Wtf I hate fake communism now

Wtf I hate fake communism now.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>fake
Okay, user.

>Start Communism for egalitarian purposes.
>Dictator takes over and establishes another ruling class.
>Every fucking time.

But it'll work next time, I swear!

Same with capitalism and the free market forces.

Fucking statists! Just you wait! I'll get a McNuke™ and then they'll pay!

> Same
Keep believing, kiddo.

>Fake

Eric Blair must turn in his grave to know the people he spoke out against took control of his country.

...

>now
Son you should always hate commies

Marxism is the most destructive mental disorder of human history.

You know fascism is fundamentally more collectivist than marxism, right?

liberal marxist indoctrination institutions were a mistake

That image would work better if paws were called hands.

>commies still exist in 2017

No fuck off thanks to capitalism I can live off of NEET bux, flashing my dick on cam, weird fetish videos like stomping on toy cars and videogame streaming.

On communism I'd be starving poor and with no private property.

Also how is this a comic thread.

Collectivism is not an evil in and of itself, it's just that everything the jew creates is an abomination and must be expunged. That's all.

Yeah but we have Marxism being taught in academia growing like a cancerous tumour while Fascism isn't so fuck off with your whataboutisms.

Animal Farm was a cartoon

still waiting for that capitalist dictator because so far every single one was either communist or socialist

>be capitalistic system
>build stuff sell stuff get rich
>don't build stuff and work for another guy, dont get rich
>NEET'ing, living on the streets you fault kiddo

>be communist system
>work hard build stuff, gets shot

>Collectivism is not an evil in and of itself,

You cant be killed for the greater good if the greatest good is the individual

I wouldn't specifically classify Marxism as a "disorders any more than Christianity or atheism. It's just a set of beliefs. Undermines your argument to talk about it like that.

"Indoctrination" by pretty much any measure is a bad thing, even in militaries.

Obviously speaks to an issue with human nature more than to the ideology itself.
>See:
He's not entirely wrong, though. Anywhere there is power, there will be wannabe kleptocrats lurking. The nature of communism requires militant revolution, which creates power vacuums and thus, easy entry points for these types. You seldom hear about "violent capitalist revolutions because feudalism is gone in most parts of the world, and capitalism can creep into societies silently.

Also, I'm not a communist, but you guys arguing against it are running a shit operation...

If you want to criticize communism, why not start with an admission that neither communism NOR capitalism is perfect in practice, but that the flaws of capitalism are much more manageable

>source my ass
both are equally bad because both are equal totalitarian, hell at least under Nazi control some people were safe in Germany, Stalin killed all the higher ups who were loyal to him just in case one of the was thinking of overthrowing him

That bitch-rot on the right has spread almost all the way across that whole country. If Korea is ever reunified, it will suffer the same fate unless they have a 20-30 year interim period where they slowly introduce free markets and liberty to the north.

As well you should
youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY

Are you a moron. There have been plently of non commie dictators. Look up the Cold War. Everybody from the Khmer Rogue to the Taliban got US support just as long as they fough the commies.

I can kill you for my greater good

No one's saying capitalism is perfect, but it's the best we've got. Communism and Marxism has no redeeming factors and is always a negative

>Khmer Rogue
>Not communist

Hasn’t history proven that Marx’s vision of an egalitarian utopia is unattainable, inevitably creating an oligarchy more oppressive to the proletariat than the bourgeoisie it vilifies?

And? I just used them as a example of shitty people supported by the USA. A actively genocidal one. They also supported non commie dictators / faux democracies in South and Central America, Africa, Asia and the middleast. South Korea. Argentina. Peru, Egypt, South Vietnam, South Africa, Rhodesia, the Iranian Shah, Pakistan.

NOT exactly, Fascism has a few collectivist tenets but it's not really entirely focused on this aspect. Fascism wants to conduct the whole of society's activities through the state, but it also believes in pushing through the best in society without holding them back, hence some private enterprises are allowed. Though eventually Nazi Germany seized the entire industry to support the war effort, theoretically they would go back to independent individuals afterwards. It'd be a very dog-eat-dog and corrupt system where only the good boys get to own things, but it's more than Communism would allow.

>I wouldn't specifically classify Marxism as a "disorders

I'd call the bone headed denial of facts for the sake of an ideology, justifying it with a sense of moral superiority, then defending the utter savagery of this system's consequences a really bad personality disorder.

I've never met a communist, or anyone with Marxist ideas in him that wasn't a living contradiction, having a religious-like faith in this ideal of equality and a yearning to be part of an absolute moral crusade of achieving it. There are insecurities at play. There's a lot of ego to people wanting to shape society to their liking knowing it might actually make things worse just to feel righteous.

>be capitalist system
>build stuff
>forced out of market by hypercorporation monopoly
>sued for more money than exists in the world

>be capitalist
>build stuff
>Lobby the government for protection
>push out competition with regulation
>sue this guy for more money than exists in the world

Were any of them capitalists?

>be capitalist
>build stuff
>no government in your market so businesses can succeed and fail naturally and multinationals won't be so easy to make

being an actual South American i don't think you have your facts clear.

the US supported overthrowing some communist governments(though more often it just provided resources to in-grown sentiment against them), it didn't stick around supporting them unconditionally. Most of the replacement governments were of heavy right wing lean or ambiguous military juntas.

and the Kmer Rouge is a very bad example considering the US itself conducted a lot of operations on Cambodia to dismantle their support for North Vietnam, which would be ironic because an Unified Vietnam would later invade and destroy them, provoking the ire of China which in turn would invade Vietnam.

>>implying Lenin, Castro, Allende, and Tito did anything wrong

>Funded by US
>Appropriates Communist aesthetic to get support from China
Very communist

>Who are Pinochet, Idi Amin, Salazar
>Implying Fascism is anything other than corporations fusing with state apparatuses

>be no government
>neighboring warlord fires ICBMs at my house for violating his privacy by existing on the same planet
>call the cops
>he uses a different law enforcement provider so our services are incompatible
>explode
>remnants get sued by neighbor's private legal company at his private court

>commies can't greentext
>muh 'not real communism'
>implying Pinochet did anything wrong

>fake communism
are there any examples of successful communism?

>having the government not label corporations "too big to fail" and bailing certain ones out is the same as no government
wew lad

>successful
>communism
pick one

...

i'll tell you what he did wrong, he didn't finish the job

Most cummunist regimes are "successful" in that they're goal is centralizing power and socializing everything. So by that standard, they're all a success. Its in terms of making an actual functional society, that they fail.

>Overthrows peaceful and democratically elected leader
>Proceeds to lead one of South America's most brutal regimes, killing hundreds and suppressing any dissent
>Ruins emerging economy for decades
>Is overwhelmingly voted out by populous

I'm trying to find what the difference is, in Communist/Socialist terms, between 'The State' and 'The Worker's Collective'. I've always heard the state(at least in democratic societies) loosely defined as 'A collection of the people that are occasionally polled to help determine where society is steered.' But then I see these Anarchic-Communists talking among themselves about how they'll tear down the state and replace it with 'A collection of the workers that are occasionally polled to help determine where society is steered.'

This is especially annoying when talking about Russia, how a common refrain will be "They didn't have Socialism(Where the Worker's Collective owns the Means of Production), they had State Capitalism(Where the State owns the Means of Production)." I can't figure out, at least in implementation, what the difference would be.

Who needs a dictator when you can have a handful of mega-corporations manhandling the government like a fucking pimp and bribing them on a daily basis into doing whatever the fuck they want to triple their own profit margins and securing every single foothold of power they've ever acquired so they will never have to fear honest competition? The government is a borderline nonentity compared to the companies who have total control over the quality of food accessible to the masses, the quality of life of nearly every single American dependent on their own income to survive, the housing market, the entertainment industry, the (for-profit) justice system, your mediocre phone/internet/cable services, your overpriced medication, etc.

>peaceful
People really aren't this fucking stupid unless they are trying.

>stealth Sup Forums thread
At least post one of your political children's books or something.

Allende was by and large one of the most peaceful socialist leaders in history, prove otherwise bucko.