You support communism? don't you know it killed like, um, 1000 GORILLION people?

lel

But user, soyboys are all about that communism kino these days. If anything they'll be whining about how capitalism murders billions every year, and if everyone was a smol socialist marshmallow nothing would ever die ever again.

food for though:
does the global capitalist system work without half of the globe being impoverished?
economic systems don't end at the national border.

Attached: thinkin.png (680x680, 401K)

*thought

>memenism

>communism is so problematic
>the freer the market the freer the people

Attached: image.png (1674x740, 719K)

Global capitalism has lifted a billion people out of abject poverty in the last two decades, and that’s not an exaggeration

I would prefer poverty to slavery

>And impoverished half of the globe
just like capitalism then

what slavery?

what makes you think that your work hours would change in a communist system?

Poverty is the purest form of slavery known to man. Pain is not always capable of keeping men enslaved, but hunger always will.

>And impoverished half of the globe

are you implying this isnt the case?

>Poverty is the purest form of slavery
Lmao
Wage slavery
Would you rather toil a field under a whip?

It's illegal for my boss to touch me so I don't understand what you're talking about.

that's not even remotely akin to slavery you privileged cunt
you've never experienced slavery and neither has the vast majority of people who have access to a computer

Historic examples. See Russia. Especially post-war Russia.
Or so says bourgeoisie sources.
Real estate bubble is a very real problem.

>iron fist
An iron fist would require high taxes to pay for it. If anything there is a plutocracy which is very incompetent.

The ever present threat of a working revolution prevented full blown abuse. The capitalists make concessions to prevent a revolution. People in your country used to start strikes at everything, even for cheaper rents.

But make no mistake, with worker organisations growing weaker, the tendency is that working rights will also deteriorate. In capitalism, profit is a virtue after all

Why not? Slavery is not always brutal.
House slaves for example were very well treated.
Or the mamluks.
The great bourgeoisie profit from high taxes. See Military-Industrial complex in USA.

Nigger I own two cars and a paid off mortgage, if this is slavery then i'm ok with it.

>The great bourgeoisie profit from high taxes
Oh ok. You're retarded.

because its literally not slavery
you have choices, you can make your own decisions, you can leave if you want too, you can choose not to work.
absolutely nothing like slavery you pathetic human
you just want to input nothing but yield from society

Is that your argument? How would, let's say, the american government pay for it's huge army without high taxes?

It's usually soyboys jerking off to Marx, not the other way around

your aversion to capitalism stems from tax concerns?

Well in the case of the USA most of it is paid through credit.

in muttland, most gibs go to corporations, which barely pay any taxes at all. they definitely benefit from taxes.

>you can leave if you want too
I don't know about your country, but in mine I can't just go to the woods, chop a lot of timber and start making my own farm there. It's all either private, or public owned.
>you just want to input nothing but yield from society
What makes you think it?

So they don't have high taxes then do they? If they are all dodging tax then it is not a high tax system.

You're the one that started speaking about high taxes
Saving companies from bankruptcy is very common too. Too big to fall, they say...

we have some of the highest corporate taxes in the world

Attached: corporate tax.jpg (1280x868, 88K)

The taxes are a burden upon the proletariat and petty bourgeoisie, not upon giant capitalists.

>income tax = corporate tax
income tax in muttland is fairly high. that's where the corporations get their gibs from.

you could literally go and do this in america kek
brazillians are legitimately the worst race you guys are like vermin

Ok. So do you support cutting taxes?

income tax is low

Attached: income tax US.png (861x734, 47K)

m.youtube.com/watch?v=KW2su6ggsuI

They took this from you, white man

It’s responsible for 3 trillion deaths in actuality

In paper. In fact most of it is converted back into benefits for the wealthy. See the Treasury saving the General Motors from Bankruptcy nearly a decade ago.
What are you trying to accomplish here?

If we let GM and the banks fail then it would have put millions in bread lines.

>See the Treasury saving the General Motors from Bankruptcy nearly a decade ago.
Other countries such as ours do that as well

>TRUE communism has never been tried!

Attached: 1518729563923.gif (413x243, 51K)

I think the purpose of that was to prevent mass unemployment and the collapse of the banks.

>What are you trying to accomplish here?
Point out the inconsistencies in your Marxist ideology.

>Why yes I'm Anti Communist

Attached: flat,800x800,075,f.u2.jpg (644x800, 71K)

>Trump nazis rewriting history uncle stalin dindu nuffin

Attached: 1515702272164.gif (800x371, 105K)

That was the excuse, yes. In fact it could be easily solved by nationalizing the industry and letting the bourgeoisie go bankrupt. If they couldn't pay their debts, just confiscated all of their property.
But no, the wealthy can't pay for their own incompetence. The american people need to pay for another's mistakes.
And this is horrible. Privatising the profits, but sharing the costs.
That's because communism was not supposed to be tried, it's supposed to be what happens after the socialism becomes outdated.
How will you accomplish it by asking me if I believe in lower taxes?

The eternal borgeoisie hate Stalin for the same reason they hate Hitler.
Both had a strong anti-bourgeoisie stance. Though Stalin was not enlightened on the jewish problem, and Hitler failed in nationalising all industry.
Both great men anyway.

That's not how America works or ever will, because seizing private property is evil and wrong.

its growing inside me, bros

Attached: cccp.jpg (453x604, 61K)

>hitler
>anti bourgeois

Attached: 1542944852200.png (645x773, 11K)

>nationalizing the industry
Yes, because nationalised industry is so incredibly efficient and doesn't just cause even bigger problems in the long run.

But you do seize private property. The difference is that America seize only from workers, while providing useless industralists with free money stole from workers.

>How will you accomplish it by asking me if I believe in lower taxes?
Because Marxism supports raising taxes.

"Our aim must be to grind the bourgeoisie between the two millstones of taxation and inflation." - Vladimir Lenin

>you do seize private property
Give an example pls

Then why give money to industries that proved themselves to be inefficient? Big companies wouldn't need free stuff from the state if they were efficient.

>And this is horrible. Privatising the profits, but sharing the costs.
Without the companies a lot of people would go out of jobs so what would be the point of letting them die?

GM example I gave above.
>Because Marxism supports raising taxes.
Have you ever heard any of Lenin's works?
>"Our aim must be to grind the bourgeoisie between the two millstones of taxation and inflation." - Vladimir Lenin
Source?

I already answered that. Nationalization.

Because the 2008 financial crisis was not caused by private industry. It was caused by a government policy in which two American banks were given orders by the Federal government to fund mortgages at below-profit rates to people who could not afford them. The aim being to boost home ownership despite the people in question not having incomes high enough to afford them.

Revolutionary Catalonia
I think that's early Lenin. But even still, he speaks of the rich. Don't know about lenin

No property was siezed, the company was just given a large amount of money

it has, in east germany, where it succeeded beyond all expectations. if the rest of the (mostly agrarian asian) union didn't drag it down in the dirt, it would be wakanda by now.

Attached: really makes me thing.jpg (612x574, 66K)

>Have you ever heard any of Lenin's works?
Yes. I studied Politics and International Relations and had to read Marx, Lenin and Engels' work as part of it because I had to write essays on Marxism. I even had a Marxist professor, who I got on well with. So yes. I have read plenty of Marxist writings. I also used to believe in Marxism at one point.

>Source?
John Meynard Keynes is the source for the quote based on an interview he did with Lenin.

And this money came from where? There's no free meal in this world
>The aim being to boost home ownership despite the people in question not having incomes high enough to afford them
The government(which was financed by big corps) clearly did it to raise the price of real estate, in turn making real estate magnates richer.

No. It was specifically done to boost the home-ownership of black people. Feel free to do some research on it.

>66% of Russians regret the collapse of the Soviet Union

rferl.org/a/russian-regret-at-soviet-collapse-stands-at-14-year-high-poll-shows/29664759.html

>One-quarter of respondents said they do not regret the Soviet breakup, the lowest proportion since 2005, and 9 percent said they could not answer.

>The pollster said that 52 percent of respondents named the collapse of the Soviet Union's "single economic system" as the main thing they regretted.

Attached: C5B454D0-C193-4A4E-8B5E-BB62B0D9B387.png (637x432, 320K)

Oh that's just the reason i use to make normies dislike communism.
My reasons are different.
Lmao who tf gives a fuck about useless shit like the bodycount?

Attached: 1527958687723.jpg (331x334, 29K)

Nationalisation does pay people's jobs but it doesn't generate profit. It'll just be a leech on the governments money

>pic
>intersectionality = marxism
stormerism is a mental illness

>Yes. I studied Politics and International Relations and had to read Marx, Lenin and Engels' work as part of it because I had to write essays on Marxism. I even had a Marxist professor, who I got on well with. So yes. I have read plenty of Marxist writings. I also used to believe in Marxism at one point.
Then you would know that marxists do not support higher taxes.
>John Meynard Keynes is the source for the quote based on an interview he did with Lenin.
Which interview? I want a source

Negro I don’t give a fuck, anything to weaken and promote infighting among those albino negrinos is good enough for me

Attached: E15FF29F-8F41-4244-A2F8-26B8D26DAA32.jpg (640x703, 147K)

Yeah, the USA really ended up like shit. That explains why they're the fucking number 1 country in this gay Earth.

Nobody cares about niggers. In USA they're the lumpenproletariat. They're used as the mad dogs of the bourgeoisie.
They may have used the excuse that it was to help poor niggers, but it's a very obvious lie, they just want cash. That's why they lived in gated communities.

>House slaves for example were very well treated.
Remember the Tronco? That doesn't sound very comfy, mate.

>Then you would know that marxists do not support higher taxes.
I know that when I was a Marxist, the Marxist groups I was a part of supported higher taxation precisely because it would damage the bourgeoisie. Obviously the aim itself was not just higher taxes, but as a tactic of weakening the bourgeoisie, taxation was as good as any.

>source
It is from his book called The Economic Consequences of the peace.

Nah. It was part of a social justice agenda that had started under the previous Democrat administration.

I don't see what that has to do with left pol tards rewriting history and then accusing other people of doing that when it suites them.

Attached: 1545452279790.png (213x237, 7K)

> It'll just be a leech on the governments money
How is it any different from saving companies from bankruptcy.?
>I know that when I was a Marxist, the Marxist groups I was a part of supported higher taxation precisely because it would damage the bourgeoisie. Obviously the aim itself was not just higher taxes, but as a tactic of weakening the bourgeoisie, taxation was as good as any.
It must be hard to be part of a group full of imbeciles.
>It is from his book called The Economic Consequences of the peace.
No, it is not. I think you're lying.

>No, it is not. I think you're lying.
I think you haven't read many books.

>It must be hard to be part of a group full of imbeciles.
I have a feeling you have never been a part of any Marxist groups yet feel you know what is more Marxist than someone who has.

This is a Jow Forumstard-tier argument.
There's no such thing as social justice agenda. The jews don't give a fuck about poor people.

pure communism is

> no government regulations
> no currency
> every citizen contributes what they can to the system
> every citizen takes what they need from the system

it is very easy to see how this system would fail (just like pure unregulated capitalism) as it would fall to endless abuse and very soon no work would be done and too much would be taken due to unreliable and scummy human nature

Attached: 1540722412175.jpg (960x955, 58K)

>I think you haven't read many books.
Which page is the Lenin's quote? Or chapter at least.

I don't really think communism will ever be achieved either.
I may be considered a revisionist, but fuck that

>There's no such thing as social justice agenda.
Let me guess. You have never heard of John Rawls: the main founder of modern liberal thought and social justice theory. Please read a book.

>This is a Jow Forumstard-tier argument.
No. It was a policy of the US government. Do you even have a proper education?

>Let me guess. You have never heard of John Rawls: the main founder of modern liberal thought and social justice theory. Please read a book.
Words and more words. In my country we had a program to make housing more accesible to poor people. Oficially, it was a social program, in fact it created a housing bubble and made billions for constructing firms.
>No. It was a policy of the US government. Do you even have a proper education?
Why do you believe in what a random politicians that is being openly financed by big corps say about social programs?

Insulting me will not change anything

>Words and more words
Facts and more facts you mean. John Rawls was the man who created the modern Social Justice ideology. You are right that it has nothing to do with Marxism. John Rawls was a liberal and his Social Justice ideology is a liberal ideology in that it does not seek to destroy capitalism. Instead it just wants to mitigate its harmful results.

>Oficially, it was a social program, in fact it created a housing bubble
Yes because that is what happens when you mess around with the market. That is what caused the 2008 crash. It wasn't market failure; it was government interference.

>Insulting me will not change anything
I am insulting you because you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

You don't care because its happening to mostly Africa and South East Asia, not privileged White kids like you