USSR DID NOTHING WRONG
USA person: "My family had to flee Communism, my grandparents know the horrors first hand"
Me: "What happened?"
USA person: "Well first off, they weren't allowed to have slaves anymore..."
Me: "the fuck"
USA person: "right?? who else do you throw scalding hot oil on, what's THAT about"
Other urls found in this thread:
My grandfather nearly starved to death under Mao who was directly inspired by Stalin. So kys
Slaves were luxury thing
youtube.com
And in Communism everybody are poor
Fuck Socialism.
>tf
>tp
>muh 100000 gorrillion
kys fag
>inspired by Stalin
thats pretty based.
>directly inspired by Stalin
World dictators like spiritual masters transfer their knowledge directly to their desciples. That's how they maintain their dictatorship teaching.
>nearly starved to death
He most likely deserved it
Equality is most important
perkele
Shitty general
I just hate Socialism. I wish America nuked the entire Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact so every commie rat was turned to dust.
thats rude, we wuznt even real gommunists, but thief gypsies
t. vox
Hungary deserves to be given every territory stolen from them in the Trianon + any other medieval territory conquered by Hungarian for at least trying to fight the dirty commie rat elite
If an ideology not only kills more people than most other ideologies combined but keeps resulting in mass deaths every time it's attempted, it's time to admit it's a shit ideology.
Based and REDpilled thread
Fuck off chink traitor
>trying to fight the dirty commie rat elite
you might didnt know but our elite is virtually made up of commy rats, larping as christian populists
Fuck off to Jow Forums with this commie shit, faggots
>the USSR killed 62 million and more than Mao
USSR did nothing wrong. Ya'll are just betas.
Just to point out, the reason people cry that "real socialism has never been tried" is because of either:
A- The fact that there are several different sects of socialism, and even then different sects of communism
or
B- The fact that "libertarian marxism" is the purest form of socialism apparently, and is actually unobtainable.
These things being said, and I apologize for my spacing, I am not a communist. If I had to choose a sect though, I'd say Stalinism/Marxist-Leninism, is the only one that's viable in the long term. As Maosim is literally just an excuse to shove the labor off onto uneducated villagers before reaping the benefits, and then it still twisted to a capitalist economic form. OG Leninism just evolved into Stalinism anyway since the concentrated party focus has to become bureaucratic to continue existing. Then finally if you're a Trotskyist, lmao get over yourself you stupid LARPer.
Pol Pot thought is the only viable one
Powerful post. You've persuaded me to give up my individualist ways. Long live the Internationale.
cringe
literally never heard a single socialist say "real socialism has never been tried", only heard it in bootlickers' strawmans
It comes and goes. It's a dumb thing to say from either side though. Just as much as using the term 'bootlicker' when you're advocating for a centralized welfare state.
>Just as much as using the term 'bootlicker' when you're advocating for a centralized welfare state.
never heard soc dems call people bootlickers either.
You're killing me, Argie. Please...
but it's true...
I've heard Americans say "real capitalism has never been tried" or some variation of it. It's always ironic.
Are you saying the way they say it is ironic, or that it's ironic that they're saying it? I'd believe some one is stupid enough to actually say that, but considering both classical and Keynesian economics are the only kind taught in a wide range of western colleges... I don't know. I guess anyone who didn't go to college and/or simply doesn't read the issue would say something like that.
>muh anecdotal evidence
I did hear socialists say that. Now what?
it's ironic because they're the ones claiming their system has never been tried while they "mock" us for saying it when we actually never say it.
It's cool for you to answer, but considering it's his anecdote, I need him to clarify.
>anecdotal evidence
it isn't, there's just no evidence at all, because you can't prove a negative.
The notion of whether or not something has been tried isn't the anecdote, it's that some one said such a thing to him that is the anecdote.
alright but it was pretty fucking obvious that that's what he meant.
i am confused as to which of you is the commie please be a tripfag
You don't know that until he confirms it!
the bootlicker hasn't replied to you once, he only talked to me.
If socialism is so great then why it failed everytime
why people flee cuba to the usa
why people flee venezuela to other countries
why was eastern germany a shithole while western germany wasn't
why is NK a shithole while SK isn't
Why everytime socialists rose to power there was oppression, censorship and people fleeing? If it is such a great system it wouldn't need all that
Russian empire was a capitalist state before the revolution.
People were slaves to money, not to the other people.
>socialism is bad because people die!
>muh Venezuela
I don't know why you ignorant fucks have such a strong opinion on something you clearly don't know shit about.
Venezuela is not a socialist country, and before you start posting your retarded "not real socialism" argument, look up what socialism is, such a basic concept that you should know, but you still don't, and have a strong opinion on.
and people who ran away from Cuba were capitalists and bootlickers, what do you expect them to say?
and what makes you say North Korea is a shithole and South Korea isn't?
>Venezuela is not a socialist country
EXPROPIESE
What a dumb picture. It's easier to just admit that capitalist focused nations indirectly force people into suffering by having them require to sell themselves for wages. Communist ones directly force people into suffering by forcing them into labor for what their wages would've bought, but for "everyone." Countless people died in developing nations through genocide, class abuse, mismanagement, and general dangers of labor. Coal miners, prospectors, railroad builders, settlers, factory workers, natives, peasants. Development is what costs lives, collectivist and autocratic societies just force development while democratic and capitalist ones coerce it. Not that it matters, since communism was only ever really adopted by nations that had not fully developed like the rest of the world. Hence they needed more meat for the grinder.
Various international political reasons, and the fact that the spreading of wealth leads to meritocracy. Things are admittedly less stable when you're stuck in an ideological war against people bigger than you. Also, a man with $2 in a socialist state can see some one in the US with $4, rush over to attempt to be the same, and end up with $1 since wealth requires capital to achieve anyway.
This as well. People were still forced into pseudo-feudalism due to how hard wealth disparity was in Russia. Although, in Communist Russia the same issue persisted, and still persists today. Albeit, it gets better over time.
Give him credit. Venezuela is a wannabe socialist state, despite 80% of its GDP being privately owned. Also, NK is pretty shitty. Although SK is just as shit, but shifted those stats into a different direction.
>tfw you'll never be publicly sacrificed with hundreds of other people for some shadow government entity that admitted its own existence.
exactly the kind of non argument I was expecting.
stay retarded.
>Venezuela isn't socialist because i say so
non-arguments are answered with non-arguments. This is another cliche'd phrase but you are free to move to NK and Cuba if you like them so much
>Venezuela is a wannabe socialist state
no it isn't, nothing is collectivized, the one big state owned company is PDVSA and it's still dependant on multinational capitalist companies such as Repsol and Petrobras, not that it would be a socialist company otherwise anyway.
deja la droga beto
>Venezuela isn't socialist because i say so
me? no, it's not a socialist country by definition.
there's private property.
but yeah, I don't expect a retard like you to understand such a basic concept.
>if you like X then why don't you move there
ofcourse you'd use such a retarded """argument"""
>80% GDP is privately owned
*the government is the main shareholder in those "private" companies. And that info is at least 8 years old
Capitalism is cancer.
Nordic Socialist wealth moderation through taxation and redistribution of money through social welfare and free education is the only workable system.
>Capitalism is cancer
>Capitalism is the only workable system
Define what Capitalism is
private property
The Venezuela isn't socialist because the government owns less than 10% of the property.
I know.