What's wrong with Communism? Why does everyone hate it so much?
>>496860
>What's wrong with Communism?
It's an unachievable fantasy
>Why does everyone hate it so much?
Attempts to implement it led to the death of roughly 100 million people during the past century and the suffering of hundreds of millions more.
>>496872
/thread
>>496872
I think you're wrong.
The people who hate communism, except for ukrainians, don't really care about the millions of deaths due to mismanagement in the "real socialist" countries.
They would dislike it just as much if the dead were numbered in thousands.
They hate it because it puts their way of life, and the beliefs they hold for truth, into question.
>>496890
It puts their life into question, not only their way of life.
>>496890
>The people who hate communism, except for ukrainians, don't really care about the millions of deaths due to mismanagement in the "real socialist" countries.
I know a cambodian guy whose whole family was massacred. Surprisingly, he does seem to care a bit.
I wish you commie pseudo-intellectuals were deported to north korea where your beliefs are aligned with their state policy...
>>496892
any decent historian or economist will tell you that even for western working class, the soviet union and other socialist countries acted as an effective and relatively succesful model of industrialization for poor countries and also acted as a very important counter weight to capitalist power in the places where there wasn't any revolutionary possibilities, incrementing the negotiating power of unions and the working class in general because of its mere presence, that of real socialism in the world. The reason is simple, the danger compelled the western bourgeoisie to give out more to their own worker demands, to prevent them from becoming socialists, a real danger for example in South America where the US manipulated politics and governments and killed thousands.
There was a real fight for socialism in many places in the XXth century after WWII but this was a trend that reversed in the 80s with Reagan, Tatcher, etc., when it became obvious that the soviets would fall and it became to negotiate the conditions of the post-war. Ever since then capitalism has had almost no resistance and that's why we have ever more poverty, inequality, etc.
>>496860
Communism is fundamentally unfit for human nature.
>>496860
Đụ mẹ cộng sản.
It means "Fuck Communism" in my language
>>496914
>Tatcher
Thatcher.
Don't spill your seed on the ground, start an on-topic thread.
>>496890
>but muh perfect version of communism has never been implemented
kill yourself you gommie faggot
>>496914
>any decent historian or economist will tell you
Noam Chomsky is neither a decent historian nor a decent economist.
>the soviet union and other socialist countries acted as an effective and relatively succesful model of industrialization for poor countries
They were seen as an effective model because of their incredible propaganda apparatus. Heck the massive famines of 1933 were unknown to the world until the late 1980s. If the world had known the truth about living conditions in the USSR it wouldn't have been held in very high esteem.
>incrementing the negotiating power of unions and the working class in general because of its mere presence,
[citation needed]
How is Pol Pot killing 1/4 of cambodians bolstering the power of unions in the west?
>The reason is simple, the danger compelled the western bourgeoisie to give out more to their own worker demands, to prevent them from becoming socialists,
[citation needed]
>where the US manipulated politics and governments and killed thousands.
The USSR killed millions in south america.
>capitalism has had almost no resistance and that's why we have ever more poverty, inequality, etc.
The world has never been wealthier as since the fall of communism.
>you will never ever hang all commies like the vermin they are
Why even live?
Venezuelans are happy now because the communism regime in their country is nearly collapsing, why your fat dumbass still want that evil theory to your country ?
>>496914
>any decent historian or economist
I'm an economist, but I guess the fact that I disagree means im not a 'decent economist'. Which is ofcourse very convenient for you.
> capitalism has had almost no resistance and that's why we have ever more poverty, inequality, etc.
It's an undeniable empirical fact that we have less poverty than any other point in the history of mankind.
But I guess being aware of the data means I'm not a 'decent economist'.
>>496940
25 year rule
>>496939
Hanging them will only turn them into martyrs.
I support forced deportation to north korea.
Shit doesn't work senpai
>>496910
>commie
>state
>>496860
The liberation fronts often times take control of the means of production and "forget" to hand them back to the people.
>>496915
this is such a bad argument. i'm no communist but what a worthless thing to say
The problem with communism was in the forced way it was implemented. It could work in theory. Hell, many of its ideals are pretty noble. But in practice it leads to corruption and dictatorships.
Captitalism isnt exactly without flaws either though. Its biggest flaw might be how it idealizes money to the point where it is seen as an end instead of a means to an end.
>>496968
>what is the dictatorship of the proletariat
But I'm sure we haven't tried enough :^) If we try again I'm sure THIS TIME the dictatorship will magically disappear like Saint-Marx predicted :^)
>>496972
>The problem with national socialism was in the forced way it was implemented. It could work in theory. Hell, many of its ideals are pretty noble. But in practice it leads to corruption and dictatorships. Captitalism isnt exactly without flaws either though. Its biggest flaw might be how it idealizes money to the point where it is seen as an end instead of a means to an end.
>>496974
It's like you don't even know what dictatorship means in Marxist theory.
>>496974
> In Marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism
>>496971
But its true.
When considering to implement a certain ideology, it seems prudent to consider the nature of the people that will have to adapt to this ideology. When the two don't match, one might consider the ideology unfit for practical use.
Cold war propaganda à la >>496872
Remember the 100 billion trillions, workers!
>>496985
it's only true in that ideology in general is unfit for 'human nature'. but again it's such a worthless point to make
>>496995
Capitalism seems to fit human nature pretty well. It leads to an increase of wealth for the total population, while letting individual agents take actions that benefit themselves (a strong motivator in human nature).
>>497005
it means there's no point trying to call it a 'commie state'. let's not try to prove communism faulty by making shit up about it
>>496884
>History & Humanities
>hurrrr durrr go back to /pol/ xDDDD this is not history xDDDDD
>>496860
What's wrong with it is marxism-leninism and its developments.
>Those who speak of revolution and class struggle without explicitly referring to everyday life, without understanding how love is subversive, and the refusal of constraints positive, hold a corpse in their mouth.
>>496860
>What's wrong with Communism?
It starts with crap economics, makes wildly inaccurate predictions, and when those don't pan out, its adherents try to set up states that bear only casual resemblance to its supposed tenets
>Why does everyone hate it so much?
Because its adherents, instead of admitting they supported a meaningless pile of drivel, loudly and stupidly insist that all of its detractors JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND IT!
>>496984
Now read the first sentence of the wikipedia article you quoted.
For Marx dictatorship simply means the reign of one class over another, not an actual political system.
Liberal democracy is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
>>497014
How is an abstract topic on political science, a known social science and /pol/ topic, a humanity?
>>497013
>it means there's no point trying to call it a 'commie state'.
Yes there is. In marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is the transitory state which leads to communism. Since the dictatorship of the proletariat's existence is justified by the fact that it will lead to communism, it is reasonable to label the dictatorship of the proletariat "commie state".
>>497012
yeah that's why there's so much mental illness among the most advanced capitalist societies. note that these societies are regulated and the more unsuccessful the regulation, the worse capitalism performs. but most of the actual production itself is swept under the rug where it is kept functioning through brutal oppression and overworking
>>497020
that doesn't make any sense. if it's transitory it means it still hasn't achieved communism. it's a phase of its own, regardless of its destination or from where it came. it would be just as accurate to call it a capitalist state if this were true.
i'm sure you have another point to make instead?
>>497017
Yes but you must admit that to "reign" one requires a political system, right? I mean, I'm just trying to assess whether you're one of those brainless morons who believes that workers will just magically cooperate on a national scale as soon as the evil bourgeois is dead.
There requires some form of organization, right? For instance, marxism-leninism.
>>497035
>that doesn't make any sense.
Are you stupid?
>it's a phase of its own, regardless of its destination
NO, not regardless of its destination, because its destination is only one thing : communism!
What other possible reasons to implement a dictatorship of the proletariat are there??
>>497024
Mental illness is nothing but a matter of classification. Besides, do you have accurate figures for the occurances of mental illness (let alone according to the same standard) in societies other than advanced western capitalist societies? No, so how can you compare them?
The rest of your post is one big [citation needed].
>>497018
Most of the disussion in this thread is based off of an ideology that was far more prominent in the past. Look at that flag.
This is history.
>>497040
>Are you stupid?
you clearly are
a dictatorship of the proletariat isn't communism. you don't define a state by the system of government it hasn't achieved
>>497052
>a dictatorship of the proletariat isn't communism
I never claimed it was.
However, since its expressed goal is to bring about communism, labeling dictatorships of the proletariat 'commie states' isn't scandalous, except in the mind of the delusional leftist ideologue.
>>497047
>Most of the disussion in this thread is based off of an ideology that was far more prominent in the past. Look at that flag.
>This is history.
Which is why people are talking about concrete periods of time, incidents, and secondary sources.
/his/ - /pol/ without dates
>>497038
Of course. I was just arguing against the common conception that Stalinist /literal/ dictatorship was somehow what Marx envisioned when talking about the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Marxism-Leninism is pretty controversial anyways since the actual workers didn't have any political power and the party made decisions "in their interest", effectively creating a new ruling class of bureaucrats.
>>497041
oh come on you're trying to tell me that 'increase in wealth' means an ideology suits human nature.
the thing is 'human nature' is always politicised. you're defining it in capitalist terms, which is why you say it doesn't suit communism. again, it's a worthless thing to say.
>>497053
>I never claimed it was.
that's the only reason you could call it a 'commie state' if it was.
you don't define a state by the system of government it hasn't achieved
>except in the mind of the delusional leftist ideologue.
me? hahah. 'first one to call the opponent delusional wins'
>>497080
>that's the only reason you could call it a 'commie state' if it was.
No, you fucking idiot. Another reason why I could call it a commie state is because it's a state whose goal is to explicitly bring about communism. This is the third time I'm repeating myself, I'm starting to think you are of subpar intelligence if you cannot grasp this simple concept.
>>497065
This is a cop out. Just because Marx was vague doesn't mean that there is a way to bring about a dictatorship of the proletariat which isn't oppressive.
>>497086
'first one to call the opponent a fucking idiot wins'
you're getting frustrated with your own inability to make a point. it has nothing to do with my intelligence. states aren't defined by their end goals. dictatorship is an intermediate state that is obviously still a mix of private ownership as well as collective. you don't define a 'communist state' by it's private ownership since that isn't communism. how many dictatorships of the proletariat resulted in communism, exactly? the end goal is irrelevant if there is no guarantee of that achievement.
>if you cannot grasp this simple concept.
no, i understand why you'd think that and why you're being pedantic about it, but you're just wrong. if you called a state that had the express purpose of bringing about anarchism, literally no one would think you knew what you were talking about if you called it an 'anarchist state'
This is now a Ronald Reagan thread
It doesn't work because it's guaranteed that it degenerates into a dictatorship.
The problem, as far as I see it, is that people, specifically communists and anarchist leftists, think it is possible to escape private property.
Which it is not. Either many people own their own stuff, or very few people own everything. It really doesn't matter if it is the Rothschilds who are among the few people who own everything, or if it is "the Party" and the State that owns everything.
The problem still persists(unfair economic power and wealth), and neither Communists nor Anarchists have an answer.
>>497099
>dictatorship of the proletariat have NOTHING to do with communism
This is literally you right now.
Stop being foolish.
>>497125
i'm not saying it has nothing to do with communism, i'm saying it's not a communist state. as a transitory phase it has as much to do with capitalism as it does communism. i notice you're responding less and less to my posts though so you can have one last (You) as a gift from me
>>497132
Are you Jewish?
>>497132
>as a transitory phase it has as much to do with capitalism as it does communism
>a dictatorship of the proletariat has as much to do with capitalism as it does communism
Top fucking kek
I'm responding less and less to your posts because you're a braindead moron who can't wrap your head around the basic fact that the dictatorship of the proletariat's existence being to bring about communism, it is completely logical to label that regime as "communist".
Just like the CNT-FAI should be labeled "anarchist" although it wasn't really anarchist.
>>497132
>just because we threw ice cubes in a scalding pot doesn't mean we were trying to create steam. The boiling water that resulted was just as much ice as it was steam. It's inaccurate to describe it any other way.
>>497145
If you're retarded you call them communist states. If you're not, you call them socialist states.
Marxism makes a claim about a perfect future that is supposedly inevitable and can be obtained by structuring an economy a certain way. The problem is history doesn't work that way, there is nothing "inevitable". Most enterprises are better when they're backed up by evidence, which is lacking in Marxism. Some practices and ideas might be sound, but they aren't part of a process by which a utopian future comes into being.
>>496860
there are certain things that the state should do, like build roads, keep order and maintain public schools, but there are things the state very obviously shouldn't do, like make cars or try to feed everyone directly
this is why gommunism fails
>inb4 not real gommunism
>inb4 16 year olds who just read atlas shrugged
>>497143
Reminder that it were Jews who invented the Communism.
>>496968
what are you talking about
>>497177
So what!
Do you really care about the ethnicity of dead men?
>>496933
>The USSR killed millions in south america.
ahahahahaha
>Board where people are expected to know about history.
>People still make the retarded claim that standards of living in the USSR after Stalin were more or less indistinguishable from Khmer Rouge Cambodia.
>People keep going on about Pol Pot, a dictator the US supported, whose genocide was ended by communists backed by Vietnam.
Communism is a flawed economic model in terms of competing with capitalism, but the amount of cold war propaganda you retards uncritically spew is incredible.
>>497379
How does it matter that the US supported him? They also supported the USSR during WW2. In fact the US have a long history of supporting total trash.
>>497403
It matters because the narrative that the US supported democracy and the USSR tyranny is a black-and-white moral tale for children that can't understand historical nuance.
Who even is Noam Chomsky? Friends keep circlejerking about him and I don't have the care to figure him out.
>>497236
>dead men
This is a history board, being dead is a criterion for being relevant.
>>497441
>Everyone who thinks Communism sucks always supports American backing of foreign dictatorial governments
Huh?
>>497454
I don't even like communism, I'm saying that this board falls into cold war propaganda and exaggeration too easily. See how one of the first posts in this thread is the bogus "100 million" shit from the retarded black book of communism.
>>496890
They hate it because it preaches taking there hard earned wealth and equally distributing it across NEETs like yourself
>>497379
It's getting ridiculous how the only argument commies can produce is that anti-communist just use "Cold War propaganda".
Specially because all their arguments are also based on communist propaganda. We simply cannot trust any report on the standards of living in communist countries because they have been known to systematically lie in order to present a better image. Stalin, for example, sent the scientists responsible for the 1937 Census in the Soviet Union to gulags because he didn't like the results
Therefore, using any kind of communist-produced data in order to defend communist regimes is being duped by propaganda. See Cuba, for example, supposedly they are a great country with a nice HDI, health and education, but in real life not even Haitians want to live there. Really. Let that sink in, Haiti is the poorest country in the Western hemisphere, it's poorer than many African countries, it hasn't recovered yet from the earthquake in 2010, and yet Haitians do not migrate to Cuba. Actually, there is not a single communist state, from East Germany to Kerala that receives more migrants than it sends (sometimes against the wishes of the State).
If you cannot trust the official data about the standard of living in a given country, you have to use other metrics. In communist states, the best one is: are people willing to live in this shithole? And the answer, in 100% of the cases, is no.
>>497466
I have yet to see someone make a convincing argument (one that isn't an outright theodicy of Stalin or Mao) against the 60-100 million range.
>>497466
I see you also fell for propaganda.
The Black Book of Communism is a good scholarly work, with access to many sources that have since then been closed. The preface is the controversial part, because there Cortouis put on his thinkings about communism and made the polemic "100 million" dead calculation. But the rest of the book is great and it's quite sad, though understandable, that it's not taken seriously only because of it's preface.
>>497488
Not an argument but I think even Robert Conquest, who was famous for his borderline cold warrior rhetoric, thought the 100 million range was way too much.
>>496914
>industrialization
That's probably the only thing that communism didn't fuck up.
Stalin and friends were able to pull Russia out of the dark ages, but at the cost of millions starving and really shitty infrastructure.
>>497441
Flat out, US also supported USSR. I think everyone who isn't an elementary school dropout knows that.
>>497510
I agree, but like I implied, that's the far end of the spectrum, and I find sixty million deaths to be a pretty unacceptable number anyway. Why isn't Communism more vilified than fascism?
>>497536
Good thing only industry matters because DUDE MEANS OF PRODUCTION LMAO
>>497555
Because muh opression
Jewish comminusts brutally murdered and mutilated best russian people. It's really fucking chilling because it can happen again.
Marxism only made sense in the industrial era, not in a service / IT based economies we have now.
>>496890
>except for ukrainians
I can tell you're a kid or trolling.
>>496872
REMEMBER THE 60 TRILLION!!!!
>>496890
Communism can only work only on a voluntary basis, like a small commune where everyone wants to live in communism. Even Marx realized this, hence why he proposed dictatorship of the proletariat instead of jumping straight from capitalism to communism. Dictatorship of the proletariat requires brutal coercion to actually function. Brutal coercion usually results in hundreds of thousands of dead people. Genocidal practices are thus inherently a part of establishing communism.
>>497495
>The Black Book of Communism is a good scholarly work.
It's litteraly a work of American propaganda, for example it counts victims in an imagined "Soviet famine" when in fact famine existed even during the days of czar Nicholas and continued throughout the Russian civil war.
Also victims of Stalinist terror never surpassed 1 million.
>>497611
>in an imagined "Soviet famine" when in fact famine existed even during the days of czar Nicholas
>Soviet fuckups do not count because tsar Nicholas was also a fuckup
>>497611
this desu
communism killed a lot of people, but the numbers have been overblown to borderline cartoonish levels. The methodology used for deaths from famine in communist China would, if applied elsewhere, result in ridiculous nonsense such as "2 million people died during the dust bowl in the US", as it counts people not being born as starvation deaths.
>>497482
Haitians don't go to Cuba, because Cuba doesn't accept them.
I will also remind you that Cuba has one of the best and cheapest healthcare systems in the world. Cuba is highly desirable as spot for medical and pharmacutical tourism
>>497611
It was written by French scholars, you imbecile, many of them former communists.
>>497620
>I will also remind you that Cuba has one of the best and cheapest healthcare systems in the world
According to Cuban government data.
>>497617
There is a difference between a famine in a civil war and an engineered fuckup.
For example there is so much bullshit propaganda about Holodomovor that paranoid Ukrainians want to turn even that into a deliberate genocide.
Americans during the Cold War used any sort of such events to stress the destructiveness of Communism.
>>497620
>one of the best and cheapest healthcare systems in the world
That's what Chavez thought when he decided to be taken care in that prison island, Pepe Cienfuegos
>>497626
Also, as I said, the "body count" thing is only in the preface. The other authors actually criticized the editor for including it.
>>497631
>According to Cuban government data.
Nope, according to everyone
http://www.forbes.com/sites/judystone/2014/12/22/cuba-cost-effective-healthcare/
>>497634
I think one of the funniest parts of the holodomor genocide claim is that it entirely ignores that the famine affected pretty much the entire soviet agricultural heartland, including southern russia, of which ukraine was merely part.
>>497595
>What are third-world sweatshops
>>497634
>an engineered fuckup
You mean like the 1932-33 famine?
>Americans during the Cold War used any sort of such events to stress the destructiveness of Communism.
And communists use any sort of excuses to say they dindu nuffin wrong.
>>497643
Actually I don't buy the "it was deliberate genocide against Ukrainians" angle. I'm more of a "it was a gigantic fuckup because retarded communists cannot into agriculture" kind of person.
>>497641
Wow, even Forbes is stupid enough to believe Cuban government data. Impressive.
>>497643
Because according to proponents of "Holodomor as a genocide", the famine in Ukraine was exacerbated by Stalin's desires to use it to eliminate Ukrainian nationalism politically.
>>496910
The present constitution of North Korea does not even mention Marxism or Leninism.
>what is Juche
>what is totalitarianism/ totalitarian dictatorship
>what is worldwide trade embargo enforced with centuries of cultural heritage of being a hermit to the bone
Fuck off. Read about the Paris Commune and choke on a dick for being a tool of the innecessities.
>>497601
Someone please refute this before I make a thread about it.
>>497670
>the end result of the establishment of rule by a communist party leader is a totalitarian dictatorship that in the end abandon the intellectual basis that brought it to fruition
Is that supposed to make us more open to Marxism?
>Read about the Paris Commune
You mean the dictatorship of the National Guard is war-devastated Paris? I'm glad it was crushed and the communards killed by Thiers.
>>497674
SLEEP TIGHT COMRADE STALIN
>>496860
It ignores individuality.
>>497675
It can't be refuted.
The claims of tens of millions of deaths from Stalin's regime are lies told by Western reactionaries during the Cold War.
They have been completely refuted now we have access to the Soviet archives.
>>497536
Capitalism would have industrialized Russia faster and with fewer gulags
>>497608
are there no police in a communist society?
>>497789
you could just as easily point to a busy city in China and compare it to rural africa
>>497753
as opposed to the capitalist, who will throw you away the moment a machine can perform a task more efficiently than you
>>497839
>thinks an employer must hurt his profits in order to be in good terms with some salary man solely interested in his own profit
>>497870
I didn't say that, but to say communism fails because it doesn't respect a person's individuality is plainly false because capitalism does not respect you either
>>497536
The revolution and the civil war actually slowed industrialization down for the next 10 years at least. Tsarist Russia was industrializing like crazy.
>>497797
Yes, there's gonna be enough police to mass murder people senpai.
>>497651
well atleast forbes has more credibility than your worthless ass
Discussing socialism by only using its worse examples is like debating purely by cherrypicking. For Economic success without ye "Communist oppression" the Scandinavian socialist democracies are goddamn bet examples. Even Mikhail Gorbachev used them as a model for the soviet union.
>Ye Mass Killings
Of course it is inexcusable even if justified but communism is not the only guilty person for that. South America's Operation Condor was pretty much state sponsored terrorism and killed Thousands. Indonesia's Communist Purges Killed so many people that its pretty much as big as modern day genocides. Operation Crazy Horse and the Phoenix program killed thousands of Vietnamese. Communism may have killed people but by using that logic to discredit it means capitalism and democracy is just as wrong considering the things they have done. And they killed more people are were state sponsored killings
>>497780
>They have been completely refuted now we have access to the Soviet archives.
This is what Communists actually believe.
>>497780
Lasted western reactionaries stopped being in power post 1918 m8.
>>498138
>WAAAH GEOPOLITICAL REALITIES PREVENT MY PET PROJECT IDEOLOGY FROM DEVELOPING IN A PERFECT VACUUM
Cry harder
>>496860
Cause it doesn't work in the real world and leads to shit like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RQVSHfuPCQ
>>496860
Homo homini lupus.
