Communism is the only viable future we have. All societies face crisis. Capitalist society does not exist. It is unable to deal with crisis because capitalism atomizes society into individuals. it makes it unable for the masses to plan for the future. The only remedy for pollution capitalist believe is legitimate, is a private party suing a polluter only after the pollution has taken place. In capitalism individuals exist only for their own individual benefit. This completely ignores the fact that humanity is not composed of one individual, but of many. If we are to resolve the issues we have, we must act as an us. We have to unleash our collective human species-being from the reigns of private property. The collective human species-being is the being that creates dams, hospitals and in the future it will create mass drivers, it will bring mankind into harmony with the earth. Right now we are just a collection of beings that are unorganized and running around with no heads. We are engaged in a struggle against ourselves. The sole cause of this struggle is private property. We have divided the Earth and its products into parcels that we fight over. Instead of uniting forces and using this Earth to provide for all, we use it to get more parcels. This does not serve mankind, but serves individuals. Who in the end are just serving capital. Capital is a living parasite that demands more and more labor. Capital requires growth or it disappears, this growth is supplied by human labor. I hope you realize humanity cannot have a future, where man continues to fight against itself.
Communism will win
Other urls found in this thread:
penttilinkola.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
So the government owns everything and we rent stuff from them with UBI money?
No, those who utilize the commons own them collectively.
Commie fags,
In body bags.
SAGE
I don't think humanity has been domesticated enough yet for that type of system to work.
how would it be any different from the current system? the government owns your house your car your land etc etc. thats why rent is due on it.
And you call yourself a Finn.
in this system the government even owns you're spoons and furniture. it will be just like that one Dragon ball z episode.
>a challenger appears!
We just need collapse. Everything else that happens afterwards doesn't matter until the collapse happens.
i agree with the general idea but don't think collective ownership in and of itself is the answer. that's just an economic system, which doesn't address anything, people have to have some sort of identity to bind themselves around, which also connects them to the past and the future as a people, before we can start thinking long-term and collectively again. i agree it's smart to act that way, but there's just not a reason for it without a group identity. i think the short term answer is a return to nationalism; sorry religious revivalists, god is dead and ain't coming back; and the long term answer is localism. no national economic system is going to place people ahead of profits or power, only ideology and group identity can do that. only shared identity can convince the capitalist to keep his factory in the country or convince the communist to put in his fair share of work.
>who gets to redistribute resources?
>can you redistribute resources without fucking the ones who actually produce shit?
>what happens when there are more people than resources?
these are the questions that need to be answered before we would ever reach a fictional sci-fi status of communism. pro-tip: it's not possible.
i think if you wanted to make a more effective argument, you'd target industries that have a monopoly because there are no easy ways to compete.
like the internet for example. sure, in a good healthy free market, the bad behaviors of social media and ISP's could be weeded out by competitors. but the fact the odds are someone with enough wealth would bother to start a competition are slim to none.
and even if they did, gab is a cautionary tale. the cesspit of social media migrated their, and had an entire drama filled happening with paul nehelen. then, the company that allows them to exist threatens them constantly.
it's clear that communism and capitalism are somewhat imperfect. in more ways that can be explained on Jow Forums. but only one of these ideas resulted in the deaths of 100's of millions because someone thought the farmers' skills of creating food was somehow too powerful.
>bottom line: even capitalism needs management, and even socialism needs freedom.
pure ideologies are always retarded beyond belief.
Such a shame USSR didn't annex you and made you into Finnish SSR then, eh?
Fascism will rise from the grave. You are right about atomized individualism losing out in the long run. Your mistake is assuming that "communism" will be the alternative. Those nations always fail. Look at China, they abandoned communism for fascism.
What we should hope for is that capitalism ultimately transforms into a better system. Look at 3-D printers for example. Once those are advanced enough, we can end the current economy of mass production and return to small localized production again just with highly advanced tools. We'll only need large industry for making large machines and for extracting raw materials. Everything else will be able to be accomplished with 3D printers
>I believe that capitalism is only consumism
>Capitalism exclusively focuses on individuals
>The concept of struggle is bad
Imagine believing this
Only advanced AI can be objective enough to plan and run human civilization. Until that time comes, communism will continue to be just as corrupt and useless as capitalism.
Think about it:
AI objectively plans and manages efficiently human kind
To liberals' dismay, its result are the almost total division of people, incidentally by their races
K let me know when it happens
Soviet union ultimately operated on basis of market economy and capital to function when establishing production. Its production was in many ways lot worse than its more open market based counterparts due to its systematic disregard for environment. Population boom of the late soviet period was the primary cause of its collapse there simply were not enough goods to sustain that high of a population and the massive military spending most certainly did not help.
Functionally the 3D printers becoming economically viable is too far off to be realistically effective in sensible timeframe. It also does not address the fundemental issues of capital: how it influences politics with lobbying and special interest groups, how it concentrates to limit production to few corporation or how it deprives scientific gains from public usage thanks to intellectual property laws. Capital will always lead to growing production and markets leading into overall bigger population sizes. People are too used to the current condition to be subjected into rationing and boycotts against market forces never work.
THIS
Sure, it'll probably win again one day.
Then another few tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of people will die, and millions more will be needlessly incarcerated.
Then it'll go away on its own when even the top leadership starts to starve.
And a generation later, we'll have another fresh group of brainless idiots like (you) advocating for it all over again.
Really illustrates how stupid (you) are.
Its not a challenger but pol pot tier retardation that can ultimately only become temporary solution.
LOL
>the commons own them collectively
>the commons
>people without training in positions of authority dictating training
u dont see the issues do u FATBOY GOOK CHINK
>temporary solution
all solutions are "temporary" if they are not Final Solutions.
You’ve been saying similar things for 200 odd years. It was bullshit in the times of Owen, bullshit in the present.
Those who utilize them aka. operate them already in the first place. Not those unfamiliar with the processes as it is under market economy where shareholders control production despite knowing jack shit how for example power plant functions.
There is no reason to change the critique if the fundamental structural failures have not been fixed.
>shareholders
That doesn't still specify why "communism" will win. Capitalism isn't even the best motif to begin with so don't play that game with me. I believe in productive enterprise within the framework of a cohesive national structure which is the antithesis of COMMUNISM. Communism is inherently an internationalist and materialist outlook so it cannot fundamentally promote a community that could exist within true "fatherland" warrior values, rather it always seeks to view itself as victimized and oppressed rather than the WOLF mentality of the ANIMAL SOLDIER COMMUNITY. "The Wolf Brigade". Do what you have to do. Duty.
Just because sometimes technical failures cause plains to malfunction at times does not constitute that we should stop using airplanes, same goes for developing ideological structures. Things are subject to changes consistently when it comes to development of technology,culture and society so why would the same not apply to political theory?
Then you are simply choosing to be ignorant of systematic failures of any market based system, especially when it comes to its subversive nature toward superstructure(cultural hegemony) of society.
What? Communism preaches a "culture of communism" as defined by Trotsky (can provide source link if you really need it, but if you do then you aren't a fucking communist because you haven't read the full details of the ideology).
>market based system
"MARKET BASED" define as Market as the CASSUS BELLI FOR EXISTENCE is not what I even fucking remotely implied you Communist worm. The issue with speaking with communists is they are like jelly and often just conform rapidly to whichever non-argument that can produce next.
REgardless, I was not talking about a market basd system because all markets are inherently limited by their expansions of PRODUCTION and productivity. Capitalism and Communism both are luddite in their overall schisms because they HOLD BACK true productive enterprise.
Communism>holds back productive enterprise because it is a threat to the Party control because the Party does not want to accept the realities of technological progression in that it will disrupt the status quo. Communism fails to adapt to changes in economic structures and crashes when these occur (reason it died in the 90's).
Capitalism>fails to sustain itself over long periods of time due to technological change. Sure, it can adapt rapdily and is more successful than communism in this regard however it always seeks to MAXIMIZE CAPITAL AT ALL COSTS and therefore: a capitalist presented with:
A. Great product that will give the consumer 50+ years of use
vs
B. Mediocre product that will give the consumer 10 years of use
WILL ALWAYS CHOOSE B BECAUSE IT MAXIMZES THEIR POTENTIAL CAPITAL VALUE
the tribal WOLF mindset believes to push the NATION AND RACE into the future AT ALL COSTS and therefore seeks to use productive enterprise among COMPETING (there is nothing wrong with economic competition) ENTERPRISE to produce the HIGHEST QUALITY MERIT GOOD
>enslaving 99% of the population
Fuck you
If it comes to long-term sustainability then I don`t think that we disagree since east Germany was well known for the long-term utility of its goods, for example fridges that were build in the east Germany are functional even today in their original purpose where as the capitalist equivalent only lives on for 10-15 years today.
Problem with national socialism is the same as with any modern day social democracy it relies upon debt based systems,Keynesian economics and limited markets. You can limit the adverse effects of markets by forcing labor market shortages by stopping immigration and by means of trade unions but that is not fundamentally capable of stopping the power of capital.
I'm not against the "power of capital" but all capital can be controlled through force. The Japanese did it for years. It took two nuclear bombs to stop the system and even now they still resolutely hold out despite the odds and despite the weakness of their modern culture contrasted to the one of the past. Will this last? Not sure, but it's at least hope for a future.
And there is no "ourselves" because that implies cultures are equal and equality is a false god.
Do you sincerely think that leaving short-sighted imbeciles who usually cannot even organize their lives in good enough way when it comes to their personal finances? Freedom that you hold so dear is only a limited frame to begin with, I would prefer social harmony and stability over it. People need authorities to direct them since they the hard choices over the comfortable sustenance of status quo are rarely taken, hell even something as basic as social- and healthcare reform have been bogged down in our parliament since 1970`s.
Japanese controlled it by trade unions and limiting the labor supply, it only lasted them for long as their national debt allowed it; till the 90`s.
That doesn't necessarily mean they must resort to Communism which even seeks their cultural annihilation in favor of a rigorous material based one that is subservient to an Internationalist State that has no roots nor intention of formulating them. Communism seeks solely as THE consumer ruler that seeks to use and consume all it can before the engine bursts and everyone, now just a messy herd, collapses with it. National Socialism and Fascism provides stronger framework, provides for human creativity and expansion within economics, as well as ensuring the survival of the community because the basis of the community is protected.
You should read Hitler's second book but this bores you check out this video
youtube.com
forgive me if it starts in the center, I'm retarded when it comes to youtube. also, I understand the video is a little silly sometimes but it's informative and you will leave with a better perspective of fascist theory then the one you probably hold now which is more than likely jaded with propaganda.