism can't be authoritarian

This is why China went back to capitalism btw

Xi Jinping Thought is about beginning to dial the communism back up now that the productive capacity is there. Orthodox marxism assumes no one tries a socialist revolution before this stage, but they keep doing that, so we see capitalist economies managed by communist DotP politburos, or we see [collapse]

*grabs her by the pussy*

no, seizing the means of reproduction (gf) comes first

That's okay, lumpen. We do it for you, too.

They do that instead of having any kind of decent life outside the phone and the clothes. It's unsustainable and they do it by borrowing against the future with no way to pay. Then they go into bankruptcy and the bank gets a check from the feds. You know this, the part you always leave out is that the capitalists spend billions of dollars to bait them into doing this.

Imperialism is not a stage of capitalism, any more than it's a stage of communism. It can be a parallel feature of both, but it is more closely aligned with communism because of the nationalism and authoritarianism. Successful capitalist countries tend to give aid to poorer countries these days, not steal their resources, although I'll admit we do see imperialist style exploitation of foreign workers and resources by multi-national corporations. As I said earlier, I'm not opposed to certain regulations, just as I'm not opposed to certain "socialist" policies like subsidised healthcare, housing, and education.

I was going to mention the embargo, and it's a fair point. But if the USA did trade with Venezuela, how much of that money do you think would reach the people who are starving? A country should be able to withstand an embargo, even by the USA, when it has massive oil reserves and more than enough arable land to feed everyone.

Free and mutually consensual trade (capitalism) is essentially the opposite of authoritarian.Certain authoritarian policies can co-exist with capitalism, but not regarding the trade and the economy.

Like I said, the behaviour of giant multi-nationals resembles imperialism sometimes, but communism isn't the answer to that. A few well-placed regulations are probably all that's needed.

...

I'm not sure what your point is (maybe it's in the text of your picture but I don't speak Russian). I think that's a picture of a multi-millionaire.

>people who are starving
meme debunked by the un
>aligned with communism because of the nationalism
no, communism and nationalism are opposites
the current resurgence of nationalism and trade wars happens under capitalism.
>Successful capitalist countries tend to give aid to poorer countries these days
usually somebody's gain is hiding behind such """"benevolence""""". many times it proved to be counterproductive.