Would Communism have succeeded if Western capitalist countries stopped their meddling and trying to make it fail?
>>1246065
Yes.
>communists feeling persecuted
>>1246075
But Western capitalist countries, including the fascists (sorry mates, corporatism is just a form of capitalism), did actively try to make communist countries fail.
>>1246065
communism would have succeeded if everyone else was communist.
>>1246080
Define capitalism.
>>1246075
>Posts guy who actively persecuted communists
>everyone meddles with everyone always
>countries that fail blame external meddling, because it's literally a universal constant of foreign relations
like pottery
>>1246092
evil, literaly pure evil
>>1246104
You sure showed them.
Would capitalism have survived if communism hadn't actively worked to undermine capitalists societies from the inside, using every possible legal and illegals means? Oh wait, it did. Actual non-utopian economic systems will continue to function regardless of what happens, whereas you need a dictatorship to enforce socialism or else everything falls apart.
>>1246101
Some countries meddle more than others.
For example: modern Japan today barely meddles in the Middle East compared to the US or NATO.
Other countries (that hold significant geostrategic importance) get meddled with more than others.
For example: Afghanistan has constantly been undermined by meddling from the Soviets, the CIA, the Pakistanis, the Indians, the Iranians, the British, etc.
>>1246124
Japan doesn't meddle because they have the US do their foreign policy for them.
To give an obvious example, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Japan simply cut a check to the US to pay for their end of the deal.
But yeah, Afghanistan got fucked senseless.
Still doesn't explain why communism failed, when republicanism was up against just as much opposition.
>>1246121
>if communism hadn't actively worked to undermine capitalists societies from the inside, using every possible legal and illegals means
except that never happened, nice false equivalency though
now go back to licking your boss's shoes, wagecuck
>>1246124
You can't meddle when you have been emasculated into oblivion.
>>1246129
Because communism has not even existed for 200 years yet whereas republicanism rose, fell, rose again, then fell against countless times throughout history. It's only very recently that republicanism managed to effecitvely annihilate monarchism for good.
There's no reason to believe communism won't return, or that the next time it will be back for good.
>>1246133
>what is the Comintern
>What are communist parties?
>What is the KGB?
>What is Gramscism?
>What is the very concept of revolution?
You are either ignorant or playing dumb.
>>1246154
>Having political parties dedicated to a certain worldview is a conspiracy to destabilize countries from within.
>>1246145
There's no reason to believe communism won't return
There are many reasons to believe that. You'll understand once you get out of grade school and understand basic economics.
>>1246070
/thread
>>1246170
>There are many reasons to believe that. You'll understand once you get out of grade school and understand basic economics.
Western orthodox economists massively disagreed with communism 100 years ago as well. Hell, traitional theologians massively disagreed with republicanism 300 years ago.
The prevailing ideology of the times is not a reason to believe the ideology of the future will never be.
>>1246165
Yeah, communist parties work to achieve something they call a revolution, which sounds pretty destabilizing.
Now I now you're not playing, you're just dumb.
>>1246175
Sure thing, bro. Allende sure did some great revolting.
>>1246174
There's a reason there are no more Marxist economists left in academia. They all metamorphosed into Keynesians or retreated to sociology and philosophy, where people can spout any bs and get away with it.
Again, read on basic economics. You're embarassing yourself at this point.
>>1246184
There are Marxian economists to this day.
>Again, read on basic economics. You're embarassing yourself at this point.
>Again, read on basic theology. You serfs are embarrasing yourselves.
>>1246184
>>1246190
Distracted me for 5 min/10
>>1246170
I read that statement like three times and still not sure if you are for or against communism with that double negative.
Either way, communism is impracticable with human nature.
That said, as more and more jobs get automated, it might be the only reasonable thing to do unless you want millions of unemployed put into interment camps waiting to die.
>>1246200
Not an argument.
>>1246175
The CIA financed (using taxpayer dollars), backed, and engineered countless coups and "revolutions" in socialist or Soviet-sympathetic countries during the Cold War and proudly admitted it.
Hell, they still do it today (see Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc)
I don't remember Communists doing anything like that, cuck.
>>1246204
>Either way, communism is impracticable with human nature.
Not this "human nature" argument again.
They said the same thing about capitalism a few centuries ago when everyone was a monarchist mercantilist.
It doesn't mean shit.
>>1246184
As opposed to Austrian which basically makes horrid assumptions that humans will act rationally in their self interest.
>>1246211
>I don't remember
I wonder if that has anything to do with you reading only books that confirm your bias? Moscow had a hand in everything from Chinese and Korean revolutions to South American guerrillas to African and Asian anti-colonialist movements, in Congo going so far as to send combatants and tanks.
>>1246222
>Moscow had a hand in everything from Chinese and Korean revolutions
Not coups engineered by foreign governments, unlike the capitalist CIA
>South American guerrillas to African and Asian anti-colonialist movements, in Congo
>anti-colonialist movements
What were the capitalist colonizers doing there in the first place?
Again, not coups engineered by foreign governments, unlike the capitalist CIA. These were indigenous people fighting against foreign exploitation who received help from Moscow after the fighting already started.
Give up kids. Communism is the only social and economic system where they had to build walls to keep people inside from going outside and not the way around. We have people risking their lives to escape communism. We Don't have people trying to flee capitalism to communism (except college students). That by itself is a harsh indicative that it is a failed system that people detest.
>>1246240
>We have people risking their lives to escape communism.
Where?
inb4 North Korea, which follows Juche, NOT Communism or Socialism
>>1246218
Which would only ever work in a society that puts a premium on rationality and education.
>>1246240
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Western_Bloc_defectors
>>1246236
Every soviet-occupied country had a phony "revolution" or coup engineered by a foreign government. Read history. It's a cool subject.
>>1246240
Give up kids. Capitalism is the only social and economic system where they had to build walls to keep people inside from going outside and not the other way around. We have people risking their lives to escape sweatshops. We don't have anyone trying to flee communism(they're dead, motherfucker). That by itself is a harsh indicative that we fuck up everything we touch.
>>1246240
>People are risking their lives to escape Canada, a communist socialist leftist pinko hellhole, and flee to Somalia, a libertarian free market right-wing paradise
>>1246243
Berlin wall ring a bell?
>>1246258
You mean that thing a bunch of westerners jumped over to get away from the shitty capitalist system?
Yeah.
>>1246258
That was 50 years ago.
Your post indicated the present tense.
Try again, cuck.
>>1246184
There are still Marxist economists in academia.
Not a single Austrian though :^)
Why do wagecucks and poorfags defend capitalism so fiercely?
I understand when the bourgeoisie do it as they rightly should since they have all to gain from it, but why do all the cucks come crawling out of the woodwork to defend the system that systematically humiliates and cucks them on a daily basis?
Do they get some sexual thrill from the humiliation? Or are they simply developmentally disabled and fail to comprehend basic facts?
>>1246243
>>1246249
I'm talking normal people not agents. Normal people who just want to lead a normal life. People travel by boat risking their lives to reach Florida from Cuba. Nobody goes from Florida to Cuba. People risked their lives to tear down the wall from the communist side, not the capitalist side. People weren't allowed to leave the Soviet Union. The list goes on. Your system is so good that you require a dictatorship and border patrol to KEEP PEOPLE IN. You can't make that shit up.
>>1246249
>that guy who defected in 1989
>came back with his leg between his tails
>"I'm sorry, I was feeling overworked"
holy shit
can the commies in this thread please describe the communist utopia they dream about. Genuinely interested
>>1246240
>Give up kids
>procedes to pretend communists defend regimes they don't defend
Never fails.
>>1246283
>People travel by boat risking their lives to reach Florida from Cuba
Yes because the USA is the richest country on the planet whereas Cuba is just a relatively decent place given it's surrounded by shitholes on every side but north.
> People risked their lives to tear down the wall from the communist side
That's not what happened.
>People weren't allowed to leave the Soviet Union
Yes they were.
>Your system is so good that you require a dictatorship and border patrol to KEEP PEOPLE IN
tbqh given concerns about brain drain in East Berlin it's quite understandable.
They're investing so much money into university education so if those graduates turn around and fuck off to West Berlin they're effectively arming the enemy.
>>1246286
Worker control of the means of production.
No state
>>1246286
You can just read Marx.
>>1246065
No.
The prediction that socialism will naturally lead into communism is a false one.
The idea that central planning's time had come was a false one.
That said, without fear of socialist revolution we probably wouldn't have most of the social-democratic reforms we see today, even if governments have successively tried to destroy them with marketization.
>>1246286
no state
automation of labor
man can do as he pleases, isn't bound by his 'job title'
we Star Trek nao
>>1246301
>The prediction that socialism will naturally lead into communism is a false one.
then what WILL lead into communism?
does China have the right idea?
>>1246303
At this rate we will be Star Trek.
Just not the Federation.
Why don't you let the workers chose their destiny instead of trying to be demagogues? It turns out that workers everywhere have rejected communism (and atheism for that matter). It's always the middle class that comes up with these salvia if utopian ideologies, out of resentment for the higher classes, but it's the workers who end up getting in the ass.
>every single communist revolution was backed and funded by Western capitalists and great powers
>"it's their fault communism fails!"
>>1246065
>Annex every single country around you
>Spread Communist propaganda and supply arms to any country that swears allegiance
>Start proxy wars everywhere it's feasible
>B-but muh capitalists are meddling and making us fail, y-you class traitor
Nice try.
>>1246311
>then what WILL lead into communism?
Probably nothing will lead to communism as generally envisioned.
Social democracy with basic income funded by taxation on automated manufacturing is probably the closest we can acceptably predict. At a certain point this might lead into something which could be considered communism. [Although it's less a fair society for workers, and more a society built on robot slavery.]
communism is not inevitable, which is the big thing.
>>1246316
> It turns out that workers everywhere have rejected communism
Because workers are generally tightly influenced by the ruling elite unless the contradictions of the prevailing system are so apparent no propaganda known to man could conceal them.
Communists just so happen to see this particular ideology as the best for them and everyone else then trying to convince others of this, this is no different to what every other ideology on the planet does.
>>1246278
Because they are the ones with most to lose.
The typical intellectual who defends socialism can just move to another country when his glorious revolution inevitably fails, either that or his cushy job in the academia shields him from the worst of economic collapse.
Meanwhile the common people is left to eat rocks, like in Venezuela.
https://panampost.com/panam-staff/2015/10/02/venezuelan-governor-suggests-eating-fried-rocks-amid-shortages/
>>1246294
>brain drain
Woah comrade it turns out ze workers prefer to be oppressed! Quick Hans close ze borders!
It should be the other way around, the capitalists should be the ones fearing that their workers might escape their system of oppression to live in workers paradise don't you think?
>>1246324
Every communist revolution was attacked and/or sabotaged by capitalist nations. The bolshevik revolution in particular was greeted with a dozen foreign armies from capitalist countries attacking the red army for no reason. And i say this as someone that hates lenin. Go with your retareded conspiracies to /pol/.
>>1246338
To be fair, socialism works when the government isn't corrupt... Say Denmark.
>>1246316
there's no difference in marxism between a "worker class" and a "middle class". there is just the bourgeoisie and proletariat.
the proletariat consists of anyone who doesn't own the means of production, which ranges from poorfags like janitors and McDonald's employees to middle class professionals like engineers and accountants and doctors.
the bourgeoisie is the class which owns the means of production and can employ the proletariat, taking the product of their labor and thereby their surplus value. these are the large factory owners, the big CEOs, the big property owners, the business owners, etc. they don't live off labor income (like an engineer or a tradesman), they live off rent and interest and surplus value (taken from their workers).
>>1246316
This is historically really inaccurate anon.
>>1246316
workers don't determine the outcome of class warfare. The only important question is "who does the middle class side with"
And right now, the middle class life is just way too blissfull for it to side with the workers.
Individualism for the middle class is liberating. Individualism for the working class is a burden.
>>1246342
Name one
>>1246339
>ze workers
University educated individuals would stand to make loads of money in the west, it's not exactly that unskilled labourers are important in terms of brain drain.
>the capitalists should be the ones fearing that their workers might escape their system of oppression to live in workers paradise don't you think?
No because capitalists just bring in foreigners to do their jobs anyway.
They are however very worried about them creating a worker's paradise right there.
>>1246342
The Bolshevik Revolution was financed and supported by Imperial Germany.
And the Allied intervention in Russia wasn't done in order to stop the Red Army, but in order to get Allied material and personnel (like the Czechoslovak Legions) out of that clusterfuck. A lot of White Russians were mad at Woodrow Wilson because he didn't allow American troops to directly find the Red Army, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force_Siberia
>General Graves believed their mission in Siberia was to provide protection for American-supplied property and to help the Czechoslovak Legions evacuate Russia, and that it did not include fighting against the Bolsheviks.
>>1246338
Do workers own the means of production in venezuela anon?
Literally the only argument against communism i see is pretending that communists defend regimes they don't.
>>1246344
Denmark is not socialist, and have never claimed to be socialist.
http://www.thelocal.dk/20151101/danish-pm-in-us-denmark-is-not-socialist
Venezuela is socialist, actually, it claims to be The socialism of the 21st century.
And it is an abject failure.
>>1246366
>Venezuela is socialist
It literally isn't, 70% of the economy is private. Seriously, if you can recognize Denmark isn't socialist it isn't too much of a leap to see that Venezuela is not socialist. But of course your logic has nothing to do with who controls the means of production but rather "One is good and one sucks, therefore the good one is capitalist and the shitty one is socialist".
>socialism
>in a 3rd world country
yeah no shit it failed
it could only work in a developed economy like USA or France or Japan
that's why China is so intent on developing it's economy using traditional capitalist means before it can go full socialist and then let that lead it into communism
>>1246359
>Do workers own the means of production in venezuela anon?
They were moving towards that. This was a huge part of their failure, since factories and farms under "communal" control simply couldn't produce as much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivarian_Circles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_Communal_Councils
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colectivo_(Venezuela)
>>1246357
You sound very worried that the working class rejects your frustrated ideology. How are you going to get revenge on those spoiled rich kids?
>>1246351
Do you know how to use google? Pic related.
>>1246358
Germany had an interest in bolsheviks succeeding because they were against the war and willing to get out of it in ridiculously bad terms (see Brest-Litovsk). It's not some retarded conspiracy.
>And the Allied intervention in Russia wasn't done in order to stop the Red Army, but in order to get Allied material and personnel (like the Czechoslovak Legions) out of that clusterfuck.
It's a mix of both. Kennan explains it pretty well in Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin.
>>1246385
I am because I think it's very important that class solidarity happens and the world becomes communist.
>How are you going to get revenge on those spoiled rich kids?
wut
>>1246348
This is wrong though.
Marx considered the completely impoverished a threat to the cause of Communism, which is why the proletariat ONLY includes workers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat
>>1246380
>"Let me tell you about your country."
>>1246383
Political gangs aren't workers with means of production in their hands anon.
>>1246393
You must endure this comrade, for the sake of the world revolution! You're not a reactionary are you?
>>1246393
Being from Venezuela does not give you magical expertise in what is and is not socialism.
Particularly since Venezuela is not socialism so you would not have a frame of reference.
Look... When automation replaces 50% or more of jobs, then we will have to consider socialism or communism.
And if you think you will still have a job in the next 20 years, you are going to be in for an unfortunate surprise.
>>1246411
Not him, but even if that were true, it is the state's commitment towards Socialism that is it's problem.
It's refusal to use any oil wealth to create infrastructure, or prop up any new industry, coupled with a refusal to increase the amount of capital investment in the country, is the reason it's a shithole, and that's because people are so committed to this bullshit ideal of socialism.
>>1246411
The Venezuelan government claims to be socialist, the Danish government doesn't. That was my fucking point.
10 years ago people like you were saying that Venezuela was socialist. Guys like Noam Chomsky, Tariq Ali, Oliver Stone, they couldn't shup up about how great Hugo Chávez was and how his revolution showed a way to the world.
Now that the whole thing collapsed you pretend it isn't about you, while the people suffer. And that answer the question: "why do the poor ones do not support full communism". Because they can't flee it when it arrives.
>>1246428
Sergio Leone makes this point nicely in this scene.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd3JrFXLrA0
>>1246411
There will never be "real" socialism you dumb fuck. There will just be dumb governments attempting and failing to implement socialism, resulting in poverty and backwardness. And there will be kids on 4chan complaining that it is the capitalists' fault.
>>1246065
communism was ONLY possible because of western meddling. Lets see the reds win the civil war with Lenin still in Switzerland
>>1246065
The Soviet Union may have survived longer, perhaps even outlasted the United States, but it's doubtful it would have attained actual Communism. If it was actually on the course to doing so, it would have done so much sooner.
>>1246428
So does the Portuguese government, this for certain does not make Portugal socialist.
>Now that the whole thing collapsed you pretend it isn't about you, while the people suffer.
10 years ago I was 9 and probably could not point to Venezuela on a map. Believing me when I say I'm not contradicting myself pretending to believe Venezuela isn't socialist. It's not a grand conspiracy to institute world communism despite being fully aware of alleged failures, I simply recognize that it isn't socialist.
>>1246428
The venezuelan government claims to be democratic. The north korean government claims to be republican. As did the UUSR.
But we agree that they aren't right? Nice doublethink.
Also, in defense of chomsky, he criticized chavez long before the crisis in venezuela started.
>>1246437
The catalonian revolution was real socialism though, or pretty close to it.
>>1246437
But there was, it was called the Eastern bloc and their socialism still survives to an extent in Cuba.
This is real socialism, it's quite crude but it's definitely legit.
>>1246411
people like you need to be gassed
Daily reminder.
>>1246455
>straw man
>meme pic as an argument
I see /pol/ has arrived.
>>1246455
Don't forget the Vietnamese boat people.
Solzhenitsyn became persona non grata in Western intellectual circles when he rightly pointed out that the liberals and progressives who opposed the Vietnam War for humanitarian reasons were blind and deaf to the suffering of South Vietnamese people under communism.
>>1246454
Not an argument.
>>1246459
>implying it's a strawman
I'd challenge every hipster commie fuck like you, and every other liberal, to say with a straight face that you would rather live in East-Germany or Cuba, than the U.S or West-Germany.
It's hard to let go of your Iphone, but lets be honest here, none of you fucks know how it is to live in a country like that, and you're just bourgeois romantics.
>>1246459
Hello.
>>1246455
Pretty sure these guys said exactly that.
>>1246472
correct, but I think you'll find that I'm not wrong
>>1246479
>Anarchists going to East-Germany
Boy did they have a wake-up call. I bet they were all employed by the Stasi as well. Ironic.
>>1246475
>I'd challenge every hipster commie fuck like you, and every other liberal, to say with a straight face that you would rather live in East-Germany or Cuba, than the U.S or West-Germany.
Pretty retarded challenge considering i don't defend cuba or communist east germany, and neither do 99% of communists i read on /his/. I'd rather live in the freer country, so any of the later.
>>1246461
>Supported the Vietnam war
>Called others blind to suffering.
>>1246475
I would.
East Germany looks fucking sick.
>>1246487
The thing is, you probably would defend East Germany in 1949 and Cuba in 1961, just like most socialists supported Venezuela in 2002.
Of course, now that these countries have gone to shit, it's easy to distance yourself and say "I don't defend" them. Harder is to ask yourself why the countries people like you support keep going to shit, and rationalize it as just a coincidence or a conspiracy by the evil capitalists.
>>1246487
And yet you call the picture I posted a strawman, which it wasn't, and it isn't, as the fleeing of people from several Communist states throughout history illustrates.
>>1246491
Venezuela and North Korea await for you.
>>1246506
Neither of those are socialist.
>>1246496
>The thing is, you probably would defend East Germany in 1949 and Cuba in 1961, just like most socialists supported Venezuela in 2002.
I'm pretty sure libertarian socialists were opposed to bolsheviks from the first moment, and faced them successively in the ussr, kronstadt, ukraine, spain, etc. So no.
>>1246498
You are misrepresenting the opinion of the people you are debating, literally a straw man.
also
>communist states
>>1246488
Anti-War activists were blind to suffering imposed by the North Vietnamese during and after the war. Is that even controversial?
>>1246532
Yes because the "suffering" imposed by the North Vietnamese is totally trivial compared to the suffering caused by the USA.
Literally, if you're going to argue from the amount of suffering that was being caused you're a fool to say the Vietnam war was worth fighting.
>>1246511
Oh but Denmark is right? ;^)
>>1246542
No.
>>1246550
>He doesn't know libertarian socialism is just libertariansim.
>He doesn't know Rothbard and his child-slavery loving m8s openly stole the term.
>>1246554
You didn't answer me. How were anarchists organizations with militias imposing communism different from an authoritarian socialist state?
>>1246564
Because the state is a tool for oppression of one class by another.
Using statist tactics to oppress the bourgeoisie is no crime, the goal is to liberate the proletariat after all.
>>1246564
>If you didn't want to join the collective you were given some land but only as much as you could work yourself. You were not allowed to employ workers. Not only production was affected, distribution was on the basis of what people needed. In many areas money was abolished. People come to the collective store (often churches which had been turned into warehouses) and got what was available. If there were shortages rationing would be introduced to ensure that everyone got their fair share. But it was usually the case that increased production under the new system eliminated shortages.
>>1246540
Are you sure? American strategic bombing in Vietnam killed no more than 200.000 people. This is the same number of people who died at sea trying to escape Vietnam in boats.
The Phoenix Program, which aimed to persecute Vietnamese opposition to the United States, killed at most 40.000 people. Meanwhile the North Vietnamese took more than a million people to "re-education camps" were at least 165.000 died.
Of course, you can shift the scales by attributing every single military and civilian death of the war to the United States itself, but that ignores the fact that it was North Vietnam that invaded the South, and not the opposite, so they are just as guilty of any "suffering" caused by the war itself.
>>1246575
>USA killed more
>Somehow the North Vietnamese are still the bad guys.
>>1246571
Where are you quoting from? Is this in Ukraine? I'm interested in reading about it.
>>1246286
Workers democratically control the means of production
Money, state, and class are no longer present
People having genuine fucking empathy for other people, not viewing them as another tool for capital and wealth accumulation.
Of course these things do need to be fought for, and will require a massive change in societal and economic structures, but with the rate at which labor is being automated, it isn't out of the question to theorize that these changes may happen in the coming years/decades.
>>1246584
reading is hard
>>1246588
It's about revolutionary catalonia (Conlon). Unfortunately, the information about ukraine is sparse and contradictory, so it's hard to know how things really went there.
>>1246554
Besides, when did I ever mention Rothbard or discuss who invented the word Libertarian? Strawmanning much?
I simply ask how anarchist organizations imposing their ideology by the arms are different from the authoritarianism they supposedly despise.
>>1246605
It's because you said it's like something to the effect of hot-ice.
My point was that libertarianism simply is socialism, it's more so cold-ice than hot-ice. I just also had to make the aside that the only reason it's seen as right wing on contrary to socialism is because of Rothbard&co.
>>1246602
You can get a glimpse of who the Makhnovites really were (aka common bandits) seeing how they treated the Russian Mennonites (who were actual anarchists).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Mennonite
>Nestor Makhno's anarchist army generally targeted Mennonites because they were thought of as "Kulaks" and an entity generally more advanced and wealthy than the surrounding Ukrainian peasants. The Mennonites Germanic background also served to inflame negative sentiment during the period of revolution. It is also rumored that Makhno himself had served on a Mennonite estate in childhood and harbored negative feelings based on treatment he received while employed there. Hundreds of Mennonites were murdered, robbed, imprisoned and raped during this period, and villages including (and around) Chortitza, Zagradovka and Nikolaipol were damaged and destroyed
hey man thats commie talk
>>1246609
I'm not saying it's not the case, but again, there are contradicting sources.
>>1246626
>It doesn't sound libertarian.
Libertarian was always against money and private enterprises retard. It's not my fault if you got brainwashed by newspeak.
>>1246626
I never said it's not a state.
I'm saying it's a temporary state designed to oppress the bourgeoisie.
>>1246615
Well, I suppose I can't argue with that.
>>1246631
I only said that Libertarian Socialism is an oxymoron, since the implementation of their goals requires an authoritarian state, which is something they claim to be against, retard. I never said that the original definition was the capitalistic one. Why do you insist with that strawman?
>>1246591
Go away evil dogger.
>>1246667
>since the implementation of their goals requires an authoritarian state
But that's false. The people can decide what to accept and not to accept democratically. Just like ancapistan won't allow murderers, libertarians are against wage slavery.
>>1246348
But anyone can buy shares in a company. In a lot of capitalist countries, you are legally required to put some 9f your income into a superannuation/pension fund. Almost everyone owns a small proportion of the means of production.
>>1246328
This. And communism is pure failure by definition.
>>1246236
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4
Obligatory Bezmenov post
Describes the KGB's operations in establishing a fifth column in various countries
Did your Pravda subscription run out pinko?
>>1246687
how do you enforce the decisions made democratically if you don't have a legitimate monopoly on force (i.e. a state)?
t. National Syndicalist
>>1246786
If someone tries to enslave someone, people will decide how to act and how to enforce the decision. A monopoly is not necessary to support the decision of a majority in a society where power is not unequal.
Would Fascism have succeeded if Western capitalist countries stopped their meddling and trying to make it fail?
>>1246824
>meddling
nigga, U.S. oil companies sold oil to Nazi Germany and Nationalist Spain.
>>1246808
How then would this not devolve into a series of fractured republics and patriotism on a city-state level by the like-minded who don't want to live with the fuckwits in the other community who disagree with you?
>>1246832
and blowing up the anschluss that should have been
don't forget that
>>1246832
Just forget all those hundreds of tonnes of bombs dropped on Germany and Italy.
>>1246844
Just forget all those American volunteers killed by Nationalist tanks
>>1246065
No. Communism is a meme system based on pure anachronisms. It was an obsolete ideology in Marx's time.
>>1246852
>my 6 banigoonillion
>>1246837
If you are referring specifically to the issue of wage slavery, i don't see why a worker would live in a place where he has to rent himself if he has access to means of production in another one. But most issues aren't as divisive: your scenario can be applied to today's society and yet people don't (usually/massively) flee from countries that voted laws opposing to their views.
>>1246859
Oh, I see what this is, it's a butthurt /pol/ack, fulfilling his patriotic duty to defend the fatherland!
>>1246179
>Expropiate half of the countries industry with 1/3 of the votes
>Congress ask him to resing with 2/3 of the votes
>He doesnt
Shit. Now you realize that Allende didn't even have the support of his own people and just used violence to get away with his stupid ideas.
>>1246862
They don't flee from countries with laws opposing to their views because their are stable opposition methods within liberal western democracies, which is why the republicans can cause gridlock when they're in the minority and block legislation they don't like (or is unfavorable to their voter base) and the democrats can do the same.
>>1246866
Oh, I see what this is, it's a butthurt /shitskin/ fulfilling his shilling duty to defend Soros and the niggerkikes
>>1246869
I didn't bring up Dresden, that was you my good /pol/ack. You did not refute the claim about oil companies providing support for Germany or Spain, or provide evidence to the contrary, instead you tried to divert the argument to Dresden, as most /pol/acks tend to when any discussion about WWII arises.
>>1246344
>Denmark
>Socialists
Kek. You retards are so funny.
>All this failing countries that had planned economies werent socialists because "insert random reasons",but this capitalist country is socialist,regardless of having the most developed market economy in the world.
>>1246359
>Do workers own the means of production in venezuela anon?
The state controls 90% of the economy (oil and its derivates). The private sector are just groceries stores and the like. So yeah,Venezuela is more socialistic than 99% of the world.
>>1246875
I didn't specifically mention Dresdon at all. When I said dropping tonnes of bombs that was a reference to the strategic bombings of both nations and as part of the greater war against them. Are you really that fucking stupid that if a person says America was against Germany you automatically think they're some buthurt cretin whining about war crimes. Leveling entire cities and forcing a country to capitulate through war outweighs simply trading in fuel.
>>1246870
Cool, so why are people not fleeing from western democracies where gridlock isn't possible? Or more importantly, why isn't the majority that got gridlocked not fleeing?
Anyway, your argument is too hypothetical, detached from reality, and irrelevant (who cares?). I don't say that as an insult, i'm just not very interested in the course the discussion took.
>>1246380
>It literally isn't, 70% of the economy is private.
No. 70% of the jobs are in the private sector,but most of the economy (oil production and refinery) is publicly owned.
>>1246883
>Do workers own the means of production in venezuela anon?
>The state controls 90% of the economy
So we agree that the answer is no, cool.
>>1246381
>that's why China is so intent on developing it's economy using traditional capitalist means before it can go full socialist and then let that lead it into communism
>Believing this crap.
You commies are dumb as hell. China will never go full commie.
>>1246875
Not the guy you were responding to here, I'm the one who brought up dresden.
By your logic the land-leases sent to soyuz sovetskikh was a support of communist ideal.
Issue is:
Economic Interest does not equal Socio-political interest. The fact is that the western capitalists countries fought the fascists with a burning passion and extinguished that particular shit-tier social experiment. That is a much bigger interaction than trade.
>>1246419
>When automation replaces 50% or more of jobs, then we will have to consider socialism or communism.
This ludite bullcrap again. New jobs are constantly made up.
>>1246884
America and the other allied states only confronted Germany and Italy after they had become a sizable threat against the financial and imperial interests of those nations. To claim that America went to war with Germany out of some desire to destroy and level German and Italian cities cannot be supported with substantial evidence. Are you so stupid as to latch on to the acts of war and claim they were the desire of it's perpetrators?
>>1246065
No and Marx himself explained the reason why communism could never succeed without realizing it.
Infrastructure determines superstructure. Society always determines the individual. As an analyst Marx realized this (Basis and Überbau), but as a social and political activist he did not. He thought he could change the infrastructure (from capitalism to communism) by appealing to the superstructure ("Einsicht in die Notwendigkeit macht frei"), because in the end he was an idealist who believed in free will.
Societal structures never changed because they never had to, capitalism worked just fine. And as long as a system works, any attempt to change it by force (dictatorship) will end in failure.
Communism was doomed from the start.
>>1246893
I didn't say that America's war with Germany and Italy was purely out of malice. I simply said that America was meddling with Italian and German affairs by going to war with them. If America didn't bomb the third Reich to the Stone Age would it have been successful?
Sure. Just look at Brave New World. It's not a healthy society though.
>>1246092
Private ownership of the Means of Production characterized with production for a market rather than for profit.
>>1246887
Social ownership may refer to public ownership. There lots of brands of socialism
>>1246893
No shit, who would try and make that argument unless you're the tippiest of natsoc fedoras. The point made when the guy said "Would Fascism have succeeded if Western Capitalist countries stopped their meddling and trying to make it fail?" is to point out how ridiculous it is to say 'well those big bad capitalists crushed our poor little workers state!' instead of showing it for what it is, which is the meeting of two opposing geopolitical interests and the stronger one coming out on top.
This is the conclusion that me and some other guy just made you come to in regards to world war ii, the same applies to gommunism.
>>1246897
They meddled in the affairs, after the assistance provided to this meddling proved dangerous to the allies interests. Irregardless of the methods employed by America and others, the goal was the same, the defeat and removal of fascist regime, and the restoration of allied hegemony.
>>1246898
Brave New World is a critique of capitalism though. Huxley even says in the intro that he should have put a kropotkian society (aka anarcho communists) as the good alternative to both primitives and consumerism.
>>1246901
That wasn't my question.
>>1246896
Not too sure about that "doomed from the start" claim. For starters, the infrastructure and superstructure continually feed off of each other, each influencing the individual a significant amount. The main problem is, though, that once people become aware of these relations, they become empowered with the ability to break them down.
Human behavior isn't set in stone, and when it comes to societal structure, the most dangerous threat is education.
>>1246908
What was then?
>>1246916
"Do workers own the means of production in venezuela anon?"
>>1246080
And vice versa. Looks like the more adaptable system won.
>>1246065
>communism
>succeeding
NEVER
BEEN
TRIED
>>1246919
You can justify that public ownership is workers ownership. It perfectly answer your questions
>>1246942
No you can't. Public ownership covers direct worker control or under the control of a worker controlled state, of which Venezuela was neither.
>>1246942
Discursively, maybe. Factually, no. Workers don't control shit in venezuela.
I'm going to sleep now, anon.
>>1246944
>What is representation
And worker controlled state is a very abstract term that can be interpreted from multiple perspectives.
>>1246950
Right but it's quite obvious that the republic that is Venezuela has little to no capacity for being controlled by workers, due to it's republican nature.
There's a way to do representative democracy, and Venezuela does not demonstrate that.
>worker controlled state is a very abstract term
"dictatorship of the proletariat" is an abstract term. A worker controlled state IRL can really only take on the form of some sort of Syndicalist Trade-Union controlled direct democracy. Anything else doesn't make sense.
>>1246257
At this rate it is only a matter of time for Canada to go full commie.
>>1246907
Eh, you still would have needed the same style of social engineering to get the end product, which was pretty disgusting. Even if it is a critique of capitalism, he painted communism in a pretty bad light.
>>1246961
>direct democracy.
That is a meme
>>1246976
And so is a "worker controlled state."
>>1246986
Yes. That is why socialism is huge fucking meme
>>1246995
No, not all transitional revolutionary governments involve a state. Anarcho-Syndicalism certainly does not involve a state, and would function as the governmental and economic basis for a transitional system.
Anarcho-Syndicalism isn't the only option, but the best options are the ones where all societal elements beside the most basic social contract is left up to the citizens to decide on and organize.
>>1246453
Idiot.
The Eastern Bloc has collapsed and Cuba is going capitalist again.
>>1247013
The unions would just become Crypto states.
>>1246487
>MY SPECIFIC, PERFECT, ENTIRELY FALLIABLE BRAND OF COMMUNISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED.
Memes have arrived and they are fucking real.
How can you even argue with these people?
>>1247013
The unions would just become Crypto states
>>1247052
>How can you even argue with these people?
there's a Portuguese guy on /pol/ who trips as "/leftypol/" and when he argues, he just continually redefines his beliefs until you're attacking a meaningless but unassailable strawman of socialist thought where everything good about socialism is true and everything bad is false
>>1246914
I disagree there. The function of education is to maintain the current structures, not to change them. Hence why schoolbooks work on narratives rather than objectivity.
You will not find
>There was a power vacuum in Germany after WWI that left multiple political groups fighting each other. The most effective one came out on top.
but you will find
>Hitler took over Germany because he was evil.
in schoolbooks. Because the infrastructure determines what education society gets, not the other way around.
Depending on their individual circumstances, some individuals might change their views on things, like some people who read Marx's Communist Manifesto and decided to become politically active. But not all who read Marx become communists. Not even most who read Marx become communists, only very few.
Name an example where the infrastructure of a society changed based on the education of the people. When there was change it was either:
1) the current infrastructure was destroyed and replaced, e.g. during Colonialism
2) the process went on over a long period of time, with the education system adapting to this change rather than being the cause of it.
When it was as individual forcing his own new idea on society, it always failed in the long run (e.g. Stalin).
One or few individuals with an idea will never be able to change societal structures based on this insight alone.
The Roman Republic did not end because Augustus one day had the idea to declare himself emperor. The change into an Empire was a long process that can be traced back over individual warlords becoming more important (Caesar, Sulla, Marius, etc).
When it comes to societal structure, the individual cannot change anything. Yes, there is feedback from superstructure to infrastructure. But infrastructure only changes if it stops working due to new circumstances. Capitalism works and that is why communism failed no matter how much people where educated on it.
>>1247027
People have been saying this for years.
I have yet to see Cuba magically going full Deng Xiaoping.
>>1246165
>what is the long march through the institutions
>>1247053
Not if they depended on each other for producing.
Why would that even happen? People would be happiest by cooperating. If the unions are set up initially with cooperation in mind, they would never deviate seeing that coercion and violence are simply much harder ways to go about acquiring resources.
>>1247059
I'm not saying school education. Education in general. As we show people and help them understand how their societies work (and have been working for millennia,) they'll be able to identify and break through established structural behaviors.
A few years ago I called myself a Communist without knowing the slightest bit about Materialism. An army of people like that is dangerous. What you need is an army of people who know what they're fighting for in terms of substance.
>>1247096
>If the unions are set up initially with cooperation in mind, they would never deviate seeing that coercion and violence are simply much harder ways to go about acquiring resources.
>>1247116
Do you think conflict just happens? Really? Do you think conflict is simply inherent to being human? Humans are not rational actors, however, they like doing the least amount of work possible. If a country we wanted to annex just gave themselves up for annexation, would we invade just to invade? No. People always take the path of LEAST resistance when it comes to acquiring resources. The path of least resistance is cooperation.
>>1247128
Continuation - The reason why it sounds ridiculous and fantastical is because it really is that simple. You would never do more work than you need to for no benefit, and the same applies for all the other 7 billion people on the planet.
>>1247096
>As we show people and help them understand how their societies work (and have been working for millennia,) they'll be able to identify and break through established structural behaviors.
>An army of people like that is dangerous.
Do you have any actual examples for this ever happening?
>>1247147
The problem with that line of thinking is that we've never seen societies with 99% literacy, near-instant communication, and access to almost any intellectual resource available ever before in history. It's never been possible to give people the tools and to communicate with diverse groups of people over long distances before to actually achieve this.
>>1247155
>The problem with that line of thinking is that it is based on empirical evidence rather than speculation.
Ok.
>>1246065
Communism is a RESPONSE to capitalism. It's like saying "would the weapon created to destroy capitalism have succeeded if it didn't have to deal with capitalism?"
>>1247196
You're tying to find evidence for something that couldn't have happened before. All I am doing is speculating. You seem to forget that we live in quite a unique era when it comes to information availability.
Seriously, at what other points in history was information this easily available AND communication was this readily accessible? This has never happened before.
I think you could make an argument for this being the cause of the recent attitude change towards homosexuals and, increasingly, transgenders. People see problems now that they weren't aware of/hadn't considered/didn't care about and have the tools available to realize that something is wrong with the treatment of these people, and therefore cause a minor change in society's structure. Why couldn't this happen with more major changes?
>>1247060
Then prepare your popcorn because if this is what building communism means then I am the Pope of Rome.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/cuba-moves-to-legalize-small-and-medium-size-businesses-1464132702
>>1247281
kek
I don't think communism is attainable in our current state of developement, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were successfully implemented in far far away future where human labour is no longer requiered in order to sustain our civilization.
Such time might never come, might be unachieveable and even if it were it might never materalize thanks to external factors, but I think the idea of economical equality for everyone might be a possibility and not pure utopia, however, that doesn't mean that all humans would be the same, there will always be hierarchies, there just wouldn't be economical one anymore.
>>1247128
>Do you think conflict just happens? Really? Do you think conflict is simply inherent to being human?
Yes
> Humans are not rational actors, however, they like doing the least amount of work possible.
Debatable.
>If a country we wanted to annex just gave themselves up for annexation, would we invade just to invade? No.
You just made that up.
>People always take the path of LEAST resistance when it comes to acquiring resources. The path of least resistance is cooperation.
No. Violent was have been used since forever. Your post is totally ahistorical
>>1247136
>You would never do more work than you need to for no benefit
Yeah,as honour hasnt been fetishized for over 2 centuries and was basically that. Saying "it is common sense dude "is not an argument
>>1247489
Honour is a benefit that translates to status that translates to power. Are you dense?
It's fundamentally flawed.
See pic.
>>1247556
Your point? A moral system based around honour requires way more sacrifice than one based on nihilism. Your whole poinr is dumb shut with 0 evidence. War,slavery and pñunder have been part of human history,and a big one, and ignoring it all together to fit your ideology is just dumb.
>>1247576
My point was honour is also a benefit, I don't know what the fuck are you blabbering about.
>>1247564
what would a genuine hero of the downtrodden look like
sabotaging communism is easy
too many sociopaths to bribe
>>1247281
That's exactly what Lenin did in the NEP and for certain he was not a capitalist.
>>1246065
>Would Communism have succeeded if
No
>>1247615
>My point was honour is also a benefit
No. In most cases it wasnt
>>1246145
communism just failed and failed again and once again failed
>>1247692
Name a communist state than wasn't directly dependent on the Soviet Union that failed.
> Commie leaders consistently choose to live in large palaces, not in shitty commieblocks with the proletariat
> "Communism failed because MURRICA disintegrated the inevitable Communist revolution that is guaranteed to us by the prophetic wisdom of Hegel-Marx!"
It's a fraud ideology.
Dialectics are a disgrace.
>>1247229
I can only recommend you to read up on Durkheim and what he described as social emergence.
You are assuming that the lgbt movement is the cause of a change in attitude towards homosexuality, rather than its effect. You can read up in Durkheim why this is wrong. Another good article on a similar topic is "why women left home." Sociopolitical movements are always the effect of societal change, never the cause.
>>1247418
So what should we do then?
>>1247757
I don't think we should do much of anything, just trying to further our scientific and technological progress like we're currently doing. These processes have huge longitude and we cannot be sure what to anticipate in the future and while it's fun to theorycraft about the possible outcomes it's all just speculation in the end.
>>1246211
So when a communist overthrows a government, killing thousands in the process, it's called a "revolution", but when a capitalist destroys a genuinely oppressive totalitarian regime that millions are actively trying to escape from at all times, it's "destabilization."
Commies are so fucking stupid. Socialism will never work because it would need to exist in a vacuum with inhabitants having hundreds of thousands of years of evolution encouraging competitive and selfish behaviors magically programmed out. Any further discussion about such an idea past this realization is nothing but masturbatory indulgence in pure fantasy.
TL;DR You're a fucking idiot.
>>1247715
nice no true scotsman fallacy
this is always your entire argument, pathetic really
>>1247665
If really that's what he did, then he wasn't a communist either.
>>1247715
Ethiopia, Somalia, Angola, China before Deng cleaned up house...
>>1247759
You seem to be having this notion that human progress is lineal and the current civilization is going to last forever. The problem with this thinking is that experience shows otherwise. There is no evidence this civilization isn't going to collapse the same way as all the others did before. In fact the sign are showing that we are nearing the end of this cycle.
>>1247947
What signs are you talking about? Also, yes, society will be shifting as it has in the past, that's kind of what I was alluding to when I considered communism as possible future outcome.
Rome has fallen, Greece has fallen,Imperialist Britain has fallen, Soviet Union has fallen, things get different and change, we have now representative democracy instead of kingdoms, yet I don't think that the products and process of scientific endeavour can be easily stopped anymore, that'd require huge scale catastrophe that'd pretty much destroy our society as whole, which it'd just come as collateral damage to utter destruction and possibly end of our planet.
>All this Lefty butthurt
>>1247052
>>1248204
the thing that pisses me off about communists is that at this point, they don't care about communism working to help people, they just want it to work so that they're right, and fuck everyone who stands in the way, including the people it's supposed to help but actually just destroys
remove intellectual
>>1246082
Under-rated post
>>1246065
No, nazi germany wouldn't succeed either.
>>1246065
>USSR fails, Russia and all satellites(Every single one)
"Real Communism has never been tested"
"Communism failed because the Capitalists were mean to them"
ok
>>1246609
Makhno revolted against the Germanic ruling elite:
>At the age of 11 Makhno began working as an ox drover on the Janzen estate in Silberfeld. Here he began to develop a hatred for the German ruling classes. In his memoirs he writes: "At this time I began to experience anger, envy and even hatred towards the landowner [Janzen] and especially towards his children - those young slackers who often strolled past me sleek and healthy, well-dressed, well-groomed and scented; while I was filthy, dressed in rags, barefoot, and reeked of manure from cleaning the calves' barn."[17] Makhno also worked at the Mennonite owned Kroeger plant in Gulyai-Polye.
>Throughout the civil war, Mahkno and his troops raided many German and Mennonite colonies and estates in the Katerynoslav Oblast. The larger rural landholdings of Mennonites were prominent targets due to their wealth and proximity to Gulyai-Polye.[18] The Schönfeld colony, located adjacent to the Huliaipole area, was unique in that it consisted predominantly of Mennonite estate settlements across an expansive area. Mennonite colonies were targeted by Makhno because, as owners of prosperous farms and estates, they were considered kulaks - wealthy farmers that exploited the labour of the surrounding, mostly Ukrainian, peasantry. Ukrainians were traditionally hired by wealthy Mennonites as house servants and farmhands
literally Germans ruled over eastern Europe
they were the aristocracy, the tsars, the landowners, the factory owners
the natives were the oppressed slaves/serfs
Ethnic Germans and Mennonites themselves, having been stripped of their wealth and property during the revolution. Some Mennonites accompanied punitive detachments against the peasantry, which greatly contributed to the growing bitterness between Germans/Mennonites and Ukrainians.
most of europe was under Germanic ruling class for almost 2000 years
same story throughout most of europe, including eastern europe
>>1246591
>money, state and class are no longer present
>people having empathy for other people
What the fuck is this cringy shit ?
If you want other people go give money for charities, impose your retarded economic ideas on the rest of the world ?
>>1249025
>If you want to help other people go give money to charities , why impose your retarded economic ideas on the rest of the world ?
fixed
>>1248995
pull up a definition of communism used by marx
compare and contrast it with marxist-leninism, maoism, etc
you'll be disappointed with the number of direct contradictions of fundamental communist ideas that you find in these ideologies.
but then again, the usa isn't "capitalist", nor is britain or the rest of the west ; sweden isn't socialist and china isn't even vaguely communist anymore. but hey, why ruin a good fedora rant about the gommies with sticky icky facts ?
for extra fun, compare and contrast the communist and capitalist utopias. you'll find an amusing number of similar ideas and goals.
no I'm not doing the work for you. inb4 meme retorts like fedoraposting and "not an argument".
>>1249107
I does not really matter what your ideology says.
What matters is the empirical evidence about what is practically possible.
>>1249025
If I give a loaf of bread to a starving man it doesn't stop hunger or poverty. He takes the bread and eats it, maybe he survives a bit longer, but the conditions that brought him into poverty and starvation still exist, all I'll have done is let him suffer a little while longer.
>What the fuck is this cringy shit ?
Oh right, I forgot this is 4chan. KEKY KEKY KEK HANG BLACKS AND SPICS AND JEWS. FOR THE GLORY OF THE WHITE RACE.
edgy enough for you?
>>1246450
and revolutionary Catalonia lasted for a whopping 3 years. Socialism truly is the greatest system for mankind's progress.
>>1246065
If capitalists were not capitalists, then maybe communism could have succeeded. But capitalists are by definition social darwinists. If communism can only succeed in a vacuum, then what use is it?
Communism killed itself so no.
>>1246194
Great picture except for the alllivesmatter part.
BLM is a racist hate group, nothing wrong in fighting against them.
>>1246755
Not to mention computers, land etc. If going by the strict definition that bourgeoisie = owner of a means of production, pretty much everyone in the west is a bourgeisie
