Socialism doesn't work

If you want to live like poor tribes do, you probably can do it with communism as long as there aren't too many people. But if you want efficiency and productivity, capitalism is the way to go.

The high automation part puts people out of work and they will feel useless. Once people feel useless no matter how much material you give them they will destroy themselves.

How does that happen? I assume you need a truth function which verifies if the output is true and then you just showe random numbers as input?

It is also where things go completely off the rails too

You make them compete against each other

A highly educated populous with a democratic republic or direct democracy.

The key to this is a highly educated homogenous population. It could (in theory) work on a micro scale.

Attached: 71D60832-3F3A-4410-B188-8C24A946C23B.jpg (386x300, 54K)

How can you then control that they approach the desired process?

Well yes, but it's going to head this direction anyway long term so communism, grey goo, or mad max here we go
Short term there are more roadblocks than people think, but even then things are happening (look up IBMs debating bot)

Attached: 6b9dcae0b199de0f262f226794bedc1a5bb65c4e202715e11dd8f8b7998a5dc3.png (600x950, 646K)

One set of data is input that will be randomly processed.
One set is controlled with the correct output.
The input data is then used to train the AI to build nodes with weights. The higher the weight the more likely it will be chosen. The weight is added when choosing that node results in success.
Once the training is complete you try real data.
But you have to analyze the results or you end up with an AI that was intended to find tanks but only identifies that is was sunny or cloudy outside

This much I know about neural networks, the way it’s just simple matrix algebra is very fascinating.

Well when they're competing against each other obviously you're testing them against a desired outcome
But, that seems too obvious to state, am I misunderstanding your question, can you elaborate?

>Communism doesn't work...

Attached: 1523926378490.jpg (1728x2592, 573K)

How do you define the goal towards which they’re competing without selected training sets?

>communism and or socialism
>implying communism is the same thing as socialism
socialism can work, Europe is proof of that. however it can only work in a homogeneous society that has a reasonable IQ. socialism is now failing in Europe because of all the savages invading and stealing the natives contributions and tax money in gibs. socialism can only ever work when a government isn't retard and it's only available to the indigenous population - used as a safety net. it wouldn't work in the USA for example, because of all your nogs and shitskins. they'd drain the system without ever paying in.
communism can never work though. it's been tried a million times and every time it ends in famine, civil war, pandemic, starvation, genocide. communism is pure spite. "well if i can't be rich nobody can, we'll all be equally poor". it's a retarded system which doesn't even make sense, because there always has to be someone at top forcing those on the bottom to be equal.

Attached: karl_marx_nobrain.jpg (480x260, 9K)

a world in which everything is automized isnt fucking communism. It may well be a utopia, but it isnt what the thinkers in the 1800s described and its bullshit on the part of Marxists to try and pretend that it has anything to do with their extraordinarily dumb ideas

Where is it now

>saved the world from nazi germany

Attached: 1488203432756.png (258x330, 100K)

Yeah and it doesnt work

>welfare and taxes is socialism

God you’re a retard

You play them against each other, or against the environment, in a simulation or IRL

>End the centuries long cycle of famine in Eastern Europe
>Higher calorie consumption than USA
>Ended racial inequality
>Ended sexual inequality
>free education

Imagine being this disingenuous and delusional

I've only ever seen those claims made on one graph that got shilled here constantly a few months ago. In the end I backtraced its origin and, surprise surprise, it was plebbit. Naturally complete without any source, just some graph some braindead (((Commie))) had made himself. Sad.

>a world in which everything is automized isnt fucking communism. It may well be a utopia, but it isnt what the thinkers in the 1800s described and its bullshit on the part of Marxists to try and pretend that it has anything to do with their extraordinarily dumb ideas
archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.505759
>To the degree that labour time - the mere quantity of labour- is posited by capital as the sole determinant element, to that
degree does direct labour and its quantity disappear as the determinant principle of production - of the creation of use values -
and is reduced both quantitatively, to a smaller proportion, and qualitatively, as an, of course, indispensable but subordinate moment, compared to general scientific labour, technological application of natural sciences, on one side, and to the general productive force arising from social combination [Gliederung] in total production on the other side - a combination which appears as a natural fruit of social labour (although it is a historic product). Capital thus works towards its own dissolution as the form dominating production.
Page 700
Read the sections around it for context
Thinkers in the 1800s in general were far superior to the bs we see now

Murder all the capitalists.

>Explain to me how Communism and/or Socialism could ever work in theory.

The reason why communism never seem to work is because they are missing one key ingredient. The human element. Sharing the means of production, but what about the means of reproduction? Real communism can only be achieved if you're willing to share your wife with other men.

Neither Mao nor Stalin shared their wives, and look where that got them.
Communism needs the sharing of humans in order to be successful.
Real communism is essentially cuckoldry.
If you're not willing to share your wife with other men, then communism will never ever work.

If you're not willing to share your wife with other men. How can you be trusted enough to share your means of production? You are not a communist if you won't share your wife.

Attached: soyviet flag.jpg (600x300, 22K)

Best socialism is voluntary family pooling.
t.Kentuckyfag who's family done huddled, saved, pooled and accumulated much funds/property since 1966 (continuing to this day with 9 large household family (nuclear/extended/in-laws) units of about 8+ members each, with each one pooling a combined household income of about $240k+ a year)

Our family never took the (((atomization))) meme bait.

underrated post

Meme of the day

Absolute kek

Attached: 1asu8906ljljm.jpg (547x20, 12K)

Enforce global socialist ethnostates.
Everyone works together to conquer the universe and improve society while all cultures and races are preserved.

Attached: GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG GANG (1144x888, 316K)

Our dumbass, skilled/transportation working redneck brainlet family is creating an incidental dynasty. FYI, it's not hard to live in a large household when you live on 4 acres with a house and a few cottages. I think we will be Rothschild-tier in 3 decades.

gutenberg.org/cache/epub/61/pg61.html
>The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.
>But you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the whole bourgeoisie in chorus.
>The bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no other conclusion than that the lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the women.
Are you by any chance a burger memefalg?

All of the least shitty (in terms of development) places in the world
>Switzerland
>Scandinavia
>Germany
>Israel
>Japan
>etc
Government provides myriad services

All of the shittiest places in the world
>West Africa
>sub-Saharan Africa
>Haiti
>Afghanistan
>etc
Government provides virtually no services

Over and over again. Clear correlation. But nothing to see here, right?

youtube.com/watch?v=8EkClNPMltQ

Ok first off European countries have built there wealth over generations of capitalism. You are completely forgetting history. The Roman Empire was capitalist, medieval europe was capitalist, colonial europe was capitalist, pre-WW2 europe was even capitalist. It's only been in the past 80 years European countries have switched themselves to government controlled cesspits. Since then Europe hasn't seen any booms to their economy equivalent to that of Japan in the 80s, Hong Kong like ever, or the US during the 20s and the 90s. Capitalism increases growth rate that's just a fact. Subsharahn african countries may be shit, but their GDP is increasing every year why Europe is stuck stagnant.

>muh millions of dead people
People die under all systems retard. They died under monarchies, they died under fascism, they died under socialism and they are dying under capitalism.
Even if this was a legit argument, capitalist countries have more dead people than socialist ones.
The fact is that fascism and socialism were forces behind the greatest progress of our history.
Fascists created some of the best weapons, chemical industries and infrastructure.
Commies made breakthroughs in science, rocketry and industry.
I swear to God, liberalism, centrism and other ideological diseases must be destroyed.

>muh shekel
If we create a true socialist society, people would be working only because they want to and not because of money.

share your wife

Why should I share my wife you imbecile?

Read a book

Might I make a suggestion?

Attached: 41tTZSUxoyL._SX317_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (319x499, 29K)

>Kekistani flag
Wew lad

>Why should I share my wife you imbecile?

Wow

Can't even share his own wife
How can you even be expected to share your means of production? It's off to the gulag with you you anti-communist scum!

Are you by any chance an involuntary celibate, son?

If they avoid statalism and political oligarchies it may work.

>When the best argument you have is calling someone a cuck
>Posting from Sweden

counter my argument then.

HOW are you expected to share your means of production, if you can't even share your wife?

she produces children, no? workers.

If you want communism to work you have to give up your selfish desire to have your wife to yourself.

i can easily explain why it does not work.

Working Communism needs everyone to have same goal and no personal needs or ambitions.

When i say that i would never accept communism, it itself proves that communism can't work.

Ofcourse then someone would try to force me, but that would instantly ruin the idea of communism and it happens in every fucking communistic country.

Simple.

Attached: EipäKestä.jpg (598x640, 93K)

what kind of commie won't share his wife?

My wife is not my property, therefore I cannot share her.
Marriage in Christianity is monogamic. I cannot share my wife.
Also the production of children does not go up with the number of sexual partners, therefore your logic is flawed.
You can keep on being a cuck tho if its your thing.

Attached: gagarin was nazbol.jpg (690x388, 68K)

because a wife isn't a mean of production?

>My wife is not my property

My property is then also not your property.

Congratulations, you've proven once and again why communism will never work.

Karl Marx himself said: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
And I need to fuck your wife.

>people can't have common goals
imagine being this deeply autistic

The production of children doesn’t involve surplus extraction retard. I hope you’re one of these ”new swedes”.

There is no such thing as a surplus extraction

>Denounce slavery
>Haha thats why comemenism cant work lmao get fucked retard
A person is not a property. If you think a person is a property, then sell yourself and your family at the Free Market™.
In a socialist utopia, people wont cling to property and rather advance humanity as a whole.
Also I dont advocate for "colectivizing toothbrushes" as most autists think, I just want industry to be managed by the state.
>Karl Marx himself said: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
>And I need to fuck your wife.
First of, you do not need to fuck my wife.
Second of, you cannot redistribute people
Third of, you have nothing but idiotic strawman argumenst, I can do that too:
>HOW can capitalism work, if you dont sell your entire family as sex slaves? Wow, youre a retard cant you see that the demand is high? How can the Free Market™ work if you arent willing to trade? Capitalists BTFO
Cant you see how idiotic that is?

>First of, you do not need to fuck my wife.

Uuh, pretty sure I need to, you can't control my urges.
If you won't let me, then sorry you just have to admit that communism will never work.

Continuing:

Who are you gonna call? The police? I'll just tell the police that they can share your wife before me if they don't arrest me

It's not like they're getting paid is it.

People can never be sufficiently satisfied and will always want something more. When people are no longer starving, new needs and demands arise. There will then be scarcity of other products, and the best way to allocate resources for those products is by allowing free trade between individuals. That way the products will end up where they are most valued, e.g. where the highest value will be paid for it.

No you dont, give me one reason.
Not being able to control your urges is a mental disability and you should be locked up in a mental asylum if that is the case.
If you arent disabled well, I got news for you. Degenerates get the bullet too.

Attached: olA43174.jpg (863x1300, 77K)

>Also I dont advocate for "colectivizing toothbrushes" as most autists think, I just want industry to be managed by the state.

>I want to live in a dictatorship

That's you, you should go live in venezuela.

This was meant to

>Not being able to control your urges is a mental disability and you should be locked up in a mental asylum if that is the case.

How will the people working at the asylum be paid? Will they paid less or more than someone working a really hazardous job?

There is no incentive to work hazardous jobs if everyone is getting paid the same.

>Who are you gonna call? The police? I'll just tell the police that they can share your wife before me if they don't arrest me
>Implying I need someone else to defend my wife

>It's not like they're getting paid is it.
They dont need to get paid, because there wont be a concept of money. Noone will get paid and everyone will work simply because they love their jobs.

Nobody will be getting paid pal, thats the thing.

>capitalism is when people trade stuff

Attached: 4a9bcd273429ec65862af9853388b5a4e758295734ef05c275486d8689bacdf4.jpg (645x729, 26K)

>They dont need to get paid, because there wont be a concept of money. Noone will get paid and everyone will work simply because they love their jobs.
>Nobody will be getting paid pal, thats the thing.

What kind of magical world do you live in?
I think you need to be locked up in a mental asylum.

I love fish, eating fish, but I live inland. So how do communist get access to fish?

To get fish in capitalist country i go to the store and buy it. The store employs a driver that drives and transports fish to the market for sale.

In communist country, what is the incentive to bring fish to the inland? There is none.
Oh, from the goodness in their heart? wow.

/thread

>What kind of magical world do you live in?
I think you need to be locked up in a mental asylum.
I am not a degenerate, unlike you friend. If you cannot live in a civilised society, then you need to be separate from it,

>I love fish, eating fish, but I live inland. So how do communist get access to fish?
Fishermen catch fish because they like catching fish.
>In communist country, what is the incentive to bring fish to the inland? There is none.
People who want to eat the fish bring them to inland from the sea.

Communism can not work because there is no way that any individual or group of individuals can effectively allocate resources in a big society. The economy of a society is a large network, where one isolated decision can have a ripple effect on the rest of the market. This is not possible for anyone to predict, so no decisions can be effectively be made. Therefore this problem is spread out to every individual, where each individual deals only with those transactions that are relevant to themself. This way everything happens automatically, efficiently, and in a way where resources are allocated where they are most needed.

Another thing is that without any incentive for producers to make efficient decisions, production as a whole becomes inefficient, resulting in a lower standard of living. Why would someone care about less yield or higher production costs, if there are no rewards or reason for it? He might be killed, yes. But that requires that some authority knows enough about that industry to know what is considered efficient. Someone also has to spend time punishing the producer instead of doing something more productive.

As a whole, it's an inefficient system which has proven true time after time again. Whenever some country under Communistic rule decides to ease their economic policies and allow free trade, they see an immediate boom in economic output and overall standards of living. Look up India, China, Russia and so on. You already know this. Now given this, tell me how such an obviously inferior economic system could be either morally or strategically acceptable? It's just not the case.

>Whenever some country under Communistic rule decides to ease their economic policies and allow free trade, they see an immediate boom in economic output and overall standards of living.
>Russia
Russias GDP halved after becoming capitalist lmao.

that's literally what socialism is you plebbit faggot. we pay national insurance. in return for national insurance we get national health service and other socialist programs such as income-related jobseekers allowance or universal credit as it is now. we are a socialist country if you was actually here and not using a vpn you'd know that. now fuck off back from whence you came or at least go wikiped Uk socialist policy.

Attached: 1529777043269s.jpg (250x246, 8K)

>People who want to eat the fish bring them to inland from the sea.

What if that person doesn't own a car? Do they have to rely on someone else to do it for them?

Why should someone else do things for you if they're not getting paid?

Enjoy having your toilets clogged up because nobody is going to work as a plumber.

(((They))) invented Communism/Socialism to get power over people and their natural resources. Wheter it works or not, is NOT important once (((They))) get the control.

Attached: 8DCB0246-B65C-471E-B429-1BAFD301D23F.jpg (988x720, 225K)

Slavery. In it’s purest form Communism would need a class of people who provide everything to everyone else. It has failed in the past because the percentage of slaves was too high, trying to completely enslave the entire proletariat. A homogeneous population of about 10-15% would be idea in order to keep the system functioning as intended.

>What if that person doesn't own a car?
He most likely does, since, yknow, socialism.
However if he doesnt then he either:
>takes up the duty of being the guy who brings the fish to the part of the country and gets a state mandated car/plane
>asks someone else who has a car to either give it to him for said purpose or drive there for him

>Why should someone else do things for you if they're not getting paid?
>Enjoy having your toilets clogged up because nobody is going to work as a plumber.
You said it yourself "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

"It's so socialist, that there is no job guarantee!"

Attached: 1528418152951.jpg (595x370, 85K)

>the UK is socialist
Sweetie no

>He most likely does, since, yknow, socialism.

So.. everyone can get a diamond plated car? thanks communism and infinite resources.

>takes up the duty of being the guy who brings the fish to the part of the country and gets a state mandated car/plane
>asks someone else who has a car to either give it to him for said purpose or drive there for him

So I get rewarded a special car/plane for bringing fish? thanks communism.

>You said it yourself "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

So you're saying you're going to unclog my toilet, you have the ability to do that?

Thanks, in return I need to relieve my dick in your wife.

Thanks communism.

>So I get rewarded a special car/plane for bringing fish? thanks communism.
Yes you do, because you are working for the profit of everyone else as well.

>So you're saying you're going to unclog my toilet, you have the ability to do that?
Eh sure, but my ability is even greater, so I do not see why I should do such measly work.
I would prefer working as a builder of infrastructure, an engineer or a machinist, since I am able to do those too and they are harder to do than unclogging toilets.

>Thanks, in return I need to relieve my dick in your wife.
Haha thats a funny one xddd, I will just relieve my dick inside your ass then because I also need to relieve myself.

>I would prefer working as a builder of infrastructure, an engineer or a machinist, since I am able to do those too and they are harder to do than unclogging toilets.

Uh no. You need to unclog my toilet, all the engineering positions have been filled because nobody wanted to do toilet cleaning.

The government demands it, you have no say in it.

Enjoy your dictatorship

This.
Also, plumbers are more important than engineers by providing better hygiene.

>I just want industry to be managed by the state.
why do you think they wouldn't abuse it with regulations? The state wouldn't give companies any incentive to produce in any industry. So now you're just forcing people to produce? Communism is slavery.

>Uh no. You need to unclog my toilet, all the engineering positions have been filled because nobody wanted to do toilet cleaning.
Nope, I dont have to, because my potential is far greater and I can do better things. I have greater ability. Retards like you can do such trivial tasks.
Also the positions can never "be filled" since we are always creating new boundaries.
If you dont like something, change it. The government will teach you how to unclog toilets and give you the tools so you can unclog yours and everyone elses toilet.

>The government demands it, you have no say in it.
You do infact, if you can help the society in a better way, then the government will let you do it. That is the beauty of it.
Cancer treatment researchers wont be forced to work as garbage men or bus drivers retard.

>why do you think they wouldn't abuse it with regulations? The state wouldn't give companies any incentive to produce in any industry.
The incentive is common good, progress and having the shit that you produce.
>So now you're just forcing people to produce? Communism is slavery.
Nobody will be forced to produce, everyone will produce because they love working and want to help further society.

>Also, plumbers are more important than engineers by providing better hygiene.
Yes they are, but engineers wont be forced to work as plumbers.
Plumbing is easier than engineering, which means more people are capable of doing it.
Those with the lesser ability would be plumbers and those with greater ability would be engineers.

>Nope, I dont have to, because my potential is far greater and I can do better things. I have greater ability.

You don't get to decide your own worth in a communist dreamland. You are worth just as much as everyone else, you need to take the position and clean toilets, it's for everyone's well being.

>Cancer treatment researchers wont be forced to work as garbage men or bus drivers retard.

How did they become cancer treatment researchers in the first place? Education?

Why would someone activate their almonds if they get to enjoy everything the communist life has to offer without even thinking.

Capitalism = rewards thinking

Communism = rewards staying retarded.

>Those with the lesser ability would be plumbers and those with greater ability would be engineers.

look at adolf hitler over here

>How did they become cancer treatment researchers in the first place? Education?
Yes, free education to all who are capable of learning.
>Why would someone activate their almonds if they get to enjoy everything the communist life has to offer without even thinking.
A genius mind could work as a road builder, but most intelligent and qualified people would prefer to work as scientists, engineers, doctors etc.
Not because they want money, but because they like the job.

So what if everyone wants to cancer treatment researchers? It's not feasible, someone is going to end up in a position they don't like.

>Reductio ad Hitlerum
Also Hitler was a pussy and hated socialism, nice try tho.