I'm turning communist

Put your money where your mouth is and move to a communist country. After all it's better according to you. We don't want to live in a communist country so please stop trying to force us to live in one.

become a national socialist instead

Are you socially marxist?

That's a jump. Saying that I find one argument compelling isn't enough to say that I believe that communism is great.

True but I fail to see the relevance.

Could work.

Absolutely not.

>due to how debt works
wrong. debt is a very simple concept. you can easily get money you owe to someone from somewhere without increasing the money supply or anything else. in fact, it's the state that artificially increases the money supply because they think nobody would spend money without the fear of it being worthless tomorrow.
the need for growth is just a smoke screen put up by the states that are in constant competition with each other regarding how much they can press from their respective population.
a company that is successful wants to expand, but they are limited by their competition and by availability of workforce, but all companies within the same country are limited by this, so the worst that can happen to them is that they don't expand, which doesn't matter. you see states opening their borders because they have already stripped their own population of adequate resources to produce that workforce.

Retake your Econ 101 class.
Jesus Christ Britain, I thought our education was bad.

>implying I've ever had an econ class

>you can easily get money you owe to someone from somewhere without increasing the money supply or anything else
If governments had that sort of money then they wouldn't be taking on as much debt as they are.

>in fact, it's the state that artificially increases the money supply because they think nobody would spend money without the fear of it being worthless tomorrow.
Nonsense. Inflation exists to counter the interest rates on state debt. At best, you've only given an argument against deflation.

Hey, I have absolutely no training or education in carpentry. Let me tell you how to build a house.

The reason a healthy business needs to grow is because stagnation is death. Growth compels innovation. As your business ages, you should be gaining experience and continuously improving your product and it’s value.

Communism (aside from outright enslaving you) is forced stagnation by a shitty centralized government filled with bureaucratic dead weight and primarily concerned with preserving its own power.

This is exactly why Communist Germany and Russia were decades behind the US in technology and economic growth after the fall of the USSR.

Communism is a failed doctrine. This should be painfully obvious in the way Cuba and China were forced to open up their economies to capitalistic commercial trade just to survive.

Kys faggot

Self reliance & sustainability is the answer. It takes away the need for top end growth and makes you & your standard of living independent. Collectivization many times means being as strong as your weakest link, and modern capitalism is a collectivist system just like communism. Fuck both.

I grow my own food, make my own electricity and pump my own water. If society collapses tomorrow my only additional concern will be protecting what I need to continue that strategy, thus why I'm strapped.

The biggest Redpill in terms of Communism is Labour theory of value. It was not Created by Marx - it was created by Adam Smith and David Ricardo. The only thing Marx altered here is adding the notion of Surplus Value.

Western Mass Media buzzes that it's wrong - and at the same time, any and all practical economic thought is impossible without its' classical economic concept.

It is evident that there is a Quantum of Universal Value, that can be held against any existing commodity - it is evident simply by existence of a global market. Consequently, the Labor can be the only physical medium of this Quantum of Universal Value.

Russia was decades behind the US and Western Euro nations before communism. Under communism they actually closed the gap some, but it's still a fatally flawed system.

First you have to stop being a retard and realise socialism dosen't have to mean Marxism.

Attached: Pic.jpg (1024x960, 152K)

the number one killer of communists is other communists

The number one killer of capitalists is other capitalists.

>This is exactly why Communist Germany and Russia were decades behind the US in technology and economic growth after the fall of the USSR.
Eastern Germany did not lag behind in Communist Era. It was already behind at a time of partition, and its' relative economic position did not change to the time of Unification. It's not even funny to compare Soviet Russia to its prior or past.

>This should be painfully obvious in the way Cuba and China were forced to open up their economies to capitalistic commercial trade just to survive.
Communism does not mean "centralization", capitalism does not mean "decentralization". Most if not all modernized/industrialized nations in the world, including the pioneers of Capitalism as it is: the Nederlands and England - were heavily centralized when they have undergone initial industrialization.

I still ponder if the system matters much at all or any, or if the system's success is primarily or entirely dictated by the people it governs.

This.

Step 1 is stop stigmatising anything lefties have also thought of at one point

Step 2 is stop thinking national socialism had anything to do with socialism or was good

You do realise that communism is just a tactic used by those in the middle to galvanise the dumb masses at the bottom and sweep away the status quo only to install themselves there and leave the dumb bottom-dweller where they were before?

Pretty sure that's why Hitler put socialism into his party name, the people who actuallt took it seriously (like Strasser) were dealt with in 1934.

If everyone was a clone, then communism would work, but since we are not like that, the need for individuality will always destroy communism.

So you think getting a second taco shop after 35 years of owning one is good GDP?

Apple went from bankrupt to 100billion in 35 years with a nice healthy dose of capitalism lad.

But doesn't the need for constant growth imply a company must expand its reach through globalism and undermining native workers' wages?

where does the value of a rock containing a valuable mineral come from if not from the subjective judgement that a person makes of it? does me stumbling over and picking up such a rock count as labor and define its value? no, it comes from the ones of its properties that we ourselves deem valuable. the labor theory is good but not perfect, and can only partially explain prices.

Came here to tell us OP is turning into a retard. You have so much time to waste, I guess. Let me break it gently to you. We knew.

Labour Theory of Value (LTV):

Non arguments:

>If I dig a hole in my backyard and then fill it in I used labor but made no value! Commies BTFO!

Marx clarified (unlike adam smith) that only socially necessary labor (labor used to produce a commodity with use value) creates value. This is also the case if you spend 1000 years making a bed.

>Nature can create value as well. If an apple falls from a tree then value is created without labor

Marx also noted nature could create value.

>if labor determines price why is coca cola cheaper than bottled water?

Labor doesn't determine price. It determines value (not exchange value or use value) and correlates with the equilibrium price.

Machines cannot create value. If I make a machine that makes diamonds out of thin air then the value of a diamond falls below that of bricks now that they can be aquired with no work what so ever. Price might not fall because you can still manipulate supply and demand but value certainly does.

Some definitions.

Use value = How useful an object is.
Exchange value = Market value of a commodity. Different from use value. You can sell a beanie baby for 200$ but it is almost completely useless.
Value = the amount of congealed labor withing a commodity.

Some evidence of the LTV
users.wfu.edu/cottrell/eea97.pdf

I prefer Heinlein’s analogy. The same labor goes into making an apple turnover out of apples as one made from dogshit.

Embrace strasserism

>smart aka the most brainwashed anglo 1st worlder still cant figure out capitalism and communism are two sides of the same jewish coin
top jej, you westcucks are fucking pitiful

>strasserism
>check Wikipedia
>"a more radical form of Nazism"
Sign me up.

Good luck using a fractured atheist movement to resist Islam dumb ass.

Yes.

What people really need to remember is that it is in fact possible to have too much. This fact is in fact a simple fact simply because the Earth has limited resources. You can't argue this, and no, asteroid mining/anything in space is not an argument until it's actually being done.

this, exactly
competitive markets push profits to 0. this is learned in first month of microeconomics. only by constantly finding new ways to increase sales and decrease production costs can a firm hope to survive; otherwise competitors will do so and profits will become losses.
Wages face the same pressure, both as a competitive market itself and as a factor of production; firms will face constant pressure to lower wages, just as with all other factors of production.
Problem: the vast majority of consumers are workers, whose primary or only source of income is wages. As wages go down, aggregate demand falls as well. This places more pressure on firms to lower production costs, including wages. Its a vicious cycle
What we've seen with capitalism is ever new innovative ways to expand the labor pool and expand consumption. The massive increases in consumer credit allows workers to consume beyond their income. Pushing women into the workforce greatly lowered wages. Now globalization does the same by pushing immigration and allowing firms to offshore labor to cheaper markets, as well as expanding potential customer markets.

You are an idiot, there are tangible arguments in favor for central planning, but this isn’t one of them.
>governments can adopt austerity measures to reduce debt growth. Now you could argue these policies are unpopular and therefor nobody would vote for them, but that is an argument against democracy more than anything else
>debt and the necessity of GDP growth exists in every system
>2% GDP growth is not as difficult to achieve as you imply. Besides the real reason we need a 2% GDP growth is due to an ever increasing non-discretionary spending (which central planning would inevitably incur as well)
>your argument already presupposes that central planning is more efficient. Your argument went “something bad in capitalism, communism is more efficient, therefor communism is more efficient”

lol, look at what china does to muslims

Attached: 9d75242d7527718b52d6f3cae5408e57bd15addb47839f01198cdb06e844e1fe.png (895x580, 1.03M)

>the only systems are capitalism and communism

Attached: 1557575186989.gif (500x493, 631K)

You should at least become a Landian accelerationist lmao

Or you could just have an economic system that isn't based on (((debt)))

If you ever feel yourself turning red, just remember; communists only exist until the revolution is complete, afterwards, they are just militant capitalists.

Considering he’s here asking questions and your the “one post by this I.d.” Retard that whose only contribution was a meme, I’m pretty confident that as retarded as he might be, he’s not nearly as retarded as you.

The way people try to argue idiots into communism is by pointing out the flaws of capitalism. Of course there are major flaws in every single implementation. The retardation of communism is their "solutions" of capitalism. None of them work in a practical application.

Oh the workers need to own the means of production, and everyone makes the same amount for everything. All social hierarchy will be gone and everyone will experience equality, equal pay/conditions, the evil boogeyman of the elite classes is gone! We ate the rich! Everything in society is now "free", but the government of the people will own and distribute everything to everyone! Yeah sounds neat. Have everything you need provided to you, work for the greater good, everyone is equal, etc etc. It's all predicated on humans behaving in a benevolent manner for the good of everyone. It will take exactly 4 seconds before whoever is pulling this wool over everyone's eyes starts giving themselves slightly nicer things, wielding the total dominating apparatus of government in tyrannical ways, and clashing against human nature.

Even with a benevolent ruler and a government that keeps themselves pretty well in check (impossible to happen btw) the people themselves will invariably fuck up communism due to their nature. Social stratification is absolutely built into human beings. It is NOT a product of capitalism, it is part of our natural drive to compete and out-do one another. Risk vs. reward is the most basic of human decision making, communism seeks to remove the reward portion of it, and if a communism system DOESN'T remove reward, i.e. someone gets rewarded more heavily for doing something particularly important, dangerous/risky, or useful, then guess what? It's capitalism again, and now unless you use your propaganda machine and tyrannical government pretty well, some comrades will get a tad upset that someone else is receiving preferential treatment in their "egalitarian" society.

Attached: DVGgVuwW4AAEQq5.jpg (1066x600, 73K)

The number one killer of kikes is other kikes

Bingo you get something cute user.

Attached: E5E864EE-F83B-498C-9F04-9B0BE2A3A117.jpg (720x720, 64K)

The number one killer of micks is potatoes. The number one sustainer of mick life is also potatoes. Thus, the circle is complete.

>impossible to happen btw

Human nature is a hell of a drug

As it should be ;)

One flaw in your argument is that central planning = communism, depending on the scale and method you could have just become a strasserite for all you know.

Mmmmm who wouldn't hit that ??

Attached: perfect-mashed-potatoes-12.jpg (600x400, 48K)

>problem is rooted in debt
>a specific people deal in debt
Yet you think the solution is adopting the ideology of this specific people

There's no such thing as you think, no one is controlling the world, for it cannot be controlled.
You can only regulate it. Change happens at the base.

>value is decided by labor
>oh wait it cam be decided by nature
>oh wait only subjective forms of labor
Seems like marx knew he was wrong before he ever took off

youtube.com/watch?v=d5InIwcWESk

>tripfagging

Attached: disgusted.png (935x720, 240K)

I want a Socialist Volkstaat for my people.

Nice, but you can do the same with Third Positionism without becoming retarded.

Attached: signs of fascism.jpg (613x926, 109K)

Then whatevs. White communism is still better jew/nig communism. Still shit tho