Why hasn't Jow Forums gotten with the times and embraced socialism yet?
A majority of millennials have a more preferable view of socialism than capitalism. Socialists are winning the battle of ideas - socialists present actual solutions to people's daily struggles.
Other urls found in this thread:
currentaffairs.org
currentaffairs.org
currentaffairs.org
currentaffairs.org
currentaffairs.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Because socialism is the first stage of communism, you fucking commie scum.
Such smugness.
>flag
why haven't you hopped into the oven yet?
Communism actually sounds very nice and comfy.
>A majority of millennials have a more preferable view of socialism than capitalism.
I don't trust millenials and their views.
Most of Jow Forums are millennials
(or, more probably, gen z)
Move to North Korea then and starve.
>socialism will win
>lists a bunch of stuff that isn't socialism
That's how you know socialism has been totally defeated.
Why would I?
We're already there or did you miss Trumps putting America's farmer on welfare. Conservatives are a bunch of welfare queens look at home subsidized walmart and the other mega corps they love are
Your own country tried socialism, and ended up ditching it for the Likud.
Not even kibbutzim are fully socialist anymore.
Except it is socialism.
Socialism is the rapid democratization of all aspects of society, and foremost among these is empowering working class people to have real power over their lives.
>that electoral college
all the right millennials in all the wromg places.
lol
be prepared to have every little detail about you weighed upon, kike.
The ideal of socialism sounds comfy the same way a candy island sounds great for a kid. A serious person would know they are both impossible and in fact undesirable even if real.
Israeli """socialism""" was always a very limited form of social democracy, and, more than anything really, clientism.
Support for the Likud is almost purely based on cultural-social pandering. Israel has no economical left, but if you ask Israelis, they consistently are in favor of """socialist""" policies in opinion polls. Ironically, the most hard-right people (the religious zionists) are the ones most in favor of government intervention in the economy to the benefit of the poor, but their party (HaBait HaYehudi) is the most extreme free market fundamentalist of the bunch.
The kibbutzim could not compete with totalitarian-run firms in the "free market", especially after the Likud opened up the borders to cheap foreign goods.
>Has Israeli flag
>Promotes Socialism
Don't you have an oven to go to you Bolshevic jew???
>comfy communism
>daily struggles
Your solution is to just make work your life. Just get a gun and start threatening people who dont agree already. Thats the only way you even accomplish it. Youre not winning a battle of ideas if you have to kill and silence the opposition. Youre just making yourself the only choice. Silly jew.
Ah yes, all socialists are children.
>Youre not winning a battle of ideas if you have to kill and silence the opposition
Nobody is advocating for this.
The is actually a brilliant writer and his articles are what "converted" me to socialism.
He utterly obliterates right-wing arguments (currentaffairs.org
I highly doubt that OP is serious, even if he is a joo or says otherwise.
Nobody else seeing this? Dude is a bot or a troll
OP, try importing millions of rapefugees with 0 net worth, keep doing this until YOU are considered rich in relative terms. Obviously you have a fridge, you have internet access, you have a computer. Now invite them all into your house and share. You hypocritical bastard.
How are you going to enforce any of this? I think people would have alot more respect for communists if they just we honest and called themselves conquerors, or that they at least agree with those tactics.
...I fixed up my grammar after fucking it up in the first post...
>A majority of millennials have a more preferable view of socialism than capitalism. Socialists are winning the battle of ideas - socialists present actual solutions to people's daily struggles.
Majority of millenials are also useless and stupid as fuck.
I am not a communist, though.
The vast majority of socialists aren't.
How about you actually read what they have to say instead of tilting at strawmills.
The glossy language used to assuage actual thinking is always so stunning to me. Education funding, corporate regulation, and healthcare are 3 topics which require 200hr lectures to even scratch the surface of, and these journalists try to condense the conversation to less than the length of a tweet. There's no wonder this patronizing approach is losing ground.
The only good form of socialism is national socialism, you disgusting, rat faced, oven dodging, shekel grabbing, foreskin cutting, kike parasite.
Your race deserves extinction.
>Culturally and socially conservative
>Economically socialistic
You make Israel sound unironically national-socialist.
>The is
Nice try
What is the end goal of socialism as opposed to socialism? Do you believe in the Marxist progression of history?
Geeee.
And yet, Israel's economy is neoliberalism on steroids.
They are privatizing our postal service and electricity grid now.
And the Nazis were anything but "economically socialistic".
>this flag
saged
>What is the end goal of socialism as opposed to socialism?
The end goal is a good world. A Communist utopia (note the capital C). Socialism will take us there by rapidly democratizing all aspects of human life and increasingly human liberty (real, tangible freedom, none of that "negative liberty" bullshit).
>Do you believe in the Marxist progression of history?
Not really.
Socialism is a general category, Communism and fascism are more specific types of socialism. Either way Communism is the fairest type of socialism. Take for example "free college" that Bernie advocates. He wants to subsidize private institutions with tax payer money that benefits private individuals (sounds like crony capitalism to me). This is unfair, to make it fair you would have to have Government run colleges, public colleges just like you have public high school. So "socialists" are REALLY crony capitalists unless Government takes control of the means of production and education.
it's a magical place where everyone is equally poor and hungry (except the party members but we need them to think for us!)
this.
They really, really are not. Had you actually bothered reading the article (found at currentaffairs.org
Quote from the article:
>One problem for pundits like Kruta is that the left has actually begun formulating serious and compelling proposals that are hard to argue convincingly against. If you haven’t checked out Abdul El-Sayed’s comprehensive policy agenda, do it. He has incredibly detailed and realistic plans for how to implement progressive policies, with answers to the tough questions about how they will be funded and how they’ll be administered. When you look through these documents, you realize why the right has to resort to just yelping “Venezuela!” El-Sayed is an accomplished public health expert who has published dozens and dozens of papers on every aspect of the healthcare system. It’s no longer possible, faced with his MichCare plan, to say that the left has fanciful pipe dreams but has never thought seriously about what they’d actually look like in practice.
The same author has elaborated on this exact theme in a different article (currentaffairs.org
>The most important moment in the last British election was the release of Labour’s policy manifesto, which was widely praised for its specificity: Labour said how many new affordable houses they planned to build, how they planned to allocate new funding for education, what new regulations they would introduce on employment contracts, and how they intended to pay for all of it.
Democracy means other people choosing how you live.
Socialism HAS been tried, and it is what brought you such Greatest Hits as the 8-hour workday, the weekend, child labor laws and the paid maternity leave -- oh wait
Democracy means you have a say in decisions that affect you.
>Socialists are winning the battle of ideas
Repeating debunked arguments over and over again is not winning anything.
>socialists present actual solutions to people's daily struggles
Socialists and especially your average dumb millenial socialists only care about redistributing things. Hardly any of them think about creating something.
Fascism is a type of socialism...?
>The end goal is a good world
This is not a fairy tale. "A good world" where everyone is totally equal and shares all in common is nothing less than a fantasy.
Tell me jew, Marx says the working class has no nation. Are you willing to destroy every ethnicity on Earth including your precious chosen in order to fulfill the Marxist dream? Why not start in your own backyard and turn the jews into a member of the global working class and Israel into a home for all instead of preaching to the Europeans?
Also Bolshevism, Maoism, Pol Pot, Castro, Venezuela, etc. etc. Why not claim those too?
>Repeating debunked arguments over and over again
So capitalist apologists?
Simply asserting the other side's arguments are "debunked" does not make it so.
I mean, as far as I can see, the "youth" wings of either side (new millennials socialists, the emergent alt-right inc. Jow Forums) seem to be tossing crap at each other all the time. But while the left (or at least segments of it) generally tries to engage with the arguments made on the other side, the best Jow Forums and company can do is flail around screeching "Venezuela!" and posting memes "debunking" ridiculous strawmen.
Here is one of your fellow Jews explaining what fascism is.
youtube.com
You're so fucking detached. All of the living conditions that have improved are due in full to technological advances, made while under the umbrella of capitalism. Why don't we have a 2 day work week with 4 hour days? Socialism did not result in our improved lives, it is the result of our increased production per person. Less work is demanded from each individual as output increases.
this
SAGE
>real-world solutions to the all the problems real people face in the real world.
Now THAT is what I call Jewish shilling
Besides abolishing private property and redistributing other people's money what solution can you offer to modern society's problems?
>But while the left (or at least segments of it) generally tries to engage with the arguments made on the other side
NAZI BIGOT RACIST INBRED REDNECK is not a compelling reason to give away ethnic and national sovereignty to internationalists.
No. Democracy is just mob rule. The best system of government is a compromise where all groups are represented, but the majority still has power.
Reminder that socialism is just a phase and people will either become full blown communist, small minority, while the rest will just fall into lines of either Democrats or Republicans. However the Democrats are literally poisoning themselves at this point and I am seeing more of my friends becoming either right libertarian or classical liberal.
But they are debunked
From the "value of a product comes from the effort spent producing it" to "estatal management of production, resources and services improves the quality, productivity and fair treat of workers"
> "A good world" where everyone is totally equal and shares all in common is nothing less than a fantasy.
Even if it is impossible (as I do believe it most likely is), it's a good goal to inspire towards. Utopian ideals are vital to keep checking how well your own society is doing. It is a true north to guide us towards, as close as we can.
>Why not claim those too?
Because they do not fit any reasonable definition of socialism. Yes, "Not Real Socialism", but hear me out for once. Simply dying your flag red, declaring yourself "communist" and massacring the old elite (only to establish a new one) while ignoring every single socialist principle in the process does not socialism make. Communist regimes fail even socialism's most bare-bones definition - worker control of the means of production. I mean, if all industry is controlled by the state, and the state is a repressive, undemocratic nightmare, in what meaningful way can the workers be called the "controllers" of their workplaces?
If we take, say, the USSR at their word and believe them when they call themselves "socialists", why not take them at their word over the R of USSR as well? Is the Democratic Republic of the Congo an Athenian model state?
This also ignores that communism's staunchest critics have come from the left - people like Rosa Luxemberg and George Orwell. In fact, whenever "Real Socialism" actually rose up in any communist countries, in incidents like miner strikes in Romania, or the Prague Spring of 1968, they were ruthless crushed by their supposed "socialist" overlords.
It is not. That's why I specifically said "at least segments of it".
Thankfully, the ridiculous hyper-SJW types, insofar they had ever existed at all, are in decline.
what retarded kikery is this that you expect us to believe Fox embraces socialism?
>The best system of government is a compromise where all groups are represented, but the majority still has power
So democracy?
>Why don't we have a 2 day work week with 4 hour days?
This is a fair question to ask. Keynes predicted that by the year 2000 we'd have a 15-hour workweek. While the workweek HAS been decreasing at a steady pace for a long time, this progress (like so many other good things) had stopped around 1970. Why is that?
>it's a good goal to inspire towards
No, it is not, people are born different, with different aptitudes and values, its but fair that they get different outcomes in society as well
>ignoring single socialist principle in the process does not socialism make
But they did seized the means of production, they did offered "free" (it never is) health and education, they did redistribute wealth
Not completely but to a very big extent
Pic related is your only outcome, kike.
And Marx predicted that proletariat would grow larger and poorer and the middle class would cease to exist
So yeah, you're just retarded
>Even if it is impossible
so you acknowldge that
>Utopian ideals are vital to keep checking how well your own society is doing
You fucking moron. They most certainly are not. Dreams of communistic utopias are not a societal checkup.
And yes, they were socialist. Ask the Marxist-Leninist if they were socialist, ask the Maoists if they were socialist. You continuly forget the fact that they tried to do everything you say and only failed afterword. What makes you different?
>Rosa Luxemberg
Fought to overthrow Germany in a revolution which would have allied with the Bolsheviks and swept Europe.
>George Orwell
A discouraged socialist who fought in Spain with USSR backed nun killers.
You have yet to answer the ethnic question jew.
>fair that they get different outcomes in society as well
So it is! Let people reach different outcomes in their lives, but let their lives be materially secure.
>But they did seized the means of production
It's not enough to "seize" the means of production. A vital question is who gets them handed to afterwards.
The fascists too had "seized" the means of production. They put them into corporatist closely-nit arrangement of private-public management, where the state functioned as capital's muscle (more blatantly than usual, that is) and set the workers in line. Hardly socialist.
>they did offered "free" (it never is) health and education
And should be commended for that at least!
I do hate it how you right-wingers insist on putting "free" in sarcastic quotation marks every time. As if people who advocate for these policies are dum-dums who don't realize these things still cost resources and must come from somewhere.
The idea of free healthcare/education is free at the point of delivery - that is, the individual receiving the service does not pay anything for it upon receiving it. So if you get injured, you are not billed upon being admitted to the hospital. You just go, receive your healthcare, and get out. It's the entire point of decommodification.
>they did redistribute wealth
Simply redistributing wealth is not goal in and of itself. You could redistribute wealth randomly, or you could redistribute it from down to up (as the current neoliberal world regime has been doing). The point is to redistribute it correctly, fairly, from top to bottom, and not just for the sake of redistribution, but out of the realization that being materially constrained decreases an individual's practical liberty, while money has a decreasing marginal utility. So you take wealth from those who derive less use from it, and give it to those who need it more. A rich person may need 2,000$ to buy a new jetski. A poor person would use those 2,000$ to fix their car.
I tend to take a more philosophical view on Government rather than argue which is best. The saying goes, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary.". Governments are a necessary evil because we are flawed, and Government's constituent parts are flawed people. If this is indeed the case, limit the ability of flawed individuals that can affect my life which makes me somewhat libertarian.
this was really hard to listen to. it's lke someone who forgot to write their presentation for the class and just bullshits without knowing what facism or socialism is.
When we all have replicators and nigh-infinite energy production, sure.
>value of a product comes from the effort spent producing it
I keep seeing this "labor theory of value" stuff, but did you ever actually try reading Kapital (please don't, it's a terrible book)?
Marx explains it in the very first segment of the very first chapter of the first volume. It's actually complex elaboration of supply/demand, and talks about how the "use value" (practical, human need/want satisfaction level) of a commodity and a "labor value" (how much effort it takes to produce) of a commodity clash to create the "exchange value" (market price). One of Marx's points, for example, is how out of the three, only one type of value - the use value - is intrinsic to the commodity and exists outside the structures of society. The other two are AGGREGATE properties, to be applied across the economy.
So a single burger does not have the value of the amount of labor it took to produce it. Instead, all the burgers in the economy, on average, have the value it takes, on average, to create a burger using average burger-making technology, average burger-making techniques, and average worker diligence in producing burgers.
>"let their lives be materially secure"
Under socialism?
LMAO
>Let people reach different outcomes in their lives
That's not socialism, you can't get a different outcome where the complete fabric of society treats them and rewards them the same as someone not remotely as capable
>It's not enough to "seize" the means of production. A vital question is who gets them handed to afterwards.
To the workers of course, what happens is that workers don't know how to run a company
>As if people who advocate for these policies are dum-dums who don't realize these things still cost resources and must come from somewhere.
Then you guys just gleefully ignore the weight of this on the economy? Don't you understand it is not sustainable? holy shit
>The point is to redistribute it correctly, fairly, from top to bottom, and not just for the sake of redistribution
And they sorta did that as well, what happens, my foolish faggot, is that there will be no much wealth to redistribute if wealthy bourgeois leave your socialist shithole, that plus the fact that human will forever be greedy and corruptible, which ends up dragging the upper and middle clases into a massive poverty status
What makes you think you can prevent nonwhites from being ethnocentric and shitting-up white countries?
What can you do to prevent overpopulation?
"Global democracy" just means Earth will be governed by the whims of retarded niggers.
Not to defend Marx's historical determinism, the middle class IS shrinking...
Socialism just cant compete with capitalism in terms of wealth generation. The people who want capitalism will all want to leave and go to the capitalist countries and that in turn will collapse the socialist country as all the producers leave. The only way the socialists can stop this is to close the borders and prevent people from leaving. This inevitably leads to a tyrannical government crack down on all dissidents and economic collapse.
Not by becoming part of the lower class, which is what the father of socialism thought
How many Jews can you fit in a BMW?
52...four in the seats and 48 in the ashtray
but only because of the encroachment of socialist policies onto good capitalist people.
lol implying the socialist policies themselves aren't so wildly impractical that they absolutely require the total state control of a communist government to even attempt
The middle class is shrinking BECAUSE of socialist policies. The middle class are being taxed to oblivion to pay for the gibs of the leechers while the rich get richer.
Underrated
This
And who determines what is "fair" redistribution? Government beaurecrats. You'll eliminate rich and poor classes sure but instead create a permanent ruling bearucrat class instead that will control everything.
>Capitalism is worse at babysitting me than socialism
Good lord
The only socialism that worked was national socialism. Every other kind imploded in on itself.
Of course its shit. But my scenario is only the very beginning. You think california wouldnt try to stop all the companies from leaving if they could?
The leftists want socialism in America because the next logical step will be communism.
lemme help you get comfy
>all the burgers in the economy, on average, have the value it takes, on average, to create a burger using average burger-making technology, average burger-making techniques, and average worker diligence in producing burgers.
But that's not the value per se of any of those hamburgers, which is the problem, to sustain the idea of an oppressing bourgeois class exploiting workers you have to preach that workers are being robbed of the value of their work by only getting a part of the actual income made from the product revenue, which is just not true, or even if it was true, its not precisely unfair
>The middle class are being taxed to oblivion to pay for the gibs of the leechers while the rich get richer.
this is exactly how all socialist retards politices always end up like. these medium-to-high earning workers are basically the only ones that can't avoid high taxes, and so they end up paying the highest price for extensive socialism.
good luck taxing large companies/corporations, and even small business owners can put their revenue into their business to avoid taxes to some degree. welfare leeches pay nothing because they don't earn anything.
people who earn a lot from their own work should be encouraged, not bombarded with black thieving hands.
Most people mean "social democracy" when they say socialism.
>muh communism
Most socialists in the West aren't Marxists.
sounds like someone needs to do the room temperature challenge
>they're going to make sure
>they're going to make sure
>they're going to make sure
>they're going to make sure
Hmm no real specifics? Really stimulates your neurons.
Social democracy only works in a small homogeneous society. These people want to bleed whitey dry to pay for Jamal and Laquisha’s gibs.