Do you still support capitalism in 2018? If so, why?

It's funny that you'd say communists want a mono-culture considering we criticize how capitalism does it. Our goal is not to create a mono-culture; it never was. We respect culture. Different cultures sharing the same mode of production is not a mono-culture.

marxists.org/reference/archive/adorno/1944/culture-industry.htm

Our ancestors also lived in capitalism, they traded gold, silver, etc.. for goods and services as we do now.

Culture and tradition are also same in capitalism and socialism and third way not controlled by the economic system, but the regulation and laws that system has.

There was still capital accumulation, wage labor, and private ownership of production means. The state only intervened when employers did something it didn't like.

No, you dipshit, the issue is you're comparing capitalism to things that are categorically different. Capitalism is an economic system, not an ideology, and comparing it to ideologies (Fascism and Marxism) is fucking retarded because of that. Capitalism has nothing to say about things like culture, because as an economic system, it is not concerned with culture. Fascism and Marxism, on the other hand, are not just economic systems, but entire ideologies.

You are disregarding the nationalized companies, which were in full ran by the govt. They also controlled the private companies via regulations, so they were like semi-free cells. It was an mixed economy, not capitalism at all.

By the way, Marxist countries do not exist; Marxism is a scientific theory about 1. the evolution of history and society and 2. how the capitalist mode of production and exchange operates, not a mode of production nor governance.

((masrxist.org))
It's as reliable as sputnik. HAHAHAHAHAHHAH

Those aren't the only necessary traits for capitalism.

>The state only intervened when employers did something it didn't like.
The fact that those governments had that kind of power prevents those countries from qualifying as capitalist.

This is a retarded thing for a Marxist to argue about, anyway. Fascist economics are pretty bad for the long term, but they're still better than Marxist economics.

The economy was still based on wage labor, private ownership of production means, and capital accumulation. Nationalization of certain companies is irrelevant; the productive mode was still capitalist.

Hello gomrades! X_DDddDD Dis general is for disgussion of margsism-lebonnism, da ideology of ebin revolutionary socialism and gommunism.

Gommunism is da next stage of guckery following real society.

Wat exagtly is gommunism according to gommies:

>Gommunism is a stage of guckery in which the produgtive infrustrugture runs away from gommie country, and no goods are produced and beeple starve. X_-DDDD
>Gommunism in full form is obressive, statist society dat follows maxim "gib gib gib!" :-DDDDd
>To achieve gommunism we must replace broduction with murderous obressive rulers liek me, fug working glass beeple. XDDDD Struggle while I liquidate you all FUG. When capitalists run away we win and I gill you all. Eventually the fungtions of state stob and state becomes murderous and indistinguishable from other gommies. Da state withers away liek da people.
gommies.gom/fug/
gommies.gom/starve/

GL uses philosphy of gib and starve, see here:
gommies.gom/ohfugme/

It is recommend you kill yourself so you can avoid starving.

Resources:
gommies.gom/ohshid/
gommies.gom/1984/
gommies.gom/guck/
gommies.gom/probaganda/
gommies.gom/XDDDD/
gommies.gom/hiwherearethefood/
gommies.gom/benis/
islamiggommunism.gom/

Da sdages of gommunism.

>Sdage one
Bourgers aren't allowed to vode :-DDD but otherwise da system is digtadorshib of gommies. Everything is stole by digtadors and digtadors rule all.

>Sdade two
Withering
All beeple who aren't digtador glass starve. XDDD Once glass disabears and we steal everything more beeple wither away. Bolice begome unnecessary as beeple are dead lol :DDDDD Central blanning begomes unnecessary begause sgarcity caused starving. (BENIS :_DD)

>Sdage three
Gommunism.
No beeple. No food. My money. Much benis.

>Sdage 4
Nod real gommunism. Nexzt gountry. problems werent. :-DDdd

>NUT MUH REAL MAERXISM

How powerful the government was is irrelevant. The state is part of the superstructure, not the economic base.

Attached: 1430405852163.jpg (517x488, 47K)

A Marxist country is a country that is following or attempting to follow Marx's teachings on things including economics and government. Marx absolutely did write about how things should operate.

>scientific theory
Scientific my ass.

You don't understand what Marxism is. Marxism is not a political ideology, nor an economic system, nor a mode of governance.

No, I'm not a capitalist anymore. Funny enough my blind faith in capitalism disappeared after studying economics.

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 38K)

The only thing capitalism needs is private ownership. And we both know the country had the power and did plain take those companies as it had that right. This is not private ownership, as capitalist societies cannot do that. This is an mixed economy or even socialism, as the means of productions were in the end in the hands of the govt.

Marx's teachings had nothing to do with how a country is governed or how the economy should work; they were about how economic modes and cultures evolve and function. Have you even read Marx?

>You don't understand what Marxism is.
A retarded utopian fantasy that will never happen

>You don't understand what Marxism
Want to try again?

Attached: ec3.png (1024x768, 529K)

Socialism is not governmental ownership of production means.

Attached: 7hschjmqv7.jpg (616x617, 45K)

[C i t a t i o n n e e d e d]

It is. You are thinking syndicalism now, aren't you.

I never said anything about surplus labor. Surplus labor isn't even a Marxist term.

It absolutely does matter. Capitalism requires the absence of governments with totalitarian economic powers. If you want to argue that capitalism is simply a mode economic interaction, you're shooting yourself in the foot, because what you're talking about is the default mode of interaction that has existed since at least the dawn of civilization. Wage labor, buying and selling, etc. did not begin during the industrial age.

Want to try again?

Attached: DSC00946.jpg (3648x2736, 3.96M)

>Capitalism requires the absence of governments with totalitarian economic powers.

No, it doesn't. Fascism is capitalism in decay. Read Trotsky.

Want to try again?

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 15K)

>"scientific"

>Fascism is capitalism in decay

Attached: 1402095045776s.jpg (250x241, 6K)

>economic modes and cultures evolve and function.
And he was completely wrong because his revolution never happened

((trotsky))
OH I AM LAFFIN
youtube.com/watch?v=2L5sb3P-5Zg

youtube.com/watch?v=1Q26BXvHJsw

If fascists don't consider themselves capitalists, and capitalists don't consider Fascists to be capitalists, then fascists are not capitalists. Stop being retarded, and don't think ignoring the majority of the post won't be noticed.

Well my ancestors have never lived in a capitalist society. I'm actually the first person to live in a capitalist country. Our ancestors may have bartered or done basic trade to acquire an item they need by giving up something in return, but they never lived under a fully industrialized capitalist nation which is completely different than the feudal and tribal societies before. Before the industrial revolution, capitalism as we know it could never have existed because the means of production could be acquired by anyway. You didn't need to rent your labor our to a person to use a hammer and anvil or farming plow because you could acquire those work tools easily and be your our employer. Now it's a lot harder and doesn't make sense to buy your own car assembly line to work yourself.

>Capitalism has nothing to say about things like culture, because as an economic system, it is not concerned with culture
Well capitalism is defined as an economic and political system. And it doesn't matter whether capitalism "says" anything about culture because just by living in the system it WILL have effects upon our culture and society. Why the fuck is our culture so materialistic. Capitalism doesn't "say" people need to be materialistic. Because it shapes our minds to see everything as commodities. Once you open your mind and start to think outside the box, the way things are in society start to make sense.

His revolution? The fuck you talking about?

He was not wrong.

>“Historical materialism is that view of the course of history which seeks the ultimate cause and the great moving power of all historical events in the economic development in society, in the changes of the modes of production and exchange, in the consequent division of society into distinct classes, and in the struggles of these classes against one another.”

>“… that all past history with the exception of the primitive stages was the history of class struggles; that these warring classes of society are always the products of the modes of production and exchange – in a word, of the economic conditions of their time; that the economic structure of society always furnishes the real basis, starting from which we can alone work out the ultimate explanation of the whole superstructure of juridicial and political institutions as well as of the religious, philosophical, and other ideas of a given historical period.”

This is a scientific theory and it has already been proven with empirical evidence.

>No, I'm not a capitalist anymore. Funny enough my blind faith in capitalism disappeared after studying economics.
Interesting. What are some of the things you learned in economics that "enlightened" you if you will.

>Marxism is not a political ideology, nor an economic system, nor a mode of governance.
Yeah, its fucking nonsense.
The gibbering of someone with no work or life experience, other than that of being a leech.

Also
>telling the guy calling out tankies on their revisionist bullshit to read Trotsky

He relied on the experiences of others. Like capitalists. You do realize Engels was bourgeois, yeah?

Nigger, you realize Capitalism is a part of an ideology, right?

Except in all practical examples where it was.

>So you think an economic system has 0 influence on how it shapes society, culture, and the nation?
The free market itself doesn't — it follows the natural order, but as government enters it, everything gets shaped the way we got what we have at moment. Every time we see any kind of agenda pushed through any economical means, "something" is fairly noticeable behind it.

>have existed because the means of production could be acquired by anyway.
you still can now
>You didn't need to rent your labor our to a person to use a hammer and anvil
You did if you wanted to be a sailor
>or farming plow
very few people owned their own land

I support nothing but myself. Have zero empathy for others, i'm selfish, i'm greedy and like watching people suffer - i saved those pictures of the immigrant children so i can look at them when i'm feeling down. Once beat up a homeless guy in the street just for a kick.

Been told there's something wrong with me :(

So, i'm not sure what system i can fit into.

Attached: BSP_054.jpg (2000x1250, 675K)

Capitalism is not an ideology; it's a mode of production and exchange characterized by wage labor, private ownership of production means, and capital accumulation.

There were no practical examples where it was.

youtube.com/watch?v=VGWijPHZam0
Adorable, want to keep trying and embarrass your self some more?

>and it has already been proven with empirical evidence.
[citation fucking required]

Recognizing the existence of a problem is not the same thing as understanding the problem.

sociology is a junk meme science

I'm afraid it was capitalism you dolt. You had an hammer and anvil, you were your own means of production, as you have entrepreneurs now, who are the ideal capitalists and in the capitalist utopia, competition is rampart and everywhere.

You also had employers before the industrial revolution. You had the Arsenal in Venice that constructed ships like crazy and they employed a lot of workers. You had aristocrats who had workers, etc.. Those aristocrats bought the means of production, meaning both the labor and their equipment to work. Far simpler than now, but capitalism non the less.

And that statement alone should tell you how retarded this particular retard was..

Are you selectively illiterate? I said PART of an ideology.

Idgaf about Jews. Talk about something that actually matters.

[Citation needed.]

>MUH BOURGEOIS

Attached: c4a8ae7c4299a3c3f95fe7a5a5b9ab0ef354211e2100a60ae7b65c8407876df6.png (1500x1170, 948K)

It is not part of an ideology. It's a mode of production and exchange -- a social system.

I don't see how this is relevant.

>Talk about something that actually matters.
Keep denying reality, the bourgeoius you speak of are also jews.

Attached: quote-when-you-re-a-kid-you-always-feel-you-have-this-weird-kindred-spirit-thing-with-other-marc-mar (850x400, 85K)

Capitalism started as a white economic system.
If you work hard, you'll be successful, period. Only the strong survive. Is that not how nature works?
Sure, the Jews exploit it by pushing pornography and high sugar foods but Jews aren't supposed to be here to begin with.

>The exception proves the rule
t. irrelevant meme flag

Whether someone is a Jew or not is irrelevant. Whether a capitalist is a Jew or not is irrelevant because capitalists ultimately do not hold control over their actions; capital does. Stop trying to distract from the actual issues. You can't push out all the problems of a society by just getting rid of "the bad people"; these problems are systemic.

Attached: 53103.jpg (1173x915, 655K)

>the struggles of these classes against one another

Funny the only time there is 'struggles' between the classes, is when there is some butthurt communist who has been told that they have to do some work.

>If you work hard, you'll be successful, period. Only the strong survive. Is that not how nature works?
So according to your logic, the Jews are the strongest. So why does Jow Forums constantly sperg the fuck out about the proven superior Jews.

>I it's not the jews fau-
youtube.com/watch?v=AOAGnZvuzsA
MMhmmm

Attached: jewish-privilege-over-asians-europeans-small-for-internet1.jpg (586x386, 81K)

Nigger the bourgeoisie is the middle class, at this point. Like I said though, Marxism recognizing that a problem existed doesn't mean it had any understanding of the problem.

>shipwrights
>exceptions

>or manufactories
>exceptions

Attached: argumenon.jpg (567x565, 60K)

>m-muh heritage
Heritage is for faggots. Stop taking credit for things you didn't do, and forge your own legacy. People who value their heritage are retards who are delaying humanity's ascent into the stars.

No? Conflicts between the lords and the serfs. Conflicts between the masters and slaves. Read your history, hold shit lol.

>is when there is some butthurt communist who has been told that they have to do some work

"From each according to their ability."

Attached: 1442293882488.png (2092x1270, 194K)

>Read your history, h
bitchute.com/video/DfQZXx71J6MV/

Yes, because communism is a failed shit-tier ideology pushed by lazy fucking faggots who don't want to work, or, who don't understand that those who put in the most risk deserve the most reward.

Literally the WAAAH WHY ISNT LIFE FAIR?!? politics of the worst of humanity, a fucking blight and nothing more. Pic is of what should happen to all good commies.

Attached: jonestown-suicide-massacre.jpg (800x455, 80K)

People want freedom, dipshit. Liberty. Which is why liberalism (in the traditional ideological sense, not the modern, misused sense) is better than Marxism.

>the majority of Americans are bourgeoisie
It's almost like Democracy is incompatible with communism.

Attached: really-makes-you-roll-over.png (112x112, 7K)

>He relied on the experiences of others. Like capitalists. You do realize Engels was bourgeois, yeah?

Like I said no life experience!
And because he knew one person that did, because all people have the same experience!?
Fuck that's not even an argument, the guy was a waste of space, pretty sure his 4 dead kids who died of neglect could attest to.

>From each according to their ability
>I'm fat ergo can't work
>communism FTW
kek, silly leeches.

Attached: 1475007907402.jpg (470x595, 201K)

Has literally nothing to do with what I said, but neat infograph

Attached: cnn jews.jpg (657x664, 159K)

>BECAUSE IT WASNT REAL COMMUNISM!!!

Attached: 1521762788723.gif (200x86, 712K)

>Gets asked about capitalism
>Starts sperging out on a tangent
Are you ok user? Did you take your meds today?

I am just spreading redpills, for this commie
I used to be in his position and a hardcore commie, commies usually last long here, unless you are Larping.
Anyway I am leaving this thread.

Idgaf about Hitler.

>Yes, because communism is a failed shit-tier ideology pushed by lazy fucking faggots who don't want to work

>FROM EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR ABILITY

The majority of Americans do not own the means of production. You're confusing Marxist class with Weberian class.

I didn't say that. The USSR did not have state ownership of the means of production. Read up on how the USSR's productive mode operated.

Basically. Don't get me wrong, there are huge problems with how the middle class treats the working class in this country, but that's all Marxism gets correct. Plus, you'll find more Marxists in the upper and middle classes than in the working class here in America.

Dude is kinda digging it but mom does not approve.

Attached: 1522466374268.jpg (1024x576, 133K)

...

None of them own production means. You're talking about Weberian class, not Marxist class.

What truth? That there are people who own the means of production due to historic oppression? So what? How does this have to do with the mode of production and exchange?

>None of them own production means
My gardener owns his means of production

Reminder that "Capitalism" is a Marxist term, and you're 100% brainwashed if you defend Capitalism or call yourself a Capitalist of any flavor.

No ordered society in history was "Capitalist" and there were no so called free markets. America was not founded on any such notions like Lolbert revisionists try to assert. Countries had trade, they had markets, but they were regulated, they were taxed. Even the US in its founding had taxation reserved as a power that congress could levy, and they did so immediately. The US also passed legislation and regulations to protect domestic industry and domestic labor. It was nationalistic, even during the industrial revolution the US was manipulating the market to spur growth vs other European powers.

Stop letting Jews control your language. When you use their words, when your mindset is framed around their language, you deprive yourself the tools necessary to form truly free thoughts. You confine yourself to a limited view and render yourself an easily controlled useful idiot.
You can have a market, a flourishing strong economy, trade with other nations, private ownership, the right to earn profit, all without resigning yourself to this perverse system of Western Democracy and Capitalism.

Jewish Capitalism treats everything as something to sell and holds nothing sacred.