Why are zoomers turning communist?

Get off my internet stupid poorfag.

I'm inclined to think this could be the right answer.

you are in for a rude awakening... step outside your social circle

tldr: Material Conditions
do you really expect that the old maxims of capitalism can endure no matter how many chinese or indian slaves we put to work or the fact that the "ethical" duty of the c-executives is to make as much money as possible for their shareholders when as put into concrete terms, means that they move production to a country that gives no shits about working people for 14+ hours a day without meal or bathroom breaks? This is by no means a comprehensive litany that can serve as a complete grievance of why people have so much disaffection but this should encourage you to at least look beyond the moral realm when considering why people are aligning themselves in such ways. Look towards other factors like economic factors and see how their self-interest align with the proposed solutions. We have already seen this movement play itself out 100 years ago which culminated into the creation of the USSR. We are entering similar conditions again which people are reacting against which could possibly lead to massive violence against the status quo.

they think its the only way they'll be able to have anything. truth is, the people with power and that will continue to hold it will never align with their ideals, so they'll always just be circlejerking amongst other equally poor or powerless people, while everybody else ends up making it.

Communism is when poorfags can afford healthcare. They should just die like nature intended.

this would be fine if we weren't experiencing a huge shitskin problem though. at some point its necessary for the future of humanity to keep the first world going, even if it means supporting worthless people (providing they're white anyway).

I agree with user. Most of Gen Z is highly conservative. You must live near a major city.

Kids from privileged background are born with entitlement mentality. When they don't get what they want, they turn to communism to cope with their incompetence.

Attached: download (1).jpg (237x213, 14K)

Step outside yours... Most people, all races, genders and ages hate leftyfag ideals

>>Communism is when poorfags can afford healthcare. They should just die like nature intended.
Nature is not limited to being a mirror of a human mind. People have some sort of agency which expands to a sort dominion in how they live.

>1985
>the dissident russian
>takes the russian metro
>gets his free food and high education to compaling about communism

Same reason for any Communist ideals.
By leveling the playing field you never have to accept that you're inferior and that you have hard work to do.

Because of just how autistic people like peterson are.

because capitalism is for gay old faggots
Read some real communist theory and stop being a youtube-Intelectual

Attached: 1539294828768.png (1000x940, 393K)

>communism can create a just world
>muh just world fallacy

Attached: 1551421088907.png (324x291, 13K)

>tfw pol psyops is too obvious

Attached: tenor (13).gif (356x200, 881K)

What if they steal your shit and kill you instead? Just like nature intended right? It's just darwinism bro...

>The just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias (or assumption) that a person's actions are inherently inclined to bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, to the end of all noble actions being eventually rewarded and all evil actions eventually punished.
So if capitalism brings all that is good and communism brings pure evil, then can we say that this also falls within this description?

No one seriously argues that Capitalism brings only good/evil and communism brings only good/evil. No system involving humans is perfect

its difficult for poor people to kill anybody important when armies, private security, and increasingly autonomous warfare is available.

that logic really doesn't capture how human psychology deals with inferiority. With a level playing field you have no excuse for your inferiority and it becomes more dangerous as the subsequent rage becomes self destructive and thus dangerous to everyone. It is precisely with an uneven playing that inferiority is easiest to rationalize, the easiest to deal with psychologically. If capitalism was truly a meritocracy it would have been destroyed in a matter of months.

There is no just world, not communism or any system. A system is not about perfect justice, it's about who it works for and how.

Spoken like true poorfags. What are you even doing on my board?

because this time it'll be REAL communism

Attached: 15378903478.jpg (645x729, 170K)

>>No one seriously argues that Capitalism brings only good/evil and communism brings only good/evil. No system involving humans is perfect
It isn't the argument that many communists make themselves. Why are we bringing up moralism when Marxist think that reasoning about it is playing by someone else's game?

>>Spoken like true poorfags. What are you even doing on my board?
Just asking questions.

>free
You have to work for it
>high education
No first worlders goes to Russia for their education

They want to level the playing field of results, not opportunity. That's evident in every antifa riot.

>he thinks he owns the board

Attached: t9fprez1whc01.png (2400x2045, 829K)

The average russian was better educated than the average american throughout the later post-war period.

Antifa are mostly anarcho-liberals, that they care more about redistribution of wealth, utopian demands about state abolition and reactionary flag-waving instead of expropriation of the means of production and class warfare is exactly the problem.

But, so long as we're talking about ideology, neither equality of ouctomes nor opportunity has ever existed nor ever will. These have always just been bland talking points and navel gazing.

You aren't important?

I mean, they kinda do. Both sides. Both sides are at about the same level of retardation of course.

Lol, gl in life Mr. Temporarily Embarrased Millionaire.

>But, so long as we're talking about ideology, neither equality of ouctomes nor opportunity has ever existed nor ever will.

What are communists fighting for then?

Communists are fighting for more free time, for democratic coordination of production, for workers to have more of a say in the workplace, for ecological sustainability and for basic necessities to be decommodified. In short, for mass domination of politics, ideology, and the economy.

>Russians were better educated!!!
t. some retarded Russians. They were taught how to love The Party, not how to do anything.

>expropriation
This meme again. You mean theft just say theft. You never built anything it is not yours, when you take it some other commie is justified taking it from you.

>>What are communists fighting for then?
Bourgeoisie defenestration.

It's going to result in monopolies one way or the other with the difference being mobs of people being pitted against each other (my collective vs your collective), not that different than the current conditions (my party vs your party).

Ecological sustainability? Nah, that's not going to work. Who's going to enforce the environmental rules?

I only see the basic necessities part working out.

>t. some retarded Russians. They were taught how to love The Party, not how to do anything.
The average russian was far more familiar with high literature than your average american. At the highest levels of academia Russian scientists, economists, and mathematicians were among the best in the world.

>You mean theft just say theft. You never built anything it is not yours, when you take it some other commie is justified taking it from you.
We're not taking anyone's personal property, rather we are removing from the capitalist class the titles that allow them control over the means of production, the private property that allows them to coordinate our economy. All these things, the workers built.

That it's not that different in terms of collective action is hardly a knock against communism. It means such collective action is perfectly feasible.

>Who's going to enforce the environmental rules?
First of all, I'm not anarchist, so I'd be perfectly happy if a state did it. Secondly, when people coordinate production themselves it's a simple matter of investing in green industries and technologies.

>What are communists fighting for then?

making mommy and daddy angry

Massive amounts of student debt, a life of minimum wage jobs, gig economy, quality of living has gone done, and people are starting to see that the american dream is no longer attainable in the current boomers rule everything environment. It's no wonder zoomers are turning to communism in masse but what they don't understand is that just like how capitalism didn't solve their problems, so to will communism fail them.

>At the highest levels of academia Russian scientists, economists, and mathematicians were among the best in the world.

They purged a lot of academics.

>We're not taking anyone's personal property

Yes you are. Property is what you personally own. If I purchased a factory with my savings and you take it away, then you're taking away private property.

>They purged a lot of academics.
Yes they did, and they were worse off for it. But they still trained brilliant minds.

>Property is what you personally own. If I purchased a factory with my savings and you take it away, then you're taking away private property.
That's a deep perversion of terms to call a factory personal property. You're not using it personally, you're not operating all those machines with your own two hands. You don't even need to visit it in person so long as your name's on the deed. What you're describing is how you would own it /privately/. It works for your /private/ interest, even though it is not used by you in person.

You're making up all these rules of how a factory should be operated. There's no requirement that a factory needs to be operated by a certain amount of people or that it needs to be of a certain size or that you must hire people. Automation is a thing now. What if the factory is set up in such a way that I can run the factory myself?

cont'd

How does shipping and handling work for a collective factory?

The entire economy is a Ponzi scheme. Those who come early and invest make compound interest.
E.g. House ownership
Rent
Stocks

These generate wealth over time
This is the reason that every civilisation eventually collapses

Many young people, particularly immigrants have no generational wealth therefore they have to work harder than the people who came before them (boomers and b4 (old money)) and for that work, they accrue less capital.
Communism is a reset switch.
It purges the early investors in the capitalist Ponzi scheme and puts most people on a more similar playing field.
It is a way for people who's ancestors were selfish and short sighted so left their descendants with nothing . To strike back.
The Apple does not fall far from the tree.
The late adopters eventually realise that doing all that work for nothing is not worth it
Similar to buying Bitcoin at 10,000 rather than 10 dollars

Attached: image.png (808x805, 470K)

I'm not making up any such rules. what I'm observing is that private property law permits someone to say "this factory is mine" without having any other direct affiliation to it, in running it or working at it. If you are running a factory yourself, congratulations, you are also taking on the role of a manager, a role that is distinct from your status as the factory's owner, since it could be realistically be taken on by anyone, including someone you delegated the work to. In communism, its possible you could remain the manager, and be employed in that capacity, without remaining the owner.

The reason for this is because there's another party involved here: the consumer. The logic of exchange, originally, was that of a tradesman directly producing and handing over to a customer some commodity they wanted for some other other commodity the tradesman wanted. This has broken down under modern capitalism. The capitalist, besides not producing the commodity themselves, also doesn't exchange with a single customer at a time. Rather, he produces for society as a whole. Since what is involved is no longer two people's private interest, but society's interest as a whole, it is logical that society have the power to coordinate the production that's supposed to meet its needs, instead of having production for all of society be determined by done according to what profits a single private individual.

>>You're making up all these rules of how a factory should be operated
So are you right?

That’s cuz ur a shutin. It’s happening

No I'm not. If you're adding arbitrary limits and restrictions, then you're the one creating rules.

No idea, but might be a bit related to general boredom with the current state of things. I'm considering being communist this year - it was fun trolling the Left & kikes, but the Right are just getting boring now. Jow Forums has become a dumpster fire, the same way crypto needs the bear to cleanse it, we need communism to sweep the board clear of cancerous Q-larping flerfers and shit. Then we can go back to posting NeetSoc memes and shit. It's the circle of life. I also want to shill cryptos on leftypol, let em understand how smart contracts could be used to institute full communism.

Except that he's ideally expended a bunch of (private) resources to acquire the factory, equip it etc. How does that mean he still doesn't own it? Far as I can tell, all communism is doing is shifting the ownership to some abstract group identity like "the people", which really means "the ruling party members". I mean, if all the employees got together and bought it, then fine, now they own it. But there's way more to the whole process than just labor, there's resources like land as well, expertise, R&D etc.

You keep moving goalposts. So it's not the factory workers but the consumers who should own the means of production now?

inevitable result of the current capitalistic system

inferior races and genders are mad at white men, but their IQ is so low they can never win this war.

I was born in 97 so I am technically a Zommer but kinda feel like more of an in between millenials and gen z. From what I have observed is that the commies tend to be only a few years older than me in their mid twenties and early thirties. Those younger than me in their mid teens and very early twenties seem to be something entirely unseen before. Their outlook on like is like if you mixed Andrew Jackson and Adolf Hitler. They know they’re being screwed by the banks and the (((elite))) so they are vehemently anti debt and very much in favor of self reliance. It’s gonna be interesting g to see what happens as the rest of my generation comes of age. Many of them are very conservative and some are even borderline fascist.

zoomers know about (((them)))?

So yeah, the working class poor deserve to be treated like crap by the bankers! Yeah! by the amazons and the walmarts!
Fuck the working americans fuck america. Let the companies destroy it! yeahhh!!!
You fuck traitor idiot.
Because some woke up realised that trump is a boomer, that stands for boomer bullshit. They realize that boomers have manipulated them into voting for someone who doesnt give a shit about them.

They are so close. They know the system is fucked and that it’s controlled by a very small and powerful group. All they need is a little push and they’ll be goose stepping down Pennsylvania Ave. Most of them already think the Nazis are cool.

Poor=weak
How the fuck you gonna kill anybody without strength or training, both of which benefit greatly from money. Most commies I've seen fold like a napkin as soon as the authorities or any kind of resistance at all show up.

who is going to force asia into it?
are you going to bomb china because they keep releasing plastic on the ocean?

I mean used to think communism was great when i was 14 then went hardcore nazi then facisit then last, i relised that a mix of all is good.

I relised this when i was 18, currently 19.

But ya the people i meet that are civilist, and most zoomers avoid politics and gay shit like that, currently me included.

Its actually a good idea to openly dislike libtards from a financial point of view. Imagine if a game company openly came out against that kind of shit. It would probably gain them a ton of money / recognition right out of the gate.

Zoomers are sick of this shit for sure. Especially gamers.

I thought zoomers only cared about fortnite and vaping

holy shit, you really have no clue how dumb your comment was do you?

I can assure you there are plenty of people outside of 4chin that have taken to communist ideas.

>Not being a political know it all when you are 13- 16 years old
>Not being a anarchist when you are 16-18 years old
>Not being a liberal without even knowing what that means when you are 18-21
>Not being a literal nazi when you are 21-24 years old
>Not being politically apathetic for the rest of your life

Do you even politics?

Attached: 1546374922891.png (500x500, 532K)

probably because they never know first hand how shit it is.

>why do some people believe one thing and other people believe other things
droolingbrainlet.jpg

truth is it's all a matter of scale. communism works best at the family scale. ideally: everybody contributes as they can and everyone receives equally decisions are referred to the one that got the expertise.

now when you try this shit with people who are not related by blood, larger than a small group problems get heavier and heavier. if you get the scope big enough all you are left with is problems.

capitalism is the opposite. it doesn't really work very well in a family. i mean sure it looks like it works but will be a horrible experience. on the other hand it scales extremely well. the larger the population of participants the better it works.

in between the two some form of socialism at tribal levels and population center levels work best.

>if someone doesn't want to slave away for Mr. Goldberg and want endless mass immigration and wants to put a sense of morals above money they're a communist
Boomers, everyone

This, Zoomers are NatSoc, Millennials partly NatSoc, mostly Commiie. Boomers and Gen Z are the full blown commie generations.

This actually sounds breddy legit to be honest.

Based and redpilled.

Anybody that thinks otherwise is just coping.

Attached: 1542867636138.jpg (1000x800, 61K)

they’re not...

Don't bother, gommie faggot is the dumbest 105 IQ person you will ever argue with. He has thoroughly convinced himself that what he is shilling is "true communism", and no amount of picking apart his utterly flawed reasoning will have even 1 iota of impact.

So is literacy apparently.

i'm not sure people are getting more stupid and uneducated. it's more like stupid uneducated people are now proudly proclaiming their thoughts and ideas as opposed to be ashamed of their shortcomings.

tldr retards are coming out of the woodwork.

>Its actually a good idea to openly dislike libtards from a financial point of view
Literally this. One of the best current-day examples is to look what's happening with California

and that is how the market takes care of it all. everyone votes with their wallet every day in the end.

Oh sorry you don't get to live in a 1st world country you worked and contributed your whole live towards that your family for generations built
10,000 sick Guatemalans showed up at the border so we need to take from you and your society while raising tax because you're an evil white male capitalist

This is fair
Most people are good and just want what's right
Any idiot can be sold on either idea

My opinion is the least amount of decisions is best
Communism opens up entire economies to be corrupted while the free market self corrects inefficiencies
It's hard to scale a any system in a world economy because exploitation is out of sight out of mind but when you give up the chance to change things under communism you fail every time

Because they're special snowflakes that can't be competitive in the global markets and can't stand that shitskins from third world countries will take part of their wealth because they're simply just more efficient.

>Communism opens up entire economies to be corrupted while the free market self corrects inefficiencies
that is what it boils down to in the end.
capitalism works. it may not be perfect. especially when you try to balance long term viability to short term profitability. but it fucking works. because if you put aside everything people participating in capitalism are expected only to follow their self interest. and that is a pretty reliable incentive.

>With a level playing field you have no excuse

You really, really underestimate people's ability to play victim and create excuses when things don't go their way

Obviously the factory owner does currently own the factory under capitalism, but this fact doesn't justify it when that ownership leads to irrational coordination and inefficiency.

Communist collective ownership doesn't have to be abstract leading to party control. Many forms are possible, and the lack of legitimate communist parties in the 21st century means it likely won't be a party. Sovereign wealth funds with democratic referendums, worker or consumer owned cooperatives, government corporations, all these things are plausible forms.

Regardless, expertise and R&D are also done by workers, and the biggest R&D isn't even done by private capitalists but by universities and government agencies.

I never made any such reductionist argument about who should own the means of production via some simple formula, all I've said is that capitalists should not.

Chinese people would rather not live in smog soup if they had a choice in the matter.

this, nobody perceives any playing field level. they will always have excuses and someone to blame.

>capitalists should not
that's the most idiotic thing i ever heard.
when the capitalist invests into a business or purchases means of production he takes on incredible risks. something the workers are not expected to do.

just imagine for a second you are kinda broke and looking for a job but every company expects you to purchase a share of the company to hire you. you don't know if this recent startup is gonna make it you have no idea if the company will be valued fairly by the market you have no idea it will be around 3 years in the future all you know is the debt and bonds get paid first if it goes down and you lose everything all your money and employment and chance to ever get employed again if it goes belly up which a lot of business do.

it would be a nightmare. i mean sure if they can employees should own a piece of the business. that's a very good thing. but forcing a system like that on them... it's idiotic.

The inverse is also true, psychologically, successful people will rationalize every accomplishment down to their innate talent and skill.

You want to get to the "truth" of the matter, you have to realize the randomness, the barriers that exist. As Machiavelli put it, it comes down to both virtu and fortuna. Skill and luck. Some people are more lucky than skillful, or vise versa, some people have neither.

irony: the post

>>psychologically, successful people will rationalize every accomplishment down to their innate talent and skill.
That is, psychologically, absolute half truth.
People generally can be decided in how they perceive their success and failure. Some perceive both as an internal outcome that comes from within them and some perceive it as an external influence. You have roughly 50% of people who perceive their success and their failures as their fault or coming from them and 50% that perceive both as a result of external forces.
And all of this is regardless of their economical standing.
How come people like Bill Gates advocate for communism? Because they think that their success was an accident - came from the external, rather then the internal influence. If someone says- I got rich because I was lucky, they think that the success is external, same with people who think that they are broke because of bad luck.
Read psychology 101 and you will see countless experiments that show that correlation.
I would say that people supporting communism are more inclined to think that the succes is an external and not internal value, but I can't find any research on this.

The LLC already means that the state incredibly subsidizes the risk for capitalists, for one. Two, the whole point is to remove market valuations as a primary method of coordinating investment. Three, cooperative enterprises do take on these risks, and the employees are better off for it since it doesn't mean a capitalist will liquidate everything when the going gets tough. Coops generally last longer and are more stable employment.

Capitalism is not a system, it's what happens when humans reject violence.