They are the niggers of politics

Sorry ancom retard I don't speak economically illiterate.

Yeah because the rich shill for people who want to confiscate all their capital don't they?

Attached: rubio.png (620x530, 72K)

you dont even know what anarchy is youve just been brainwashes to associate it with chaos not that the fucking idiots that represent it dont do much to shake that these days

Please ancoms just gtfo of my thread I don't want leftist cancer here near me.

>ancom retard
im not a communist besides I speak economic truth as in true cost. dw you just carry on getting exploited buy companies and paying prices that anyone could pull out of there arse

You just proved that anarchy is unsustainable because if everybody just kill each other there is no way of living.
Natsocialism and Anarcho-capitalism on the other hand offers more possibilities and future that you'll ever have.
Eat shit and starve you fucking nigger.

Oh my fucking dear Jesus does being ancom means being an illiterate retard?

>when you dont know what socialism or anarchy is so you state fallacy thinking that makes you right (Y)

>little Marco
>capitalism
weak bait

I have a car, home I eat good, in commie times my parents had shit

Attached: 1555575090282.jpg (1024x1024, 178K)

The polish man talked, ancoms and commie retards BTFO

I didn't say anything about killing people all the infrastructure you rely on is from socialists labour! capitalism is for the rich so you eat shit you rich cunt

for the record not a commie

if by that you mean you stay at home while we fuck your woman then yeah

>nazis
>not capitalist
>fascists
>not capitalists

kys op

Attached: nazis.jpg (2765x1308, 932K)

>Natsocialism and Anarcho-capitalism

Attached: 1548093506820.gif (268x210, 1.95M)

Anarco-Communism is the only valid answer.

>capitalism is for the rich so you eat shit you rich cunt
I doubt anyone here is rich. Besides who said capitalism is for the rich? When the PC was introduced, millions of new jobs came along. Everyone did profit from it.

Lmao so many seething bitches on the thread, that's alright I love debate.

Every infrastructure we rely on comes from the bourgeois employing mentally retarded niggers like you for a misery, and then when a random kike come and says "I can fix it" you believe him.
Results? Mass starvation, but it's alright since it stopped being real socialism.

lmao shut up incel, apart from your mom's boobs at 2 yo you never touched a woman.

AAA ANTI ANTI CAPITALISTA AAA

youtube.com/watch?v=FJTkzAU25yI

Attached: mao-zedong-quote-lbn2n2u.jpg (1200x630, 57K)

>anything I don't like or find inconvenient
>its not capitalism!

your fouquet is done faggot, bon apetite

Attached: D526glyWsAAKCpx.jpg (1074x659, 97K)

Yeah not capitalist, but we have the decency of letting people have a house, and not living in fucking camps with other starving farmers like you did in USSR, we actually respect farmers need and demands rather than nationalise everything for at end collapse because of deficitary gestions and coup d'état.
Not capitalizing on something means no abuse and no chance of degeneracy, but nationalizing everything just means collapse, too much losses at this ladder, but you can't understand that since you don't even now what capitalism is in the first place.

Your bowl of dirt with a little bit of shit is done nigger bitch, bon appétit petite pute.

there first rule of fight club is
ussr was not real communism

You are retarded. The nazis didn't just "let people own things." They privatized everything they could. They systematically sold off public elements of the government to private industry, not like america. Their policy was literally that everything that can be privatized should be. This is in contrast to even social democrats in other parts of europe, who were also staunchly anti-communist and worshipped capitalism. Even their antics paled in comparison to nazi privatization. And that's what capitalism is you retard. It's the private ownership of the means of production.

we are the innovators, engineers and inventors clearly you dont know the first thing about creating these things you think you line up a bunch of idiots somethings going to get made well done sorry what do you do for a living ?

YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT YOU FUCKING RETARDED FAGGOT, YOU REALLY ARE THE NIGGERS OF POLITICS AHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

>we are the innovators, engineers and inventors
At least make your bait believable

Attached: 1418343199853.jpg (573x609, 52K)

you dont establish shit human rights arnt a forte of the capitalist

Word.
you should listen to this comrade right hereyoutube.com/watch?v=D2ZR9a_vvfk

The USSR sustained itself for 80 years you retard. Nazi germany was on the verge of economic collapse and their entire economic model was predicated on the theft of resources from russia.

niggers have good music, big dicks, great physics and spicy food. i can live with that

Private ownership of the means of production is what I want you stupid bitch.
We can't nationalize everything even at a regional level because at this ladder there is so much losses it's just a financial black hole.
Private ownership of the means of production at a regional level is the difference between a good economical gestion and a ancom coup d'état.

no who do you think made, designed and sustained the machines ?

not to mention the red army raped nazi woman shills by the millions. guess the french faggot wants a round 2 huh

privatisation just pushed up prices and leads to exploitation of the consumer why do you want that ?

The USSR only winned against Germany because of the fucking slaughter of Russians and the 4,7% of military budget boost offered by America.
3 million died at Moscow. 2 at Stalingrad.
40 million killed just because of Germany, and your still proud of that?
Well at least my theory of the mass killing being the whole point of communism is true.

Nobody gives a shit about Nazis here.
But if you are so smart. What happens if a owner would be against Hitler?

He would get shot.
Does that sound like freedom of contract and association?

Yes businesses existed under heavy regulation.

Private ownership at a regional level leads to a competition between companies which permits great social and economical grow.*

Here we go with the memes again. The military "budget boost" only came into effect well after the war was turned around and the nazi effectively defeated. The large number of casualties on the russia side was due to the red army being vastly outnumbered at the start, caught with their pants down, and in a transitional period. Furthermore the economic assistance the USSR received from britain and america paled in comparison to what the nazi got from their allies, not just in terms of resources, but manpower support and strategic routing. The nazi had literally every advantage imaginable. They just weren't as good, they had poor planning, and their top brass was a bunch of retards who had no idea what they were doing.

What happened to someone who was accused of being a communist in america during the red scare?

>competition between companies which permits great social and economical grow
capitalist bullshit by doing that you'd be at the disposal of the workers and the consumer! privatisation only benefits companys and the capitalist government makes a quick buck

Marxism explained corporatism in a very moralistic sense (opressor/opressed) not capitalism

>being a communist
or
>being a spy from a hostile nation
I know what you want to do

economical growth is cancer. unironically.

except many people were persecuted based on zero real evidence, they lost their jobs, people used to accuse others of being reds just because they happened to dislike them or have personal beef. it's well documented.

corporatism is a made up bullshit term. there is only capitalism.

Attached: 1553289771659.jpg (1200x900, 134K)

I understand it has its benefits if someone could do it cheaper or more effective but these people should just represent the national interest company dont work to the national interest

capitalism is dying. it wont be too long now.

Attached: 1554244030870.jpg (500x719, 46K)

You just proved my point, which is that communism is a retarded point of view, but if you like starving you do you.

youtu.be/NofAKY4p9fY

Except niggers are the niggers of politics

Attached: 1557749230807.png (781x956, 705K)

FUCK COPS

youtube.com/watch?v=_H_-DFBeeY0

FUCK ECONOMICAL GROWTH AND TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS

youtube.com/watch?v=nByUB5Y5Eqs

Attached: maxnewsfr885500-3637095.jpg (1200x675, 105K)

FUCK FASCIST REACTIONARIES AND BOOTLICKERS

youtube.com/watch?v=nxKQfTOXpJI

Attached: 0c2.jpg (2000x1123, 129K)

>except many people were persecuted based on zero real evidence, they lost their jobs, people used to accuse others of being reds just because they happened to dislike them or have personal beef. it's well documented.

Same shit happend in USSR by the KGB

So how about you stop judging from a your high horse.

Anne who thinks there is any viable alternative to capitalism other then Fascism is just a larper and should grow up and Fash or neck themselves

LONG LIVE CIVIL WAR LONG LIVE GLOBAL CLASS WAS LONG LIVE KARL MARX

youtube.com/watch?v=EPdjPaPZC6o

Attached: 1552799167145.jpg (1000x666, 66K)

>Marxism explained corporatism in a very moralistic sense
Marxism is completely detached from morals. Das Kapital is a dry academic book. Also, corporatism IS capitalism. Its the natural tendency of capitalism to centralize capital.

>Definition of corporatism
: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction

>Definition of capitalism
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Why do you thing we are AnCap?

>capitalism to centralize capital
and no, under capitalism monopols can't form

*think

>under capitalism monopols can't form

so you're saying one firm cant out-compete all other firms?

and what happens when a firm gets so bigg that it starts to rent the services of a congressman, and what makes a congressman any different to just another service provider? why is it "wrong" for a corporation to buy congress people? those are voluntary exchanges.

>so you're saying one firm cant out-compete all other firms?
A monopoly means you have exclusive rights to produce a good or service
If you out-compete all other firms, a new one will emerge.

read the definition of corporatism
>Why do you think we are AnCap?

why makes it impossible for one firm to out-compete all other firms. for example, Amazon is driving out many retail business out of the market. eventually it can afford to sell at a lost just to drive out its competitors, after it drove out the competitors it can sponsor certain congressman to enact laws that further serve its interest. dont forget that a congressman needs to compete in that market of other candidates, and he needs donations for that therefore he's required to offer his services to the higher-bidder.

so tell me, where is "capitalism" stops in this story and "corporatism" begins?

answer this please.

Capitalism is dying because it is far to successfull in giving us wealth and comfort that people are loosing their very nature and in doing so are realizing there is something wrong but not what, as with the yellow vests.
To make the selfish claim of "me want what rich man has" is perfectly valid but it is reaching the same conclusion from the wrong direction.
I'm afraid you will be utterly and completely dissapointed as you do the right thing for the wrong reasons.
I'm only telling you this because i know you will never get the point.
That comfort and technology itself is what needs to go.
And that a fulfilling life does not come from making powerpoints from the couch but from making fire when you really need it.

>why makes it impossible for one firm to out-compete all other firms. for example, Amazon is driving out many retail business out of the market
Amazon is a mail order company and retailers offer their goods at Amazon.
Amazon dosen't produce goods.
I don't get your point.

>eventually it can afford to sell at a lost just to drive out its competitors
Not in long term. You would still want to maintain your company and pay the salary of your workers.

>after it drove out the competitors it can sponsor certain congressman to enact laws that further serve its interest. dont forget that a congressman needs to compete in that market of other candidates, and he needs donations for that therefore he's required to offer his services to the higher-bidder.
I will ignore this part
>where is "capitalism" stops in this story and "corporatism" begins
With government involvement in the economy

It is like with Steam and Epic right now.
If amazon is a threat, the compition will offer a more lucrative deal for retailers

Is Reich Wing Watch affiliated with Right Wing Watch? Because the latter is literally funded by George Soros.

Attached: antifa memeball.png (583x468, 125K)

Attached: 1557539327922.jpg (320x320, 30K)

>Amazon dosen't produce goods.

so what? products are bought out of stores not out of factories, the circulation of commodities is indispensable. if amazon makes it more comfortable to get the commodities to the consumer then it established a service. if its the best at this service then it will out-compete all other firms therefore establishing a monopoly. where is the contradiction between capitalism and monopoly here? and if i were to start a firm that tries to compete with amazon then they can just temporary sell at a lost and drive me out of business

>Not in long term
i never said they need to do this in the long term. but just to drive out the competitor.

>I will ignore this part
why?

>With government involvement in the economy
i never said anything about the government involvement in the economy, i said that private firms get involve in the government - they rent the services of congresspeople to enact laws that further serve their interests. why is that not ok? a congressman is a service provider. he's a man looking out for his self-interest - like any person under capitalism. if he wants to get reelected he needs money to compete in the free market of other congresspeople. are you saying that donations from corporation to politicians should be outlawed? if so, then that would be regulating capitalism, and not free market capitalism. is that what you want?

then change your memeflag

Attached: 1491038612892.jpg (640x640, 151K)

Attached: nottruesocialism.jpg (480x541, 61K)

Your concern is that Amazon will be the only mail order company?

>i never said they need to do this in the long term. but just to drive out the competitor.
That would require long term. As I said Amazon is a mail order company. They gain profit by commission. And every time a new competitor will emerge they would have to put their commission to 0 %. And put it back whatever it was. I doubt a retailer that had to deal with only 0 % commission would want back to 30 % or whatever it is now.

>why?
There would be no government to bribe

>i never said anything about the government involvement in the economy
But you asked "where is "capitalism" stops in this story and "corporatism" begins"
Again we are against corporatism

All forms of anarchism are naive and retarded.

sup

>There would be no government to bribe
so you're saying that there would be private courts? private armies like Black Water and private police forces? so why would a person go to court where he knows that the guy he's up against in the case is owned privately by his opponent? what are we talking about here, really? high tech feudalism?

i was tying to use amazon as an example to show that capitalism breeds some major firsm to the point that those forms being to enact POLITICAL power. its in the NATURE of capitalism and not an accident of an aberration of it.

>Capitalists didn't even know what capitalism was until Marxists explained it to them

THIS LMFAO

>I doubt a retailer that had to deal with only 0 % commission would want back to 30 % or whatever it is now.

not just some little punk competitor.. but ones the little competitor get big enough to show on Amazon's radar then yeah, amazon would cut its commission to whatever it takes and kill the competitor. when the competitor dies amazon will raise the commission to whatever it wants again.

First a government has a monopoly on violence over a defined geograpic location.
>why would a person go to court where he knows that the guy he's up against in the case is owned privately by his opponent
The PR. If people will find out, that the judge is corrupt, the court will lose it's clients.
Look I'm a very slow tipper and i have to go to work soon. This video will explain it better:
youtube.com/watch?v=Ql4M0VkWa-w

>amazon will raise the commission to whatever it wants again.

"corrupt"?! how can you have corruption without a government that can define what corruption is?! the judge is just a service provider, whoever pays him more will get the favorable verdict.

to have the legal category of "corruption" you have to have a government that will define and legislate "corruption".

in free market capitalism "corruption" is not, cannot be, a thing. how can you have corruption in a world made up of service providers and service consumers?

go to work, work sets you free. and dont forget to smile.

No you don't need a entity, that will throw in jail, for growing a plant, to define words.
>the judge is just a service provider, whoever pays him more will get the favorable verdict.
I already explaint how to counter that.

you really work? you sound like you're 14, is child labor allowed in Germany?

the concept of corruption presuppose the regulation of some fiscal transactions you fucking low IQ retarded faggot, where do you wonk anyway? i wouldn't trust you with a styrofoam cup at McDonald as an employer.