Anyone had any ideas recently?

This is too far socialist left for me. Like a step towards world communism. I like the idea of an anarchist society. Actually an idealist anarchist doesn't want the world to be in war, but rather in peace, free from government.

Totally. I hold a lot of communist beliefs because inequality from capitalism hits really hard if you look into it, in nearly all aspects of life. And I just think proper Marxism has yet to be actually implemented anywhere. But I like anarchist values just as much, because again I think they'd be a far better alternative to what we have now. The anarchist communities in Spain are worth reading up on, if you haven't.

>Neither of these are money? Sure it's a measure of value, but banks over the years have convoluted that a lot.
If you abolish existing currencies or make them unusable people will adopt or invent different ones. When hyperinflation made the Zimbabwean dollar worthless people didn't just abolish money, they started using US dollars. There's no "convolution", all it is is a way to measure economic value so you can trade things with other people.

Neither of those work once your community gets much above Dunbar's number.

Single currency would ultimately be a form of power and oppression. If there is only one currency, then somebody needs to be in charge of it. You need to trust somebody with a ledger. That person you trust will invariably fuck you over.

Cryptocurrency, as a concept, had a goal of democratizing the use of currency. If you didn't like the block sizes of bitcoin, you could make your own bitcoin with larger block sizes out of the open source source code. To that end, I would feel much more comfortable having the world on a single, decentralized currency trading post.

But I would also really like the material good of the proletariat to be the central focus of a government.

I personally don't like communism at all, I want to stay the hell away from it at all costs. I'm an American, and as one socialism will never prosper here.

Communism could, Dunbar's number doesn't factor in. USSR was a massive, albeit flawed, communist state which had a lot more than 150 people in it. If not for the Cold War, Mao and Stalin, I'd argue there's a good chance it'd still exist today. But to much anti-Soviet tension built up, in the west. without international relations anything will crumble eventually, especially factoring in a few other problems.

Neither will 95% of the citizens

I've never heard someone make a case for cryptocurrency in this way, but I like it! I can't believe I've yet to encounter it in a political discussion. More power to the people, user

I find it a shame, but understandable. I think America would make an exceptional communist or socialist nation if it happened.

You are delusional, you live in a fantasy world my man. Communism has never worked in the end. It has in fact, destroyed many nations. If you can't see that I don't know what else to say to you.

>Dunbar's number doesn't factor in.
Yes it does. That's essentially what Stalin was talking about when he said that one death is a tragedy and a million are a statistic. It's impossible to know a million people personally, and so in any society of millions of people, you won't know, or really care about the fate of, a majority of the population. The innate benevolence that both anarchism and communism assume from people as a given breaks down.

If you vote for such people they are more likely to take bribes and become corrupt.

>Communism has destroyed many nations

But user, America has had 56 military interventions in South America since WW2 and devastated the Middle East. Millions are starving under capitalism. What horror has communism brought that that capitalism hasn't?

And capitalism hasn't? The system has killed our planet, millions of people, and the rights, freedoms and hopes of many more. Challenging it will never not be valid, and communism hasn't had a chance to properly do that yet. I'd take it over capitalism any day, even if the end product still has some flaws.

This thread alone is testimony to why we need t talk about and create change. The user with the crypto proves we have more tools now than ever to make a different society work.

Capitalism? Our grand society? Pic related is capitalism. Sell your rights for a PS4.

Attached: muSg-WFifeop19Px7a66o_M0CkYpxGwbzOEpQUVFhOA.jpg (1072x1356, 116K)

This is it.

Stalin was a literal headcase. You can't use him to pick out supposed hypocrisy in communism, because he was never a real one.

Good post OP. We should elect a bus driver as president like Venezuela did, that'll prove that poor people are really smart and competent for sure.

You could have a point regarding the last three but not regarding the first one. The politicians for whites should be white. The politicians for other races should belong to those other races.

>America would make an exceptional communist or socialist nation if it happened.

Let's compare America to other countries:
>significantly larger than other countries (socialist programs becomes more inefficient/harder to manage the farther removed they are from local circumstances, and democracy is a less effective feedback mechanism)
>Few countries have more racial tension than the US, and fighting over government allocation of resources will omly make that more intense
>Country filled with rootless immigrants and individualist entrepreneurs who have relatively little commitment to the success of the nation state
>American left has shown extremely poor judgement by promoting candidates who do everything but openly tell you they're corrupt/will rapidly become authoritarian
>Country will already be broke in 10 years so there won't even be the 20-30 year long sugar high poor people get from initial socialist redistribution

Literally no country is less suited to do socialism right. There's no national cohesion, government isn't responsive to citizenry, it's too large to manage efficiently, and there's very little patriotism here that would entice people who keep mouthbreathers fed to stick around. Oh and it's highly likely to lead to racial strife/persecution.

Not that matters to you. Poor people literally think any logic presented to them about socialism is some sort of trick to make them stay poor, and i'm sure the same is true with you.

but $100,000 isnt that much to keep track of, people would notice if they spent their bribes

You gotta be trolling. I wouldnt vote for a politician with a net worth less than 100k, it indicates that theyre either dumb or dont know how to manage money.

No, poor people literally think that they are poor because of conspiracy because anything else would mean accepting that they are retarded

This might shock you but some people focus on things other than how much money they make.

Then why would they run for office on a platform that revolves around stealing from people and redistributing the proceeds? They care about money, they just don't think they should have to put forth any effort in particular to receive it.

or we'll just get poor people into the office. you know, people who are cheaper to buy (just saying)

To help people? there are people that are altruistic, not everybody is a business sociopath. Just the 'imporant' people are.

this might shock you but 100k is not exactly an impressive net worth and many non-materialistic people have net worths greater than 100k. good luck retiring on 100k lol.

>poor people
Big assumption there, but it's not a big deal. I was thinking about it in terms of:

>significantly larger than other countries (actually considerably beat by India and China, and China is particularly important in this context as their economic reform under the Communist Party means the US is due to lose its top spot)
>fuck your racial tension, you cannot seriously use being backwards as a real argument. Especially when a lot of people will suddenly be too busy reclaiming the space of the 1% to worry about the niggers down the road getting some too.
>filled with
Prove this, and find a way to measure commitment before getting back to me.
>Bad political candidates
Everyone has those, doesn't mean they're not the only people who exist. Russian Revolution proved it.
>sugar high
Oh hell no, we're talking trillions of dollars. If a reformed government doubled down on infrastructure, like Britain did before going on to own 23% of the planet's land, you'd be good to go. Also, where the fuck are you getting these numbers from?

National cohesion is improved by more government investment, funded by reclamation. This creates patriotism as the quality of life for the majority of the population improves. Racial stuff is too backwards to survive under a system which wouldn't tolerate the KKK and the like, even when there are thick fucks like you wasting oxygen under a God-given sun. no, it wouldn't be perfect, not at first, but that's not even considering the precedent it would set in the west, and opportunities to lead by example here.

Who says a poor politician would be uber-socialist? A polician should be judged on their character and leadership abilities alone, not how corrupt they can be.

>and China is particularly important in this context as their economic reform under the Communist Party means the US is due to lose its top spot
lol you realize that those economic reforms you're referring to which allowed china's economy to grow rapidly in the 90s and early 2000s were capitalist in nature, right? they shifted from a planned economy to a mixed-market economy and allowed foreign investors to start dumping money into china. it was a rebuke of everything mao stood for.

As they themselves believed though, like Deng, even if it was a capitalist system, as long as it worked, it worked. Plus in a mostly capitalist world, some flexibility has to be allowed to at least initially cope with the contrasting systems.

>as long as it worked, it worked
okay well that's just called pragmatism not communism
>Plus in a mostly capitalist world, some flexibility has to be allowed to at least initially cope with the contrasting systems.
or maybe it wasn't the capitalist world that was responsible for hindering the growth of china's economy and it was just a bunch of retarded mao-era economic policies that were based based on ideology rather than, you know, what actually works.

>Elect a politician whose speciality/focus isn't on money
>Meanwhile America is in massive debt

Nice post. I'm still going to leave for Singapore when the commies take over and so will anybody else with any skills worth preserving. I'm not going to bother refuting anything else because i have a hard time believing that someone who references Chinese market liberalization as an argument for communism is arguing in good faith or is not terminally retarded.

It doesn't matter. It's been proven time and time again in history that people like you are either too greedy or too stupid to understand the real life ramifications of what you're asking for. Realpolitik is not about political speech, it's about knowing when to leave for an enclave when the poor people get uppity and propose to destroy the economy

that's way to high
cap should be 1 million

>You already have food
>You already have running water
>You already have indoor heating
>You already have electricity
>You already have libraries that grant you access to any knowledge you want in the world

God, you are a dimwit

America isn't a white country.