Serious question: Why aren't you a Socialist or Communist?
On the one hand, Communism promises to give you freedom- from debt and poverty, from hierarchies, from having the products of your labor stolen by bosses, and from state coercion. On the other hand, opponents say communism would destroy the country allowing you to live out your an-prim fantasy, or rebuild your own white nationalist territory with a new constitution and new social order.
It's a win-win Jow Forums. So why aren't you helping the communists overthrow the capitalist pigs?
>freedom from having the products of your labor stolen Serious question - if I invent the latest greatest assault rifle do I keep the profits from the sales
Asher Morgan
It is innately internationalist It is naturally impossible It is based off a literal meme by a retard and his friend It assumes everything is a capitalist construct which must be destroyed; family, Nation, friendship, et cetera It is an anti-alpha, feminine ideology Tyrants will eventually co opt it to take power
Capitalism is harmful, but communism is a death sentence to everything we fight for
Jeremiah Reyes
No, those profits will be equally distributed to the workers
Juan Torres
>confusing communism with Stalin's state capitalism
You still have a queen you bootlicker. Are they keeping the sheep warm for you in Derby?
>from debt and poverty, does not apply to me >from hierarchies, I am for hierarchies
Samuel Lewis
The "Freedom" that gobbudism promises inherently requires a larger government. It forces it's citizens to rely on that state to distribute their wealth/resources and removes responsibility. With freedom comes responsibility, and the idea that infantilizing a population to be dependent on the "community" is liberating is terribly short sited and just downright foolish. The only thing that can potentially hold back hierarchies is the use of force, which in itself requires a collective power, which is a hierarchy. I have no an-prim fantasy. The most effective way to build a white nationalist territory will be to claim back our lands from the neocon globalist socialists with a use of force.
>IT'S NOT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAL COMMUNISM And yet every commie licks Stalin's boots and defends everything the USSR did because they all good goys who dindu nuffin.
>Communism promises to give you freedom- from debt and poverty, from hierarchies, from having the products of your labor stolen by bosses, and If funny that you believe this because this is just what communism does.
Elijah Ramirez
>On the one hand, Communism promises to give you freedom- from debt and poverty, from hierarchies, from having the products of your labor stolen by bosses, and from state coercion. it fulfills these promises by removing you from your life
> stalin's state capitalism > mysteriously indistinguishable from Marx's Authoritarian Socialist State > calling it capitalism because it failed will surely deflect criticism from our next idiotic attempt at marx's scheme > it totally wasnt real marxism! you really are despicable.
>On the one hand, Communism promises to give you freedom- from debt and poverty, from hierarchies, from having the products of your labor stolen by bosses, and from state coercion. It promises to redistribute wealth but what actually happens is the total amount of wealth across all people starts to rapidly decline which leads to everyone being poorer because of it, not just the wealthy but also the poor. Poor people in capitalistic societies are richer than everyone in communist societies.
>On the other hand, opponents say communism would destroy the country allowing you to live out your an-prim fantasy, or rebuild your own white nationalist territory with a new constitution and new social order. Most people would not surivive to see that however, as most people in communist regiems are killed off. The russians killed all the productive people first and then all of the students and all the people who had a glimmer of hope of being productive, until there was no one left and everyone was starving to death and eating human body parts. Communism has killed hundreds of millions of people. And even if you survived all of that somehow, rebuilding a better society from it takes many generations, you'd personally not benefit from the new social order, you'd be busy for the rest of your life just scraping by as you rebuild everything.
You'd have to be a moron to think communism has any chance. It's based on innumerable internal contradictions and was abandoned by its own revolutionary subject (the working class) a full century ago.
In the end Spengler will be right. Workers have more loyalty to their nation than their class. The ultimate conflict is between money and blood, not money and class.
Ayden Stewart
>Why aren't you a Socialist or Communist? I hear Venezuela has a great weight loss problem. Why don't you go there?
Somebody post that comic of the emo kid wanting to keep all the products he makes in a factory just because he's pressing a button.
Landon Green
I didn't say it wasn't an attempt at socialism/communism. You can call it socialism or communism and appreciate that it turned a destitute feudal nation and transformed it into an industrial powerhouse over the course of a few decades.
It isn't the only conception of socialism and ocmmunism- and wasn't Marx's concept. There are plenty of other ideas about what communism would look like. Equating communism with Stalinism is like equating Christianity with Protestantism. You could say Stalinism is a type of communism- but it isn't the only type- equating the two is fallacious.
Chase Fisher
Sauce? I want to wear her pussy like an ushanka on my cock and cumrade deep inside until it looks like siberian goolag.
Nicholas Barnes
communism is a retarded utopian fantasy that will never happen
Nathaniel Cook
Only ethnonationalism is relevant. Worrying about economics while civilization is being destroyed is useless.
I'd vote for a commie ethnonationalist over a liberal open border faggot.
Lucas Cooper
Industrial Powerhouse...
Who in the West bought soviet-made products?
Nobody...
Julian James
>You can call it socialism or communism and appreciate In order words, it's communism when it does stuff you like but 'state capitalism' when anyone brings up the bad things. Sounds legit.
It never ends in true democratic ownership of the MOP. Its basically urban socialites convincing urban poors to go out and enslave or exploit the very people who are closest to owning their means of production (i.e. the Girondins, the Kulaks, or any other type of farmer or suburban hobbyist). The ideology hurts these people just as bad as the capitalist system, if not more because the reciprocal exploitation thats supposed to make the society equitable cannot function. Also Im anti-egalitarian, and dont think the working class needs anything above subsistence.
The simple answer: at least capitalism addresses the basic concept of how something get produced. Even if you take the Stormfaggots here with their simplistic "der juden" rational for everything, we're at least left with the idea that some Jew somewhere is going to find a way to exploit some worthless fuck and produce a needed product at the end of the day. Communism on the other hand seems to think that the product will be produced out of the sheer necessity of the need for it, all the while ignoring the fact that every worthless fuck will expect someone else to produce it for him.
you're moving goalposts. In a communist society, everyone is part of the collective, that's kind of the point. In totalitarian socialism (which I don't agree with), people are forced by the state to be in that collective but in communism/anarchism there is no mechanism to impose the will of the collective over "disorganized people" and therefore no hierachy of power.
Angel King
We have a lot of socialist practices here in Cali. They don't work so well.
>Communism promises to give you freedom- from debt and poverty, from hierarchies, from having the products of your labor stolen by bosses,
I don't have any debt, I'm not poor, and nobody is "stealing my labor". Basically you're "promise" is free shit, but at who's expense? I'm guessing mine.
What do you do for work by the way, and who is stealing your labor?
Fairly certain he means liberalism/international capitalism, in which case he is correct. Any system that trades long term viability for short term gains is inherently destructive.
Private ownership, markets, and the invisible hand are absolutely wonderful things. But note that adam smith wrote about "the wealth of nations", not "the wealth of international conglomerates". If your conception of economics threatens the stability of the nation-state that allows it to function in the first place, there is a flaw in the system that needs to be addressed.
What if people aren't a part of the collective though? This is the big reason why communism/anarchism will NEVER work- it requires everyone to think the same. What if some people decide that they want to keep the money that they deserve? You're saying that the collective won't attempt to impose their will onto them? Take the so called "stolen" profits off them by force? How is that not a hierarchy of power?
Carson Mitchell
Why are you advocating for an ideology that is already being enacted on its best possible form? Willing slaves that pay for almost all of the collective's needs with the infastructure to brainwash and maintain them; with just enough leeway so that the most wealthy wont flee the country and leave it destitute.
Isaac Gray
>poverty wew, repeating those unresearched Pinker talking points. lol. He's using a stats trick. If you up the poverty measurement to 5$ a day (rather than the 1.90 stinky pinky uses) a billion more people have been added to the poverty line since 1990 alone.
>commies killed gorillians
capitalists have also killed gorillians- and still are. Around 70 million people remain in poverty and are starving under capitalism- in the U.S. alone.
>scraping by If you take USSR to be socialism- it more than doubled the literacy rate and went form a feudal shithole to an industrial powerhouse in a matter of decades. All measurements of standard of living were vastly improved in the USSR as a result of the revolution.
Jordan Butler
poverty*
Mason Martin
Jow Forums are radicals for the establishment. They fight to uphold the prevailing capitalist system on behalf of the wealthy capitalst class despite the fact that capitalism is causing all the problems they complain about. The wealthy doesn't care about the typical Jow Forumsyp and would sooner have them replaced by a third worlder. But they still defend them because they have been so heavily brainwashed and manipulated becauae despite what people say the wealthy are extremely clever and manipulate and bend the whims of the not so clever or intelligent/pol/tard losers countrywide.
>Around 70 million people remain in poverty and are starving under capitalism Many more starved before capitalism. This is a consequence of the reality of scarcity, and of humanity's nature as mortal animals. Starvation existed long before capitalism or communism. Of the two, capitalism does a better job of not being outright murderous.
Jack Walker
So your goal is anarchy communism, right?
Thomas Martinez
>When communists went out of thier way just to starve and works to death any one who doesnt obey but its ok because people die under capitalism too
John Bennett
It doesn't matter what you call it. Wordplay is just a way to disguise the differences in what Marx described- as workers seizing and controlling the means of production and operating democratically without bosses vs. a centralized state taking over the role of being the boss.
No matter what you call the USSR, it did a lot good along with a lot of evil. No different than another other major player on the world political stage.
Bentley Turner
That's what marx's conception of communism is, a stateless society. It's not going to happen, but that's what it means.
Elijah Jenkins
I'm getting Mexico to pay for my healthcare LOL
Kidding I'm Canadian and I'm free.
We live in a truly free country not like your stupid police state. You've been Trumped hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahaahhhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaahhahahahahahaha
Communism requires coersion to work. And my job would literally not function without hierarchy....i think my wifes job would have been even worse frankly. Were talking about people who passed high school but are functionally retarded, or in my case just dont care about the big picture of our service. Itd be a fucking NIGHTMARE.
>and from state coercion. Oh, the ol' withering state trick. Never seen it.
Nicholas Wilson
Alright, but in an anarchy what's stopping someone from waltzing on in, conquering and establishing their government?
Brandon Evans
Because you sided with the globalists. Now please go fuck yourself and remember, there will always be a based Romanian to shit on your communist faces.
Kayden Robinson
fpbp
Jose White
> Paying higher taxes for healthcear wich you dont even use
Nothing. Anarchy is always the rule of the person with the biggest gun, regardless of the suffix. That's why Marxism relies on a worldwide revolution of the proletariat. The idea being that if all the workers in the world unite, they'll outnumber any other potential group that would seek to impost a government. Again, as I said, a complete impossibility.
This is the most American thing you could possibly say. >muh communism >muh bible >muh not understanding the bible Do you also ride a mobility scooter you dumb American pig?
Josiah Perry
It isn't the nature of scarcity. It's the nature of capitalism. We currently produce enough resources to end poverty and starvation- but capitalists choose to throw away food, clothing, and let houses sit empty and rot. There is no real scarcity anymore- it is artificial, created by profit seeking capitalism. It isn't even profitable to create this waste- but the waste does create a social harm whose costs are absorbed by the public.
