This thread is permanently archived
Anyone who hasn't read Marx has no right to criticize socialism or communism
| True, but did you read capital? Its kinda hard to read for normal people. And i'm not even talking about rightwing scum.
| Communism as a concept exists beyond what Marx has written. Not only that but you can criticize it due to how it was practically applied to the world. The true Communism has never been tried meme is far too stale to be used as any argument. It's a cute Kantian logical loop.
| >>179557 well the biggest arguments various communists have is about successful implementation of the idea which is honestly the hardest part about while thing. The other thing is that Marx left some unfinished work as well, which only complicates things more
| >>179585 German Neo-Kantian philosophers would argue that there are things of an absolute nature. That means that it's merely a model in perfect form and something that does not exist in the practical world. Any socio-economical model works on that principle. I wouldn't be so much against Communism if it offered constructive improvements over the other functioning political systems but sadly it's a means to a massive decline. I'm sure many will disagree here though.
| https://youtu.be/ZynwKwu67SQ
| At least with a quick watch of a country like Venezuela you can see why Socialism can't work. Nevertheless actual capitalism has evolved from the capitalism of the industrial revolution that Marx used as the base of his works and mainly his dialectic; so far Marxist dialectic doesn't apply to today's system and communism is not needed.
| Anyone who hasn't been kicked in the groin has no right to prevent people from kicking them in the groin.
| >Anyone who hasn't read Marx has no right to criticize socialism or communism
>>179532
No. The main problem about Marx is that he has fans that confuse his ideas and criticism as religious dogmas.
In order to that criticism on socialism/communism is totally ok, as long one does distinguish between its known and failed realisations and the theoretical idea as a goal.
| >>179765
Well, that's a really lame argument as the situation of Venezuela does not much have to do with socialism/communism.
Also, I don't see where capitalism has evolved. The principle is still the same: The owners of means of productions are the ones with political power and the duty to increase profits leads to opression of people that don't own such a thing plus it stand's in a contradiction to the automatization it generates.
| >>179939
The trick is just that globalization is driven by a bunch of transnational companys that move/offshore opression around the world, while the opressed people are still divided by religious, nationalist and racist opium/lies to fight each other about the breadcrumbs that capitalists throw to them under the table.
The overkill potential increased in the last years more then ever since the fall of the soviet union and there are more fortified borders these days than back then.
| Oh, and a last thing: Capitalists are just about to artificially restrict the nature of information due to the information-technological revolution. A „personal“ computer is a mean of production, that is highly accessible, which becomes artificial restricted by non-free standards and software. „Mental property“ is the modern way capitalists protect their system from the opportunities that technological advance could offer.
In the end people will pay for every thought they „have“.
| Anyone who hasn't read mein kampf doesn't have right to criticize nazism.
Sounds good my communist dude
| >>180559 K. Marx was an actual scientist and philosopher who did all the math in Das Kapital. While A. Hitler was nothing more than failed painter and demagogue...
| >>180578 Yea one of those actually started a regime. Before you criticize Hitler, try actually read his book.
| >>180609 Mein Kampf is book of transcribed incorrect ramblings about Jews and their "conspiracy" against Germany. I know Hitler started a regime, what's your point?
| Marx is gay
Money good
Checkmate
| >>180616
No it isn't. Your sloppy generalization indicated that you didn't read the book at all, lad. But i guess your gender studies class professor hippie forbid you to do so?
Btw, name one place communism actually succeeded, then we can talk.
| Communists really need to update their holy books. Most Western nations no longer engage in pure laissez faire capitalism.
| >>181290 Anyone who knows anything about China would tell you that Dengism, what China adapted right now is not even close to the idea of communism or even socialism. After the disastrous genocide by Maoism, China ditched the idea of communism except its name through reform and opening up, it's capitalism with state-owned market intervention. Otherwise why is Jack Ma, the richest man in china not executed and hanged? Just talk to your chinese exchange students..
| >>181290 All the shit about "Hitler apologist", how many did Mao killed in cultural revolution? Not sure if you know any of that since they dont teach history at school.
| btw about China. It's written in their constitution that they are slowly transitioning to communism. And they are doing it step by step because they think Soviet Union failed specifically because they tried to hop over to communism nearly instantly without perfecting productive forces.
| >>181293 There were a lot of rich people in the Soviet Union too. They had close ties to the governmemt. The reason real communism was never tried is because it's a pipe dream. Centralized power will always eventually lead to tyranny.
| >>181327 Who tf cares if it was intentional or not? Stop apologizing for dictators, you hypocrite.
| >>181405 Good intentions even if they lead to horrible things are still good intentions. I am interested in ideas themselves first , the way they are adapted is up to debate
| >>181405
Well, for the victims of the past it probably does not matter, but for the people at these times and in future it makes a difference.
I don't want to live in a shithole World just because some stupid people believe there is no alternative while making it a self-fullfying prophecy.
Good intensions are no guarantee for good politics, but they are a condition. The idea of gaining something good by bad intensions is just a lame excuse or self decepion for assholes.
| >>181503
>The idea of gaining something good by bad intensions is just a lame excuse or self decepion for assholes.
This twisted capitalists logic btw. is a major reason why most communism/socialism attempts failed in such a large scale - up to now.
| Everything that's bad is capitalist: The Thread
| >>181538 This.
I feel like a lot of the retarded commies on this site just can't accept people can be evil with or without politics.
| >>181538
>>181581
Please learn the basics of mathematical logic, especially set theory, and how it is used in language.
It will help you to understand why your statements are wrong.
Because this:
>Everything that's bad is capitalist
was not even mentioned once in the whole Thread (and btw. not by Marx either)
But there is a real interesting phenomenon:
Everything that promises profit seems to be ok for capitalists, even if it's a "communist" labelled dictatorship.
| >>181687 Sorry, professor. Clearly I haven't watched enough Rick & Morty episodes to attain such a vast intellect as yours.
| >>181333
It's also written in the constitution that the chinese president should not be permanent.
Guess what, we have an emperor now. Watch the news, my western communist lover.
| >>181508
>Blame the failure of communist state on capitalism
Nice try my dude. There's something called natural selection. Your ideology committed mass genocide and fucked it up for multiple times.
| >>181882 I know China (and Soviet Union while it existed) is dictatorship, but just because a communist state is bad doesn't discredit the idea of communism itself. The same way capitalist dictatorship doesn't discredit whole idea of capitalism.
| >>181885
>There's something called natural selection.
There is something called pseudo-science like social-darwinism.
„Natural selection“ is only one (!) of a couple of factors in evolution hypothesis (!) which works over as time span of million of years (!).
Pls. get rid of your voodo-science replacement opium religion.
>Your ideology committed mass genocide and fucked it up for multiple times.
Strange, in my collection of socialist literature there is no word about do genocide.
| >>181971
The thing is that the idea of communism stands in contradiction to dictatorship, while capitalism gets both, practically and theoretically pretty well along with it, since capitalists give a shit when it comes to increasing profits. Even the most pro capitalism economists will admit that there is at least a minimum of regulation necessary. The question is how long a government can stand against the inherent increasing power gap of capitalism.
| >>181988
Plus historically capitalism only worked for 70 years without a global catastrophe in the scale of the last world wars facing the attempt of establish an alternative. To proclaim that there is no better alternative to capitalism in order to the fact that attempts to do it failed until now is unlogical propaganda bullshit. Just look what happens these days: regional conflicts increase and the leading industry nations are arming up like they didn't for a long time.
| >Everyone who didn't die because of starving has no right to criticise socializm
| >>181996
Darwinism is voodoo? I guess gender studies is a real subject for you instead.
>Muh socialist literature
Lol I was talking about the commies but funny how you shifted your response from communism to socialism. Read some history, kiddo
| >>182023 socialism if the first stage transitioning towards communism you dummies. Read some literature yourself
| >>182025 lol i triggered a commie. Lets talk about Maoist China , soviet union , cuba, vietnam and cambodia, shall we?
| >>182035 That's why I said people should read K.Marx. According to him stages of history are:
Primitive Communism > Slavery > Feudalism > Capitalism > Socialism > Communism
| Anyone who studied biology at school knows that there is no such thing as "Primitive communism". No Alpha male in his right mind would share food and females with beta weaklings because some middle class jew from 19th century wrote so.
| >>182196 you clearly don't know your history. Early tribal European (especially East Asian) communities shared the resources between themselves.
| Fuck commies, the threatened my Rodina almost one century
| >>182196
I have no problem sharing food and women with you, even though I'm physical and intelectual superior to you.
| >>182030
Ok, but then let's also talk about Chile, Nicaragua, Indonesia, Ghana and Royava.
I'd suggest we start with Vietnam. What are your complains? How could agent orange and napalm fail to convince the Vietnamese people that capitalism is better than socialism/communism?
| >>182259
Fuck capitalists, they threatened humanity for more then a century leading people in two brutal, barbarous world wars and preparing now for a third one.
| Marxist communists love doing the critical theory. Since they can't support socialism on its own merits, they have to (1) strawman modern societies as being purely capitalistic (2) blame everything that's bad on their own construction of capitalism and (3) craft a falacious dichotomy where it's either capitalism or communism (no middle-ground).
| >>182514 Nazis added socialist to their names only because it attracted working class people, nothing to do with real socialism
| >>182514
Well, Stalin let most honest communist die in gulags while he proclaimed the end of revolution, socialism in one country and invaded Poland together with hitlers nazist-germany that only used the label socialism to attract workers to his stupid antisemitic, racist social-darwinist ideology. Capitalists in countrys like france, UK an usa were shocked, since they hoped Hitler would protect them from communist revolution and not collaborate with em.
| >>182542
Except they were not. Socialism was never about killing jews and invading countries for nation, race and leader. It is about turning private property of the means of production into public property controlled by basic-democratic councils (=soviets). You're the one acting like a (us-)american here.
| >>182554 Im fucking russian, and my ancestors saw terrible red motherfuckers and their crimes. My bad english language don't let me tell you why nazi ARE socialists, but if you dont see it, you are really stupid westy idiot
| >>182558
Even if you would write in perfect English, there is no way for you to explain why nazis were/are socialists, because it is just stupid bullshit. Socialists were main enemies for the nazists. In nazist ideology socialism was slavic subhumans under jewish control.
| In the grand scheme of things, fascists and socialists achieve similar ends with similar methods. It's just that only one person can be the guy in charge, so they utilize useful idiots in order to garner power and weaken the other side. It's not about ideology or principle. It's all about being on top in the end. That's why you'll have national socialists and communist socialists fighting one another.
| Anyone who hasn't read Mein Kampf has no right to criticize National Socialism.
| >>182726
>Anyone who hasn't eat dog-shit has no right to criticize its taste.
This is what you basically wrote.
| >>182646
The thing is, that I don't believe in your "grand scheme of things". Sound pretty much like some New-Age esoteric shit to me. In order to that all you wrote does not make any sense to me and seems more like presumptuous, metaphysical and pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo.
Face the fact, that nazism/fascism is nothing but the ever returning crisis-mode of capitalism and socialism/communism wants to break the vicious circle of destruction, death and reconstruction.
| >>182745
I never said I agree with the OPs statement, but common: compare the work of Marx/Engels with Hitler is like compare dogshit with fat, tasty burgers.
| >>182519 You know what I mean. Communism is a utopian pipedream. Socialism is essentially what communist-focused societies stay as. There is a way regulate the excesses of capitalism without going full socialist. If that was not the case, the US would tear itself apart with every recession.
| >>182746
> Face the fact, that nazism/fascism is nothing but the ever returning crisis-mode of capitalism and socialism/communism wants to break the vicious circle of destruction, death and reconstruction.
unironically lol
> The thing is, that I don't believe in your "grand scheme of things". Sound pretty much like some New-Age esoteric shit to me.
IDK, long-term and short-term planning are pretty common among normal, functioning, independent adults.
| >>182746
> accuses me of spouting esoteric gibberish...then spouts esoteric gibberish
What a time to be alive.
| >>182749
> compare the work of Marx/Engels with Hitler is like compare dogshit with fat, tasty burgers.
One man's turd is another man's burger. Don't let me stop you from shoving turds in your mouth.
| >>182753
>>182754
I don't know, if you just want to troll or if you are really that stupid. You think you are very smart, but trust me: you are stupid as shit while being resistant to realize that on your own. But since I am a nice person I want to help you to get out of that intellectual valley of lacking knowledge...
| >>182829
>introducing the circle of death in its neutralized, euphemistic interpretation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle
>Introducing real darwinists evolution hypothesis timeline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_history_of_life#Earliest_history_of_Earth
>introducing social darwinists timeline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_history_of_life#Humans
>introducing the actual meaning of "fitness":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness_(biology)
| >>182840
>introducing social darwinists timeline
actually social darwinists only refer to the tiny tip of the mentioned timeline. This is what unmasks them as the idiots they are, just establishing a replacement religion, beside the massive restriction to AND missinterpreatation of the selection mechanism.
| >>182751
The USA just did not tear appart yet because they managed to participate and win two world wars. Looking at the current state of things in the US and the global post cold-war power-shift to rising powers like majorly China, I am not so sure if things will always turn out well for the USA. All Empires will fall one day.
| >>182568 Idiot, nazi are socialist because they had SOCIAL COUNTRY, almost all people were members of SOCIAL groups like hitlerjungend and others.
And socialists were not main enemies to nazis.
Let me explain: there is socializm and two streams of it: nazism and communism. TWO streams of ONE socializm, got it?
| >>183657
Wait.. are they really saying National-socialists weren't Socialists? LOL
How about they listen/read a bit of George Lincoln Rockwell if they don't wanna read Mein Kampf.
National-Socialism is the perfect unity of man working for the state when he can, and the state taking care of the man once he can't work for the state anymore.
| >>183657
No. Nazis only proclaim to be "socialists". Their ideologic core is social-darwinism which is based on
1. the wrong assumption one can transfer the million year long progress of evolution on the last 3-4k years of human history
2. reduce evolution on only one of its multiple factors/aspects
3. the massive misinterpretation of this factor ("survival of the fittest") that a primitive understanding of supremacy allows to oppress the "weak" and "poor".
| >>183862
Fascism isn't national-Socialism, do your homework and read stuff surrounding Mussollini's fascism.
| >>183859
>Wait.. are they really saying National-socialists weren't Socialists?
And are you really saying that you believe that socialists and nazists share the same world-view/ideals/goals?
Nazists are just fools that serve the capital to fight and destroy socialists in any way. Nazists tell you three lies with one word.
| >>183871
That's fancy so I guess as a "nazist" everything I just told you is a lie then?
Great way to shelter yourself from your opponent's point of view.
| >>183866
the german "national socialism" was a special kind of fascist regime, but not every fascist regime was like the german "national socialism". Musolinis fascism was a official role model for Hitler and unofficial/defacto for stalin:
Dictatorship, militarism, centralized and authoritarian controlled mass movements and person cultism, and last but not least about autocratic corporatism - the peak of capitalism.
| >>183888
Well a lie is not equal to a point of view. Or would you say, that there are no lies and everything is true? Are you one of these spiritual LSD-hippie-anarcho-nazists?
Do you want to cencorship me if I want to disprove nazists lies?
Well thats a
>Great way to shelter yourself from your opponent's point of view.
| National socialists, fascists and Marxist/communist socialists are totes different, because they centralize power, turn their countries into shitholes, and always end up as tyrannical dictatorship.
Wait.
No, no, no, they're different because one is like "hurr durr, we're the superior race" so let's kill all the jews and the other is like "hurr durr, we're the victims" so let's kill all the jews.
| Honestly, why can't we just replace the far right with "s" and the far left with "m" at this point?
| >>183967
The only thing you touch is your penis while living in your dream, that you achieved something like a success in a discussion in that you actually stand on lost ground in every way.
| >>183947
>because they centralize power
That's something which comes in order to the industrial revolution and capitalism anyway. The difference ist, that socialists/communists want in theory the people to participate on that power. But unfortunately there was not much industrialisation, were "socialist" revolutionaries came in power.
| >>183947
>turn their countries into shitholes
Ah, interesting. Who was it that invaded any country that was suspisious of having "socialist activities" at all costs by collaborate with or supporting dictators, fascists, religious fundamentalists or just directly invading and destroying everything and everyone? Assasinating political leaders that were under doubt of being socialists, persecute suspectes fellowers of socialist movements etc.
Yes it was the major shithole cuntry USA!
| >>183947
>No, no, no, they're different because one is like "hurr durr, we're the superior race" so let's kill all the jews
yes
>and the other is like "hurr durr, we're the victims" so let's kill all the jews.
So pls. tell me which socialist theory, movement or state was about "killing all jews"? I want to see a debitable source to prove your bullshit. And don't you dare to reduce all socialists/communists entity to stalinism!
| >>184014 Any government that embraces socialism will be able to genocide whoever they want to. Just because Venezuela isn't as anti-semitic as the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany doesn't mean that if an anti-semite were to get into power, it wouldn't lead to the same consequences. It's common fucking sense that a person with power will abuse it. But no, I'm sure that if you were in charge, you would usher in the utopia. Because you're perfect.
| >>184009 You think the USA is a shithole? Really goes to show your champagne socialist mentality, that you would compare the US to the like of third world nations. The reason the US even bothered with the nations was stop them from becomming communists. They didn't even care about the nations themselves. Just that it would cause a domino effect that would make all the shithole communist countries outnumber the US and its allies.
| >>184097
>You think the USA is a shithole?
Yes, I do.
>compare the US to the like of third world nations
Actually yes, for more and more people live quality in the US is going to be on a 3rd world/development country level.
>The reason the US even bothered with the nations was stop them from becoming communists.
But if communism is such a big flop and supposed to fail by design, why even bother?
>domino effect, outnumber, blah
Well, in Afghanistan the US succeed, in Vietnam not...
| >>184318
>Well, in Afghanistan the US succeed, in Vietnam not...
The same is for Ghana, where the USA succeed with "stop communism" and Cuba, where the communists suceed and do better than ghana althought beeing still punished by sanctions.
So I would prefer living communist vietnam over "liberated" afghanistan and communist Cuba over "liberated" Ghana.
And I would prefer in most country libertarians, conservatives and alt-right idiots consider to be "socialist" over the USA.
| >>184089
>Any government that embraces socialism will be able to genocide whoever they want to.
In many countries like Cuba, Vietnam, Chile, etc. your believed have-to genocide of socialist-embracing governments did somehow not occure. Except the genocide, did by US-capitalits/imperialists assholes to "protect" people from socialism. A fucking hypocritical dogmatic anti-socialist/communist fundamentalist you are! So bigot that it makes me almost vomit on my keyboard...
| At this point, the comm/u/nists are making shit up to suit their narratives. No point in arguing further.
| I just personally don't see anything undemocratic or wrong with basic communist wish that workers themselves should decide how much and what to produce.
| >>184525
Could you pls point on what exactly what was made up to fit in communist narrative? I would lije to prove that you're the one making things up here to suit your non-/anticommunist narrative like capitalists, neoliberals, conserveatives and nazists ever did.
| I wish God will kill every fucking commie in this world. I wish u all have cancer of your anus.
| >>185394 Comrade don't discredit Christian Communism. Zyuganov himself said Jesus was the first communist.
| >>184525
It's OK, arguing with unironic communists was a recipe for failure to begin with. I blame mercury poisoning, we should pity the disabled.
| >>185418
"Christian communism" proclaims a diffrent god than the one of this statement >>185318 does.
I'm ok with it, even thought it's unnecessary. Same is for all other religions. Believe what you want, but stop bowing to religious authorities like clerics, saviours and new prophets. In the end all of them serve only capitalism.
| >>185723
mercury poisoning is often caused by esoteric "alternative medicine" which is really trendy in non-materialistic, anti-communist and also antisemitic groups. Alternative facts, alternative medicine, antisemitism, spiritualism, racism, religious fundamentalism - all these things exist under the umbrella of capitalism to sedate people mentally and keep them away from socialist/communist ideas.
| >>185665
My mom probably killed more counterevolutionary traitors you can imagine in Vietnam and Cambodia. For me I think killing people is bad, but the situation back then was more complicated. But you know, it is really hard do be pacifist if your enemy, the capitalists and their nazist dogs, killing people to achieve their goals is totally fine. Pacifism and peaceful revolution/recistance only works if your enemy has moral claims, but take a look on how the world develops now.
| In the end communism will win, else the human race will turn out as a failed marginal note of nature. The only chance to stop communism is to annihilate humanity. So pls. give it up, recistance is futile! ;P
| >"alternative medicine" which is really trendy in non-materialistic, anti-communist and also antisemitic groups
ITT we say whatever we want, no matter how ridiculous or blantantly incorrect.
| >>186061
Not only ITT - it is in general: Your kind has no chance! The more you resist, the more we will prove you wrong, no matter how ridiculous or banal you argue! In the end capitalism will fall and communism will be established. Why be so stubborn? You can't avoid the unavoidable. Capitalism is outdated and needs to be overcome.
| Никогда на выборы не ходил, но в этот раз пойду голосовать за Грудинина. Он настоящий кандидат от народа!
| Anyone who hasn't read Hitler has no right to criticize national-socialism or anti-semitism. Do you g/u/rls agree?
| >>187324
See, the premise of OP is heavily debatable (in fact I don't agree with it) but your comparison is absolute ridiculous bullshit. Anti-Semitism was no new (and at least no smart) "Idea" by Hitler and "national-socialism" is a term that was born in order to undermine international socialist worker movement. Basically Hitler did just copycat Mussolinis "fascism" which is capitalism in final form and added antisemitism, racism, nationalism and germanism.
| >>184097 this begs the question, why would the US need to have so much worry about the world having more and more comunist/socialist presence around? Why the panic alarm? Worth bombimg and sabotaging countries and goverments everywhere and sanctioning and pointing guns at "either drop it or I kill you"? What is this deep fear all about?
| >>187554
>national-socialism" is a term that was born in order to undermine international socialist worker movement
Ok you don't like this term, but how does it undermine my comparison to Hitler's Mein Kampf? I didn't want to compare it with international socialism (although I see many similarities), but I wanted to show how ridiculous OP's discourse is. Many people who didn't read Hitler hate nazism and they have right to. So are things with socialism and communism.
| >>187554
>Basically Hitler did just copycat Mussolinis "fascism" which is capitalism in final form
Fascism is more Gentile's work than Mussolini's one. And fascism is anticapitalistic, it supports third way. I think you don't know much about its ideas, so stop mix it with capitalism. Fascism is more leftist thing.
| >>189196 Karl Marx was economist and scientist. Hitler didn't develop any new theory. You can't even compare the two.
| >>189227
>didn't develop any new theory.
So you agree that nazism is just a form of socialism? I did not mean it when compare these ideologies, you said it yourself.
>>189228
Corporatism isn't leftist? Really? I think you don't understand what Gentile and Mussolini meant writing "corporatism", it's not like modern capitalistic private corporations.
Corporatism is political theory, according to which the elementary cells of society are certain social groups, and not individuals.
| >>189245
That means that corporatism is a form of collectivism, leftist philosophy. State corporatism refers to the practice of state regulation of private and public organizations. This way was applied in the socialist countries.
Corporatism is leftist.
| >>189228 >>189245 >>189249
Either you are so called "cross-front" idiots that just think/proclaim they are anticapitalists/socialist/left or you are neoliberal trolls that want to discredit socialist/communist theory by constructing connections to fascism.
It is true that fascists (including nazists) have a rhetoric which sounds like capitalism-critique and also that some socialist/communist approaches turned out with fascistic characteristics. But what you don't understand is...
| >>189288
...that fascism is an authortarian concept which practically always included backwardness by collaboration with feudal elites (clerus, nobility, monarchs) romantizing and glorify the past (imperialism, colonialism, ancient and medieval warfare, etc.) and last but not least always reducing the issue of capitalism to the capitalists personally, blaming them that they wouldn't have hornor or are from the "wrong race" and intentionally do evil. This is a major break with...
| >>189302
...what true socialists/communists critique on capitalism is about. Fascists don't want to overcome capitalism by making the means of production democratic controlled public property, they just want to replace the „evil capitalists“ with backwarded, reactionist idiots who believe they can control the means of production autocratic for a „greater purpose“ (which often is bullshit itself)
Conclusion: Fascism always was and will be anti- and/or failed socialism/communism.
| retarted fascist - "but muh class collaboration"
| >>189309
>they just want to replace the „evil capitalists“ with backwarded, reactionist idiots who believe they can control the means of production autocratic
That means that "true" socialism has never existed. The experiance of socialism is exactly the replacing "bad capitalists" with backward idiots hungry for power. Anyway, these differences do not put fascists in the diametrically opposite camp. And my comparison (>>187324) firstly wasn't about the leftism of nazists.
| >>189322
>That means that "true" socialism has never existed.
Exactly
>Anyway, these differences do not put fascists in the diametrically opposite camp.
There is another major difference which does this:
For fascists this
>replacing "bad capitalists" with backward idiots hungry for power.
is the official goal, while for socialists/communists it was proclaimed as a temporary „necessary evil“ which make their official goal of peace and wealth for all fail on the long term.
| >>189478
>temporary „necessary evil“
It was Lenin and his fellowers that reasoned every bad thing they did with this logic. Facing where the old and new elites of the capitalist world led „their“ people with the great war, it seemed not too stupid to agree on this logic.
Socialists/Communists did not realize (or to late) that this „pact with the devil“ leads to stuff like stalinism.
These days this logic remains as a ideologic core assumption of capitalism: doing good by doing bad.
| >>189478
I think this difference is not major. Their methods are the same after all.
And they led to a deplorable situation. I don't wanna support neither of this systems.
>>189480
Capitalism is an ecomonic system, not ideology. It's not about doing good or doing bad, it's aboit receiving a profit. I don't see evil in it. I see evil in populist bullshit talking about social justice and equality, but leading to mass deaths and totalitarianism within the country.
| And after we fail let's say "That was not real socialism!" and start it again and again. This system didn't work in any country, but this is too good way of manipulation to refuse it, right?
| Fuck socialism
| >>189538 Mistakes do happen, that's why Lenin always said we must learn from past mistakes. No one said building socialism and communism is easy, but that doesn't mean we should give up
| >>189621
Didn't you think that maybe socialism is the mistake itself? Maybe the problem lies in the ideology, not in the "unsuccessful attempts"? Maybe the multimillion victims is not the necessary price for trying socialism? Maybe there were enough historical examples to understand that this system is fundamentally disastrous? Didn't you think that capitalism has more chances for development?
| >>189535
You're wrong. It is a major difference, because one can point on socialists/communist regimes discrepance to what is and to what should be there. Also the western capitalist world progressed most where they accepted the challange to do it better than the socialist/communist regimes when it comes to problems like social mobility and security, colonialism, slavery, racism, equality of women and last but not least technologic advance.
While Fascism creates shit by design.
| >>189535
>Capitalism is an ecomonic system, not ideology.
This is what Marxists say about communism. I am sure that both for both is true: Communism and Capitalism are economic systems with a diffrent view on how the world and people are or should be.
>It's not about doing good or doing bad, it's aboit receiving a profit.
That's exactly what something what Marx (and Engels) wrote.
>I don't see evil in it.
So you believe in rationalism and that you decide what is it and what not.
| >>189535
>I see evil in populist bullshit talking about social justice and equality
Ah, finally you've become irrational yourself, yet. So even just talking about social justice and equality is evil for you? You want have back child labour, slavery and patriarchy?
>but leading to mass deaths and totalitarianism within the country.
Here you become ridicolous. Give us a proof in which country social justice and equality stood it a causal relation to mass deaths and totalitarism.
| >>189679
>Didn't you think that maybe socialism is the mistake itself?
Well ofcourse the idea has its weaknesses. Otherwise it would not have failed.
>Maybe the multimillion victims is not the necessary price for trying socialism?
I'm sure it is not.
>Maybe there were enough historical examples to understand that this system is fundamentally disastrous?
The system that never was properly established (and far away from ideal circumstances). I know history pretty good btw.
| >>189679
>Didn't you think that capitalism has more chances for development?
I think it already had two chances, which ended in two world wars. With the actual warfare/weapon technology I am not interested in a third chance and World War. I hoped after the end of the cold war the expierence with capitalism and communis would lead to a compromise/middel path between both. But looking in which direction things goes these days gives me more and more historical dejavus.
| >>189710
>looking in which direction things goes these days gives me more and more historical dejavus
Nazism, Racism, Autocracy and religious fundamentalism is rising everywhere. Regional conflicts become more and more playground for imperial superpowers (or those who want to be) which also are arming up like they did not since the cold war. Nations, including democratic constitiutional estates, are like toys to global operating companys.
| >>189710
>I hoped after the end of the cold war the expierence with capitalism and communis would lead to a compromise/middel path between both.
What I have experienced the decades after cold war until now is that even constructive criticism on capitalism and political approaches to "tame the beast" did not work, always were ignored or countred with "arguments" like, "muh communism is evil", "muh stalin", "muh mao", while most things that were criticized became reality over time.
| >>190090
Well, your country is fucked up, which has a couple of reasons:
- economy relied to much on Oil, which became a problem when the USA started fracking (which also will have its price for US-citizens on the long term). Oil price is low as shit now.
- the USA wants to get rid of the Venezuelan government from the beginning and at all costs. But the poor masses had no interest in this Opposition and supported Chavez because of his social politics, which was based on oil export
| >>190179
If you think the Opposition would have done better, just take a look on history how these kind of people ruled. Where the so called socialist government failed:
- depenency on Oil
- foreign policy (they should have try to normalize relations to the USA)
- lack of corruption prevention
- get rid of the idea that "socialism in one country" will work under this circumstances and push industrialization and free market for the sake of not loosing power to the shitty opposition.
| >>189686
>because one can point on socialists/communist regimes discrepance to what is and to what should be there.
It's because "what should be" is just theoretical idea of how socialism should work. And "what is" is how it actually begins to work. This is exactly the discrepancy. If the theory written on paper looks good - it does not mean that it will be just so good in real life.
| >>189700
You didn't understand my message. I wrote about it is bad to lie to people for the personal benefit. Fascism is not so popular precisely because it contains much less beautiful words. Fascism and Nazism directly speak about their intentions. Socialism and communism popularize themselves by saying fabulous things. There was no real equality and "justice" under socialism.
| >>189700
>So even just talking about social justice and equality is evil for you?
Yes it is, it's populism. "Social justice" is not an objective thing. Social justice and equality are incompatible ideas in my opinion.
>You want have back child labour
Well, I think child labour is good if it's voluntary.
>slavery and patriarchy
"What is not socialism is slavery and patriarchy". I see.
| >>189710
>I think it already had two chances, which ended in two world wars.
>First world war
My boy, imperialism applies not only to capitalism, it is mixed with any etatism.
Really? Second world war was caused by capitalism, not nazism? Please, tell me more.
| >>189835
"muh stalin", "muh mao"
Stalin and Mao did nuthin wrong, right?
>>190183
The maximum centralization of the state leads to corruption, this is just an effect. The more people rely on the state, the more painful it is to hit them.
| >>190242
>There was no real equality and "justice" under socialism.
Pls get rid of your ideologic glasses and face the fact that the idea of "social market", the equalization of women and the abolishment of slavery only worked in order to weaken socialist movements and make capitalism more attractive in competition with socialist regimes.
These days any kind of capitalism critique is treated like blasphemic proclaim for stalinism, while the problems become more and more.
| >>190253
>Well, I think child labour is good if it's voluntary.
Pls tell me, this is a joke.
Your "voluntarism" does practically not exist in a world divided into poor and rich. Kids from poor parents will have to work, while children from rich parents will never make their hands dirty and still end up ruling over the rest. This is what I call neo-feudalism. This is not the world I want to live in. I personally would never had a chance to get out of poverty without estate help.
| >>190242
>You didn't understand my message. I wrote about it is bad to lie to people for the personal benefit. Fascism is not so popular precisely because it contains much less beautiful words.
As you statet yourself there is no "true and false" for subjective categories like "good" and "bad"
So it is not about telling lies or the truth.
For me counts, that socialists/communists aims a wold/society I want to live in.
Fascism/Nazism aims a world/society I don't want to live in.
| >>190242
>Fascism and Nazism directly speak about their intentions. Socialism and communism popularize themselves by saying fabulous things.
That is the most ridicolous potrayal of how things are, i've ever read.
So fascists/nazist are no popullists because they tell people an "unconvienent truth", while socialists/communists are evil liars that secretly only want power for themselves to destroy humanity? At this point I only miss the usual "it's a jewish conspiracy" part.
| >>190274
>The maximum centralization of the state leads to corruption, this is just an effect. The more people rely on the state, the more painful it is to hit them.
I totally agree with you on the problems with centralization of power, but currently I see it more in private economy than in estate.
And there is a big difference between estate and private economy:
It may have a constitution where all people have the same status and it's representants may be democratically elected.
| >>190274
>Stalin and Mao did nuthin wrong, right?
Don't act more stupid than you are. You know exactly what I meant. I am not defending Stalin or Mao, but I see it as a major Problem that capitalism immunized itself from critique with this killer arguments which are becoming more and more ridicolous as the time passes. I repeat myself: The Capitalist world prospered the most facing the challange to beat socialism in the "peacefull coexistence" (which was not rly always peaceful)
| >>190364
Also socialist/worker movements had a big contribution to make the society worth living also for the economic weak people that basically generated the wealth with their work. I am btw. active member of trade unionist and I see how repression is rising against it, even in democratic constitutional estates. People loose their jobs more easyly if they start to fight for their interests than in the past. The opportunities of IT-revolution are misused to create modern slavery.
| >>190373
The market is globalized, and globalization is an unavoidable and unstoppable consequence of capitalism. Also the labour-market becomes globalized, which increases more competition about the lowest wages and lowest social standards. This is why international organization of labour is so important. But what happens instead?
Nationalism, Racism and religious fundamentalism is dividing the masses, while capitalists become more and more powerful, reducing estates to toys.
| >>190378
I suggest you start thinking about todays problems, which are majorly part of capitalism and its globalisation, automation and mass surveillance/control, instead living in the past and grudgin forever about historical socialism/communism and calling people stalinist and maoist who honestly see and want to solve actual and predictable problems. Else you are part of the Problem.
| >>190364
>I am not defending Stalin or Mao, but I see it as a major Problem that capitalism immunized itself from critique with this killer arguments which are becoming more and more ridicolous as the time passes.
I don't know why are you talking about those people. It's like I would start talk about people who defend their ideals writing "muh drumpf" etc.
| >>190333
It doesn't matter for me why capitalist countries tried to become more attractive. It really matters that they did. Actions are more important than intentions.
| I don't want to say that nazi are honest. I say that their words aren't attractive.
| >>190448
>It doesn't matter for me why capitalist countries tried to become more attractive.
I realized that, and I am sure that you're making a big mistake there.
>Actions are more important than intentions.
I think you confuse "actions" with "results". Because without intensions there is no action, except you have an ideal of humans as will-less animal/robot alike species.
I agree that good intensions do not automatically lead to good actions, but they are a minimum requirement.
| >>190468
>I don't want to say that nazi are honest. I say that their words aren't attractive.
So how it comes that they can win the masses over "socialist populism (which are evil lies to you)" when it comes to (capitalist) crisis situations?
I don't now where you live, but in my hemisphere more and more people see nationalism, racism or religious fundamentalism as an answer to decades of neoliberal politics. Socialism/Communism didn't play mentionable role for almost 30 years now.
| >>190508
>I agree that good intensions do not automatically lead to good actions, but they are a minimum requirement.
This is something which is inherent to the capitalist system: the assumption that if everyone acts as an sociopathic, egomanic asshole it somehow will generate a very cool society. And that economical success automatically proofs what is right and authorizes "the successor" to rule, ignoring the fact that success seldom is the result of actions by one individual.
| there is a saying that "behind every fascist, there is a failed revolutionary"
| If you live in Venezuela you could criticate Marx himself.
| You don't have to eat shit to know that it taste bad.
| >>191139
Nice try, but it does not work in this context. It is out of debate that Marx and Engels made a big contribute on understanding what capitalism is and how it works. Even capitalism fans usually admit that.
We're not talking about pseudo-scientific and quasi-religious racist/antisemic/social-darwinist conspiracy theorist Mumbo-Jumbo, which never will be a basis for a serious debate.
| Btw. in Belarus, which is officially no socialist/communist country centralized plan-economy performs not that bad.
Yes it is a autocracy or even dictatorship, but at least people do not starve or beeing mass murdered. But the most important thing: the Belarus government did not offend or fuck up other countries (yet).
I don't want to glorify dictatorship, but I am very upset on the hypocrisy in capitalist democracies with their oversimlpified good-evil scheme, especially the USA.
| >>190576
>If you live in Venezuela you could criticate Marx himself.
If you live in Syri, especially Afrin, you could criticate all the brave defenders of capitalist values against evil marxists by genocide them supporting dictators and religious fundamentalists.
If you think Venezuela is an example for how bad socialism is, than for me Syria is an example how bad capitalism is. I still would prefer Venezuela if I had to choose between these two options.
| >>191431
So what religion do you follow and why do you subscribe to creationist theories? Does the evidence for evolution hurt your feels?
| >>191618
>So what religion do you follow
None.
>and why do you subscribe to creationist theories?
I don't do.
Not agreeing on social-Darwinism does not make me one religious or even a creationist. Social-Darwinism itself is a modern religion, made by people who did not understand evolution. Darwin himself would not agree on it and probably turn in his grave knowing that his name is misused for this bullshit.
Btw. most religions officially go pretty well along with evolution theory.
| >>191618 people seriously need to stop confusing proper scientific biological Darwinism from pseudo scientific Social Darwinism
| >>191577
If one thinks that Venezuela is fucked because of socialism why not also thinking that Syria is fucked (much more btw.) because of capitalism?
Answer: Because of ideologic bias and capitalists propaganda and distraction strategies.
"War on Terror" my ass.
"Enduring Freedom" my ass.
"Defending Democracy/Nation/Values/Freedom" my ass.
"Humanistic Military Intervention" my ass.
"Surveillance for Security" my ass.
| >>191899
>Where is Capitalism involved in Syria's case? What?
1. Where is Socialism involved in Venezuelas case? What?
2. In Syria's case capitalism is involved in every thinkable Way.
a) geopolitics, which is about control over ressources, which is important to compete on the global "free" market.
b) having a playground for the military-industrial-complex
c) an distraction from serious internal social-economic problems of the participating countries
d) Bonus: genocide ypg-commies
| >>192020 What resources are there on a desert? Genocide of Communists, what? Military conflict not a side effect of other wars or the Arab spring?
You can apply a principle to everything if you twist your mind enough but that doesn't make it close to reality.
| >>192036
>What resources are there on a desert?
Fight is not only on the ground where the resources are, but also on so called "transit regions". Pls learn something about geopolitics. Did you never question why superpowers ever fought in Afghanistan, since there is nothing but dusty mountains? Geostrategic attributes are a resource too.
I mean the genocide on the kurdish people in Syria, while the whole "international (capitalist) community" watches or even supports it.
| >>192036
>Military conflict not a side effect of other wars or the Arab spring?
"Arab spring" was not a side effect of a capitalists advance, to get rid of old backwarded elites and estabilsh capitalist ones (even thought it failed, but hey, most central-european countries, especially germany, did fail on that step)
And was Islamism not ever used as a tool by western, capitalist powers to fight colonional opponents or later "communism"?
Check T. E. Lawrence, M. Oppenheim + Mujahid!
| >>192161 If you're talking about the situation in the Middle East, it's of equal fault of both West and East of Iron Curtain times as both sides aggressively funded the Arabs. The Arab spring happened because people were oppressed far too much by totalitarian governments. By your idea this automatically makes it capitalist yet it's a capitalist movement too? Totalitarian governments are beyond economical systems and can function within every single one.
| Since you're such a great Communist I'll also include this. One of the things Marx feared in Capitalism is that rationalization would destroy human relations. In this regard it means that using rational analysis you remove human qualities for the sake of rational belief which is a byproduct of Capitalism. Would it not be, oh I don't know, strange to proclaim that this rationalization can be recreated within Marxists and Communists? Stare too deep at the abyss, my friend.
| Real Antifa has never been tried.
| I don’t know why you fuckers still try to make communism work. It doesn’t, history has showed time and time again it will never work. Capitalism isn’t perfect but it fucking works and that’s the point
| >>192632
>I don’t know why you fuckers still try to make capitalism work. It doesn’t, history has showed time and time again it will never work. Communism failed yet but it fucking will be unavoidable and that’s the point
| The schizophrania in the commie poster continues. Just tell her how Communism is a failure and watch her spill her spaghetti.
| >>192762
Ah, pathologization - the last escape of the defenders of status quo to fight justified but unpleasant critique. As the time passes and problems will remain unsolved and amass it will become more and more obviously that you're the real madman here. We just need to w8 for breakout WW3. It already started flickering. Everyone prepares for it.
| >>192753 capitalism does work, buddy. Go to Cuba or Venezuela if you wanna feel what communism feels like
| lmao nah commies are scum
| >>192831
Go to Worldwar 1+2 if you wanna feel what capitalism feels like. Or just wait for Worldwar 3. Or simply go to Syria. Or take a bath in Napalm and Agent Orange. Happy Capitalism!
| News flash but war goes beyond economic relations. Ironically enough, yelling your commie ideals demonstrates that. People will wage war for all sorts of pointless things. The problem with Marxism is it only focuses on the economy.
| >>192989
News flash my ass. Nothing goes over economic relations. They are the fundament of everything what is when it comes to question why human societies are what they are and how they work. Everything else is just religious opium to fool the masses about the "true nature" of capitalism. Stop living in a dream that inevitable more and more becomes a nightmare.
| >>193118 So anything outside of economic relations is fake to you? That would make Philosophy, Psychology, Politics, Sociology, Anthrolology and the likes religious opium by your words. Even Marx acknowledges the necessity of history and philosophy in an analysis.
| Economy and rationality too have factors that let them exist as things. Even in the Socialist countries of the last century people lead lives outside of the Communist ideal and did things outside the economical rationale. We are human after all.
| >>193123 Marxism is based on belief of Materialism. It states that everything that matters is material and material itself shapes our lifes.
| >>193135 But we have enough examples to show that the immaterial aspect is just as determining. There's also the problem of how material things are as meanings for materials are made by people.
| In Marxism there is the notion that economic processes form the material base of society upon which institutions and ideas rest and from which they derive. While the economy is the base structure of society, it does not follow that everything in history is determined by the economy, just as every feature of a house is not determined by its foundations.
| The notion of society itself means a union of people grouped up into particular notions. The economical actions would come as a result of creating that union. It's not a self apparent all existing structure.
| >>193151 I just stated the official Marxist outlook. Economy and historical materialism is the core of Marx work.
| >>192855 war existed way before capitalism, war will always happen. You only say the bad stuff but I’m prtty sure you’re living very comfortable in a capitalist country, I’m prettt sure you’ve never felt hunger or been starving, go to any communist country right now, see how it goes for you, happy communism!
| >>193349
>I’m pretty sure you’re living very comfortable in a capitalist country
It becomes uncomfortable day by day. Back then workers were better organized and there was not that much surveillance technology. In my dads company they installed GPS-tracker in company cars to control employees. He was fired (his boss lost money at stock-market) and re-hired via a 3rd party "labour agency" under worse conditions. Founding works council is nearly impossible now.
| >I’m pretty sure you’ve never felt hunger or been starving
When my dad lost his job we partly lived from charity. Many of his former colleagues who lost their jobs and even some family-members of mine, which never where interested in politics, unionism, activism, volutarism, etc. are now supporting far-right partys because they believe that people in foreign countries and immigrants are to blame for increasing rents, decreasing labour rights, social standards + consumer protection.
| >>193349
And me, who did learn a job over 3 years (thankts god!) and already worked for 5 years gave up the illusion that the university is a institution to provide social rising and giving chances. On the one hand there are people who get everything paid by their parents and will graduate to follow their footsteps, while others have to work on 1-2 jobs to survive and have to mess with ridiculous bureaucracy and conditions to get public support just to become modern proletariat.
| >>193578
If I had no savings from my working phase, I don't know how I would survive studying at university. I am much older than most study colleagues and will just get a smaller pension than the parental financed idiots. If I would have studied from the beginning without savings from my previous work-live I had to pay for public or private credits after finishing university (under massive time pressure at cost on study quality, as it is a condition for becoming money)
| >>193607
Once, when I heard some jura studying snobs discussing about how their genius godlike parents avoid paying taxes on my way to the canteen, I was almost about to burst of anger.
This thread is permanently archived
| Do you g/u/rls agree?