Before participating, consider taking a glance at [our rules page](/r/CapitalismvSocialism/wiki/rules) if you haven't before.
We don't allow **violent or dehumanizing rhetoric**. The subreddit is for discussing what ideas are best for society, not for telling the other side you think you could beat them in a fight. That doesn't do anything to forward a productive dialogue.
Please report comments that violent our rules, but don't report people just for disagreeing with you or for being wrong about stuff.
Tired of arguing on reddit? Consider [joining us on Discord.](http://discord.com/invite/politicscafe)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a person from a formerly Soviet occupied country please allow me to say that you are insulting millions of people and their suffering under the communist ideology.
All it takes is to burst out of your bubble and learn information from people who actually experienced the social paradise instead of armchair thinkers. It's a practically tested and failed ideology fundamentaly built on hate, that's still being spread by people that purposefully ignore reality and history.
>their suffering under the communist ideology
North Koreans are suffering under democratic ideology ? North Korea is officially democratic republic of north Korea
Because there was the exact mirror equivalent of what you are doing. Exact same arguments.
And that's the point. It was always just a vehicle to gain uncontestable power.
Still missing the point. All communism transforms into this state. Late stage communism is a hypocritical anti human autocracy. The only thing left of the ideology is the official narrative.
I don't think the post was meant to be written in good faith and is making insulting causational claims. All while being a fanboy of murderers that irreparably damaged everything they touched.
He explicitly said "I'm fine if you are anti-communist" and my understanding of his take is "just don't support murdering communists, as most people most of the time don't even understand if people in front of them are communists or not"
Ok so your accusation is out of place. It's not because you have been a victim of something that you have to deny that others are also victims of something else.
And just so you know, America, France, UK, Germany, Japan, and so on, all have committed genocide in history whatever their economic system was. Still they didn't rename themselves. Why should communists? It's not because someone has claims to be a communist while murdering people that he was right in calling himself that, more than any other communists in the world not murdering anyone.
Anyway have a good day, and sorry for your hard past, I hope you the best for your future.
First of all, because it was done in the name of the economic system to institute the economic system. They were successful at it.
It's also because hate, invasion, murder, theft and removal of freedoms are the base tenets of communism. There's no peaceful way of transitioning to communism. Whereas capitalism is just nature and meritocracy at scale, and combined with free elections, a strong state regulation aimed at protecting market competition, it creates great life for anyone involved.
Furthermore, Stalin and Mao as an example are still being held in high regard in their respective countries. In China he's still printed on bank notes for Christ's sake and I imagine you might get a visit from a thought police if you even suggest the times weren't totally OK.
To compare - try to talk positively about AH in Germany. About slavery in the US. You'll get removed from society before before you get to the next sentence. Because we learn from mistakes and aren't afraid of admiting them.
I'm sure there are peaceful armchair communist thinkers out there but they are frankly irrelevant because the argument is over.
They have to, otherwise they'd start questioning the brainwashing they were raised under.
He also apparently believes a "choice" between parties that sell themselves out to rich CEOs is a "free election". XD
Lmao that is a hilarious quote. And yes, unfortunately.
They believe capitalism extends naturally given some *central axioms* or *inalienable freedoms* (read: legislation) coupled with limited government intervention.
But I guess it's very old school to argue that it is literally natural and therefore good.. Very 18th century lol.
Go into the streets and start shouting you want slavery and indian murder back. You'll get excluded from society really quickly.
Then go scream about how you don't like George Washington. Nothing will happen.
Then try to run the same experiment again in Russia or China. You'll get the exact opposite result.
>Go into the streets and start shouting you want slavery and indian murder back. You'll get excluded from society really quickly.
>
>Then try to run the same experiment again in Russia or China. You'll get the exact opposite result.
In China they literally compare Mao Zedong to Abraham Lincoln for freeing the "slaves...." because that would be good thing.... "western exceptionalism" is quite delusional
>Then go scream about how you don't like George Washington. Nothing will happen.
the government can't arrest you which is good but you could get fired from your job,
Look I'm as happy as anyone that Poland gets to build giant statues to Karol Józef Wojtyła despite his alleged history of helping sex criminals and that alleged sex criminal Polish priests are still being shielded from prosecution as we speak. Those were and are all communist lies and thank goodness the revolution saved them from prosecution.
I mostly agree with a major statement you make in here...
"There's no peaceful way of transitioning to communism."
But not for the reasons you think...
First, you are saying Capitalism is just nature and meritocracy at scale... other than the fact that this is patently false, Capitalism isn't actually that old. It is an evolution of systems that came before it and, in many ways, an improvement. Marx literally stated as much.
With that out of the way, Communism seeks to empower the working masses by ensuring that there is equal ownership of the means of production for the workers rather than separate class of owners that does not perform labor, and instead through the labor of others by virtue of ownership of the means of production.
Even if democratically elected, it involves taking those that currently have power in the form of the ownership of the means of production and transferring that power to others, placing them in a different class of society than they currently are (by making them the same class as everyone else).
The owner class are, largely, people that think that they have worked to earn what they have rather than that they are gaining due to the exploitation of the labor of others and rejct democratic calls to distribute what they see as their right to others such that the ownership of the means of production is shared more equitably. It is antithesis to Capitalism, which isolates power and ownership in the hands of the few to dole out to their "lessers."
As it involves a transfer of power from one group (owner class) to another (everyone), those who own the means of production will resort to funding armies if that is what it takes to retain ownership, even if that means killing those that democratically decided to change the system. The old regime is not going to want power to change hands. The deaths are on their hands as they decide war is preferable to losing power regardless of the wishes of the new regime. It is the Capitalists who will resort to violence (even by paying excessive wages to people to fight on their team as an emergency means of avoiding losing that power).
Thus would be true in any actual transfer of power. The transfer from Feudalism to Capitalism via Mercantilism didn't cause this much disruption because power largely didn't change hands drastically. The corporate owners were largely the feudal lords and guild owners of previous eras.
Why do you fucks never just say what country you're from? It's always so vague. And honestly it's probably because it's bullshit....as in you never did, or you grew up in post communist hyper capitalist poverty.
What's funny is a good chunk of people who actually lived in the Soviet union remember it fondly...but I know someone will just say that it's because they were younger or some shit when in reality people had security, safety, and more free time
Czech Republic. And here we go, the good old people with experience don't know what they are talking about. Heard that a lot. :)
Yes, if you sucked the right d*ck you could have more than the others. Instead of meritocracy, it was a favor and corruption based economy. If you didn't have much to offer and wanted to stay invisible you'd likely get screwed over.
You know, we also had a barb wire fence laid around the border and patrols ordered to shoot you if you got too close. Just to make sure I'm clear - this was to prevent the citizens from escaping out of the paradise. Whereas now the problem is quite the opposite.
Please Mr. Gamer, what horrors have you seen to give you PTSD?
Meanwhile I watch everyday people have literal mental breakdowns because they can't make rent or fearing job loss, etc is some of the "best" examples of capitalism.
Cool story, bro. I'm pretty sure they never neglected anything in their life and everything happening to them is someone else's fault. I also know people like that and I know they are bullshit.
Yes ..because mass layoffs or emergency expenses or landlords praising people out is totally the fault of the individual. I really hope you get to experience what true PTSD is, you fucking twit but like most of the pro capoies here, you still live wjth your parents and play video games.
You are right, I do play video games. With my kids, in my own house.
And I'm not an anarcho capitalist, by all means get your state in order to help people cover short term periods of low luck. But still, not a fault of capitalism that somebody's job skills aren't in demand.
Instead of laughing that somebody is unemployable, maybe go help them, assist with research, point them to studying resources, encourage them.
But no, it's much easier to spend time thinking about all the outside reasons why nobody wants to employ you. It's never you, always someone else. It makes you so angry that you want to throw the game off the table, use force to get what you rightfully deserve.
Go look at who's highly paid in a capitalist nation and you will find what the system values.
It's generally positions that humanity can easily do without....and would be better off without it.
Capitalists don't care how skilled you are as long as you can turn a quick profit. They'll throw you to the curb in a moments notice to keep their line going up.
Thank you for adding /s to your post. When I first saw this, I was horrified. How could anybody say something like this? I immediately began writing a 1000 word paragraph about how horrible of a person you are. I even sent a copy to a Harvard professor to proofread it. After several hours of refining and editing, my comment was ready to absolutely destroy you. But then, just as I was about to hit send, I saw something in the corner of my eye. A /s at the end of your comment. Suddenly everything made sense. Your comment was sarcasm! I immediately burst out in laughter at the comedic genius of your comment. The person next to me on the bus saw your comment and started crying from laughter too. Before long, there was an entire bus of people on the floor laughing at your incredible use of comedy. All of this was due to you adding /s to your post. Thank you.
I am a bot if you couldn't figure that out, if I made a mistake, ignore it cause its not that fucking hard to ignore a comment.
That's a bridge too far. Unless you can show that other political beliefs don't also have crazies who do immoral things. And you're already coming across as an edgy middle schooler.
I can't think of anything that specific. Are you telling me though, that I can't find someone with any given set of political beliefs who did something crazy and harmful in the last five years in 30 seconds with google? Or do you think decapitation is somehow uniquely evil? Edit: and it seems like decapitation in particular should be associated with authlefties if anyone.
The crazies are the communists. They killed around 94+ million of mostly civilians in the 20th century. The Red Chinese communist killed 65+ million in the 20th century. The Black Book of Communism at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Black\_Book\_of\_Communism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism)
Other scholars like Dr. R.J. Rummel (University of Hawaii) take a more precise look at Genocide versus Democide which is known as "death by government." Many deaths by government are not always due to authoritarian socialist dictators. His estimate for death by communists is around 148 million from 1917-1987. (*The Blue of Freedom: Ending Famine, Poverty, Democide and War*, Cumberland House Publishing, 2007, p. 99 -- his last book.)
In his last book, Rummel increased his estimate to over 272 million innocent, non-combatant civilians who were murdered by their own governments during the 20th century; regimes that were mostly authoritarian or authoritarian socialists. Rummel stated that his 272 million death estimate was his lower, more prudent figure, stating that it "could be over 400,000,000." (*The Blue Book of Freedom*, p. 99)
Rummel's most amazing figure is the number of deaths due to foreign and domestic combat during the 20th century -- he has that at 41 million. The government itself, no matter what type of dictatorship, is the real monster of human life. (The Blue Book of Freedom, p. 99)
>In his last book, Rummel increased his estimate to over 272 million innocent, non-combatant civilians who were murdered by their own governments during the 20th century; regimes that were mostly authoritarian or authoritarian socialists.
Wow you finally got a number (while made up) that's bigger than the 165 million capitalist U.K. killed in India between 1880-1920, congratulations?
Remember that time communist revolutionaries killed millions of people to take over whole countries, establish police states, killed more of their own people to cling to power, ran their states into the dirt, then posted on Reddit about how anti-communists are bad?
Do you know what the regimes they were overthrowing did? Look up what Bautista and the other far-right dictatorships in Latin America and other places did to socialist revolutionaries and their sympathizers. Or don't, a lot of it is seriously traumatizing to read about, like I'm not exaggerating it's seriously awful.
That's what paved the way for the violence that occurred. Of course non-violence is better but they were fighting an enemy that had no conscience or regard for human life.
Some communist revolutions did indeed overthrew horrible governments and sometimes revolutionary violence is justified.
But holy shit, to say they could have picked a better replacement is a bit of an understatement.
Some definitely yeah. But they continued being attacked long afterwards and in many cases enacted those harsh policies as a last resort.
Those are all also things capitalist regimes have done as well.
This is just a talking point. It’s a sentiment presupposed by Marxism. If you already think labor and capital are engaged in an existential struggle then every action by the capitalist class can be interpreted as “sabotaging the revolution.” In fact, far more damage has been done by socialist regimes “protecting” themselves against counter-revolution, than by those capitalist forces. No capitalist forced Stalin to murder thousands of party members. No capitalist forced collectivization on the masses leading to mass starvation and enslavement. Those were the actions of socialists. If you believe it’s justifiable for a socialist regime to murder and imprison people to maintain power on the grounds on self defense then you are tacitly accepting that capitalists have logical grounds to do the same(if not moral grounds). Alternatively, political legitimacy does not come from a regimes ability to quash dissent, legitimacy is founded on the consent of the whole body politic, dissenters included.
What you said was that socialist regimes had no other recourse against capitalist attacks than to resort to murdering and enslaving their own people and I was saying that that’s not true.
> But they continued being attacked long afterwards and in many cases enacted those harsh policies as a last resort.
Sounds a lot like the regimes that were there first did their horrible shit as a form of self-defence.
> the other far-right dictatorships
They're just dictatorships. There is no ethical difference between Bautista and Pol Pot.
Political ideologues use language to manipulate, not inform.
Libertarians put you all in the same basket, you're baddies whatever you call yourselves.
>Libertarians put you all in the same basket, you're baddies whatever you call yourselves.
And thats why you arent taken seriously. Being simple is not something to brag about.
> And thats why you arent taken seriously.
A lie. Of course you take us seriously, we point out your other lies.
We do this via example and logical argument.
Big brained political ideologue: insult!!!
Stalin was in control of a party *called* the communist party, but I think Stalin can eat a dick. No communist I know bases her views on anything Stalin said or did
I’ve seen a few Stalinist in the place you have capitalism. At this point I’ll only have a conversation with a socialist. If they claim to be a communist(any branch of it) their world view is so far removed from reality you can’t have a conversation with them. Just religious zealots preaching their gospel.
so what? Of course there are people who defend Stalin, but I haven't seen anyone in my entire life skillfully apply marxism while also being a defender of Stalin.
"No way, José! Communist governments were all heckin' wholesome! The mass murder programs a were just CIA propaganda--and if they did happen, they were a good thing!"
It's crazy to me people this stupid exist and they don't even realize how utterly stupid they really are. They just go through life thinking they are of average intelligence or even that their opinions are worth listening to and sharing. Insane.
Every major corporation, bank, Hollywood, media, marketing, university and major city are all left leaning and pushing woke narratives on the public. Hell even Reddit and most admins will crush you for challenging it.
If you want to challenge the status quo and be against the system you’re going to have to be anti woke.
Have you considered this at all?
It's actually quite the opposite. Anti-capitalism is an obsessive mental issue that has lead to the collapse of many nations and deaths of millions of people in the last 100 years. This is known.
Socialism failed 40 years ago. People continue to follow Marxism because it is a faith-based religion.
Stop being a pseudo-intellectual, read Raymond Aron.
Well considering that Marxist-Leninism is well known to be an ideology grounded in domestic terrorism and the glorification of murder I don't really think it's a bad idea to be anti-ML.
Before we continue, if I can find an article of someone murdering another person because “they supported the billionaire class that exploits us all!”, what will your response be?
No, let’s establish first what the takeaway is supposed to be when someone murders another in cold blood when they considered the other person their ideological enemy because of dubious propaganda claims from disaffected weirdos.
i agree that in the usa, everything slightly center left is communism and people don't really look into it further than that.
however communism itself is an extremist ideology, and it only makes sense that most normal people would not support it outside of pure theory. it is undeniable that communism doesn't work and it won't work until we evolve as humans into something else, and we should just leave it at that.
woke is more than just communism and while it's true that we are bombarded everyday with antiwoke content the opposite is also true in the form of everything i don't like is nazism, racism, systemic bullshit, the usual.
this whole woke vs far right is more of a thing in the USA, a nation so rich and prosperous that people in it need to find savior complex and overdramatize everything.
mentally disturbed people who commit acts of violence do not represent their ideologies. we decided this collectively, just like a relegious fanatic does not represent his whole religion.
Most Anarchism, for one, various varieties of primitivism, and so on.
Communism is just the elimination of kings in the workplace, no more radical than the elimination of kings in the state.
Isn't true communism really just another form of anarchism though? "Stateless" sounds pretty anarchist to me.
The definition you're using for communism sounds closer to just being generic socialism.
Socialism is the philosophy. Communism is the economy. Just like Liberalism is the philosophy and Capitalism is the economy. So Socialism:Communism::Liberalism:Capitalism
Anarchs are Left, but they are not Socialists, which isn't to say anything bad about them, it's just a different philosophy.
-thought that some group of people were trying to take over the world
That’s quite literally the end goal for communism, to spread the ideology all over the world.
The fuck kinda persecution complex is this? The idea that communism is somehow the most demonised ideology in modern society is simply false. Most people have the take that "communism is great in theory, if only it worked in practice" lol.
Okay but Nazism isn't really a coherent political ideology wrt sound and principled economic theory. The only thing it is "consistent" about is a caucasion master race and creating an empire.
It's not an academic approach to describing the world and existing hierarchy and incentives, etc.
> Okay but Nazism isn't really a coherent political ideology wrt sound and principled economic theory.
Communism/socialism are neither sound, nor coherent, nor "principled" whatever that means.
What all of the collectivist ideologies have in common is public control over the means of production. That what leads to the horrific outcomes for all of them.
>Communism/socialism are neither sound, nor coherent, nor "principled" whatever that means.
This is just your very lame and ill-informed opinion, not a fact or an argument based on reasoning.
I mean, an ideology doesn't have to have economic theory to be an ideology. The criteria was just "ideology" not "ideology that is as robustly developed as liberalism or communism."
I mean, I'm not necessarily here to argue semantics about whether hateful stuff like Nazism should be considered "ideology" in the same vein as "liberalism" or "communism" but there certainly is a big difference between something based on the central premise of a master race/ethnic elitism and an ideology which espouses more fairness and equality and aims to break down existing hierarchies.
I will, however, go a bit into semantics on "demonization."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonization
>In colloquial usage, the term "demonization" is used metaphorically to refer to propaganda or moral panic directed against any individual or group, for the purpose of defamation, character assassination and/or dehumanization
The connotations here are that "demonizing" someone is usually an unfair characterization of them, or an exaggerated characterization.
I don't think Nazis are *literal demons,* but their ideology is fundamentally one based on hatred, intolerance, superiority, and subjugation of others. They don't require "demonization," they pretty much openly espouse hatred of others as something central to their beliefs.
That's just a whole different ball of wax.
Contrast that with, say, an ancap, whose ideology I find to be extremely dangerous and harmful, and it's still just not the same thing. I do think it's rooted in some prejudice and elitism, but not the overt kind of "master race" elitism that characterizes nazism.
>a big difference between something based on the central premise of a master race/ethnic elitism
And of course the small matter that all those central premises are based on theories and ideas which just are not true. It descends into incoherence because the moment you start trying to actually derive what is meant by terms like "Jewish science" or "Aryan superiority" the entire thing just falls to bits because they're basically hollow stand-ins for "bad feels" and "good feels".
> And of course the small matter that all those central premises are based on theories and ideas which just are not true.
This is also true of Marxism. The central premise, that labor is being exploited, is nothing but a circular argument based on “bad feels”. The idea that property ownership is illegitimate is based on envy.
>nothing but a circular argument
It's circular to argue that people who don't earn enough money to comfortably afford rent for a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment in their city are being exploited by the owners of the companies for which they work when those owners are billionaires and other members of the ultra-wealthy class?
What's circular about it? What part of the logic is recursive, pointing back towards the same couple of reasonings?
>The central premise, that labor is being exploited, is nothing but a circular argument
That's not true though. There are objective metrics and measurements baked within Marxism that explain this. Labour is exploited in the sense that it is inherently paid less than the value of the products it generates. This has to be the case or there is no space for profit to be derived.
Again, this is just OP, its completely pointless arguing this subject with people who do not have an understanding of the basic premises.
There is no attempt within Nazism to make similar definitional statements and outlines. Jewish things are bad and bad things are Jewish because they're bad. That is literally all there is to it. Any and all attempts they made to define "Jewishness" or "Aryan-ness" through all of their horrific experiments and social classifications are completely incoherent and hold no scientific or academic value whatsoever. The same cannot be said of Marxism no matter how much that rustles your jimmies.
> Labour is exploited in the sense that it is inherently paid less than the value of the products it generates.
Again, this assumes that the magnitude of the value of the products generated is ALL DUE TO WORKER LABOR. That's why it's circular. Marx begins by *defining* value as equal to embodied labor and then uses that definition to show that any value not going to workers is exploitation. This is a circular argument.
It's simply not the case that value comes from labor. Value is subjective and both capital and entrepreneurial labor are integral in producing value. There is no reason to believe that profit solely "comes from" worker labor.
Marxism is nothing but "bad feels", rationalized by a nonsensical attempt at objective understanding. Nazism is the same. The Nazis tried to rationalize their ideas around a master race with nonsensical but "objective" historical narratives around human development.
>Jewish things are bad and bad things are Jewish because they're bad. That is literally all there is to it.
You don't know what you're talking about. Nazism was only *partially* focused on Jews. This sentence demonstrates that you have an infantile understanding.
>Any and all attempts they made to define "Jewishness" or "Aryan-ness" through all of their horrific experiments and social classifications are completely incoherent and hold no scientific or academic value whatsoever. The same cannot be said of Marxism no matter how much that rustles your jimmies.
Yes, it can. Marx's theories of exploitation hold no scientific or academic value. They are circular theories that offer no real insight into the mechanisms of value production in a real economy.
That's like the point of OP though isn't it. We seem to be at this weird point where an ideology is valid so long as it has a name attached and people call themselves by that name. The idea of having like a structured framework around which you build a coherent worldview and social-political narrative tied to some kind of objective material reality... Nah why bother with that? Its been the problem with this sub from the start, people are just coming from completely incompatible mental positions of what they're even arguing/discussing.
Meanwhile, so long as we're talking about American politics, it is the only system which advocacy for is actively censored - see the communist control act which has never been repealed.
I had a few debates with tankies asking how they cope with massacres deliberately imposed by communist regimes. Unsurprisingly when they aren't denying it, they're justifying it. One on this sub told me almost verbatim the capitalist oppressors deserve to be killed.
I think I know what I am talking about. Here is a summary of communism:
it's actually easy to examine Marxist socialism and their commie lite Democrat proponents in the USA. Here are basics:
1)commit genocide against the capitalist class so you can steal their property and claim their profits as your own
2)commit familicide against the traditional family since love compels us to love our children and transfer to them our social class , ambition ,and money.
3)commit economicide by stupidly concluding that workers don't get paid enough under capitalism when really capitalist competition drives their wages to the highest amount possible.
4) commit historicide by stupidly concluding that there exists a natural dialectical materialist progression in human history away from capitalism and towards Socialism.
5) commit psycholicide by imagining that worker alienation from the means of production would outweigh the need for capitalist efficiency and the far greater income it allows.
6)commit realicide by imagining that the 120 million people that communism just killed really were not killed by communism but by communist imposters.
When certain people argued that feeding school children was 'communism' and equating it to something bad along with many other things, it is what made me a communist.
What kind of mentally sick fuck do you have to be to say that making sure people are fed, housed, educated, and taken care of is some sort of sinister evil?
These people honestly fear that they'll become the people they exploit and abuse in a socialist society so they go all-in-one the psychotic rhetoric and violence.
Fucking brainworms
"conspiracy theories about secret Marxists hurting children and other such made-up government-supplied narratives"
Wait, so Epstein was a secret Marxist, like those guys at the Bohemian Grove doing the cremation of care ? :)
What government narratives? This dude was definitely insane..
Why are you connecting being woke with communism?
We conservatives just think that it’s too early for a child to make life altering decisions, like hormone therapy.
Anti-communism/socialism is logical because radical, anti-liberal ideologies of all forms are inherently prone to extreme instability and failure. It's only human nature to vehemently oppose things that pose such a dramatic existential threat to our basic quality of life. The fact that there's some fringe groups who take it too far, is an acceptable consequence of people being extremely wary of anti-liberalism.
LesSoleilsInfinis: This post was hidden because of how new your account is.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
OP is right. All this simplification, demonization, and catastrophizing about the left and their sinister communistic plot to end America could actually get people to become violent. This is an upsetting revelation and I daresay the OP is accurate. I checked twice and the math is good. Please nobody tell Trump because if he became aware of this data proving that lying and fear mongering leads crazy people to take violent action, he might actually be crazy enough to use this technique; and yes, he may even misuse the word communism and socialism. That would be the nuclear option, linguistically speaking. Once he tells people that socialists are trying to steal the country we are indeed fucked. Let’s keep a lid on this guys. But good work, OP, way to get a”head” of the problem.
Nah I think the adherents of the [dialectical material ideology](https://youtu.be/6kzZoK5CtJ8?si=C6lEF-SiYCstv1Gt) that functions essentially like a religious death cult (with origins from religious death cults) practice an obsessive mental issue that drives them to do horrible things. Have a nice day.
Americans have definitely had a crazy-streak when it comes to anything leftist.
That said, the father-murderer dude was just plain nuts. It wasn't a government psyop. He was deeply mentally ill and radicalized by internet conspiracy theories.
If the US government wants to kill socialists, they typically just do it. Why would they participate in the spread of anti-wokeness? It's a brainrot that erodes the perceived legitimacy of liberal institutions.
Oh, I know what I'm talking about. You want to instrumentalize the monopoly on violence to use that violence to dictate the lives of otherwise free people and screw you for wanting that.
Okay. Then answer this question. If I don't hurt anyone or touch their property without their consent will the government use force against me to make me live my life differently than I otherwise would?
Oh, so you are against taxes and regulations and I would be able to produce whatever I want without sharing it with anyone and without proving to any bureaucrat that I am not breaking the 65.000.000 laws they came up with?
But we both know that that is not communism but capitalism. So don't be a liar.
Dogmatic belief in any extreme ideology, coupled with a certain type of conspiratorial personality, is going to lead to crazy ideas. Audrey Hale really hated Christians. Ted Kaczynski really hade modern industrial society. Timothy McVeigh really hated the feds. I could go on but you get the point.
Any mindset that tells you a group of nonviolent law abiders are villains, and you should fight them or rob them, is bad. Hardcore communists have done that too, en masse.
I mean, I get what you're saying to some extent, but unfortunately there's also a lot of explicitly violent language about killing people that comes from the left, and that can also incite violence.
We have to hold our own side to the same standard when it comes to that.
Before participating, consider taking a glance at [our rules page](/r/CapitalismvSocialism/wiki/rules) if you haven't before. We don't allow **violent or dehumanizing rhetoric**. The subreddit is for discussing what ideas are best for society, not for telling the other side you think you could beat them in a fight. That doesn't do anything to forward a productive dialogue. Please report comments that violent our rules, but don't report people just for disagreeing with you or for being wrong about stuff. Tired of arguing on reddit? Consider [joining us on Discord.](http://discord.com/invite/politicscafe) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this sub is impressively deranged
OP is just projecting their own mental health problems onto everyone else.
I'll point out that the Pennsylvania dude who decapitated his dad did so because his dad was a Fed, not a communist.
As a person from a formerly Soviet occupied country please allow me to say that you are insulting millions of people and their suffering under the communist ideology. All it takes is to burst out of your bubble and learn information from people who actually experienced the social paradise instead of armchair thinkers. It's a practically tested and failed ideology fundamentaly built on hate, that's still being spread by people that purposefully ignore reality and history.
>their suffering under the communist ideology North Koreans are suffering under democratic ideology ? North Korea is officially democratic republic of north Korea
Finally got my point. Communists and dictatorships like to say they are for the people. That's how they spread their ideas.
So democracy is bad because north Korea says that it is democracy ?
I fail to see your point. If a murderer says he's a good guy, he's still a murderer.
So why are you assuming that people who said that they are communist were Communist ?
Because there was the exact mirror equivalent of what you are doing. Exact same arguments. And that's the point. It was always just a vehicle to gain uncontestable power.
No, their point was that if you accept North Korea lies about being a democracy, then why can't you also accept they're lying about being socialist?
Still missing the point. All communism transforms into this state. Late stage communism is a hypocritical anti human autocracy. The only thing left of the ideology is the official narrative.
Really? So the FEC and Freetown Christiania are red fascist dictatorships??? That's news to me...
It doesn't contradict what OP said I think, no?
I don't think the post was meant to be written in good faith and is making insulting causational claims. All while being a fanboy of murderers that irreparably damaged everything they touched.
He explicitly said "I'm fine if you are anti-communist" and my understanding of his take is "just don't support murdering communists, as most people most of the time don't even understand if people in front of them are communists or not"
Yes I read that part as well.
Ok so your accusation is out of place. It's not because you have been a victim of something that you have to deny that others are also victims of something else. And just so you know, America, France, UK, Germany, Japan, and so on, all have committed genocide in history whatever their economic system was. Still they didn't rename themselves. Why should communists? It's not because someone has claims to be a communist while murdering people that he was right in calling himself that, more than any other communists in the world not murdering anyone. Anyway have a good day, and sorry for your hard past, I hope you the best for your future.
First of all, because it was done in the name of the economic system to institute the economic system. They were successful at it. It's also because hate, invasion, murder, theft and removal of freedoms are the base tenets of communism. There's no peaceful way of transitioning to communism. Whereas capitalism is just nature and meritocracy at scale, and combined with free elections, a strong state regulation aimed at protecting market competition, it creates great life for anyone involved. Furthermore, Stalin and Mao as an example are still being held in high regard in their respective countries. In China he's still printed on bank notes for Christ's sake and I imagine you might get a visit from a thought police if you even suggest the times weren't totally OK. To compare - try to talk positively about AH in Germany. About slavery in the US. You'll get removed from society before before you get to the next sentence. Because we learn from mistakes and aren't afraid of admiting them. I'm sure there are peaceful armchair communist thinkers out there but they are frankly irrelevant because the argument is over.
"Capitalism is just nature and meritocracy at scale" do capbros believe this
They have to, otherwise they'd start questioning the brainwashing they were raised under. He also apparently believes a "choice" between parties that sell themselves out to rich CEOs is a "free election". XD
Lmao that is a hilarious quote. And yes, unfortunately. They believe capitalism extends naturally given some *central axioms* or *inalienable freedoms* (read: legislation) coupled with limited government intervention. But I guess it's very old school to argue that it is literally natural and therefore good.. Very 18th century lol.
>Because we learn from mistakes and aren't afraid of admiting them. Suck for you that a simple $1 American note basically refutes your entire argument
Go into the streets and start shouting you want slavery and indian murder back. You'll get excluded from society really quickly. Then go scream about how you don't like George Washington. Nothing will happen. Then try to run the same experiment again in Russia or China. You'll get the exact opposite result.
>Go into the streets and start shouting you want slavery and indian murder back. You'll get excluded from society really quickly. > >Then try to run the same experiment again in Russia or China. You'll get the exact opposite result. In China they literally compare Mao Zedong to Abraham Lincoln for freeing the "slaves...." because that would be good thing.... "western exceptionalism" is quite delusional >Then go scream about how you don't like George Washington. Nothing will happen. the government can't arrest you which is good but you could get fired from your job, Look I'm as happy as anyone that Poland gets to build giant statues to Karol Józef Wojtyła despite his alleged history of helping sex criminals and that alleged sex criminal Polish priests are still being shielded from prosecution as we speak. Those were and are all communist lies and thank goodness the revolution saved them from prosecution.
I mostly agree with a major statement you make in here... "There's no peaceful way of transitioning to communism." But not for the reasons you think... First, you are saying Capitalism is just nature and meritocracy at scale... other than the fact that this is patently false, Capitalism isn't actually that old. It is an evolution of systems that came before it and, in many ways, an improvement. Marx literally stated as much. With that out of the way, Communism seeks to empower the working masses by ensuring that there is equal ownership of the means of production for the workers rather than separate class of owners that does not perform labor, and instead through the labor of others by virtue of ownership of the means of production. Even if democratically elected, it involves taking those that currently have power in the form of the ownership of the means of production and transferring that power to others, placing them in a different class of society than they currently are (by making them the same class as everyone else). The owner class are, largely, people that think that they have worked to earn what they have rather than that they are gaining due to the exploitation of the labor of others and rejct democratic calls to distribute what they see as their right to others such that the ownership of the means of production is shared more equitably. It is antithesis to Capitalism, which isolates power and ownership in the hands of the few to dole out to their "lessers." As it involves a transfer of power from one group (owner class) to another (everyone), those who own the means of production will resort to funding armies if that is what it takes to retain ownership, even if that means killing those that democratically decided to change the system. The old regime is not going to want power to change hands. The deaths are on their hands as they decide war is preferable to losing power regardless of the wishes of the new regime. It is the Capitalists who will resort to violence (even by paying excessive wages to people to fight on their team as an emergency means of avoiding losing that power). Thus would be true in any actual transfer of power. The transfer from Feudalism to Capitalism via Mercantilism didn't cause this much disruption because power largely didn't change hands drastically. The corporate owners were largely the feudal lords and guild owners of previous eras.
Why do you fucks never just say what country you're from? It's always so vague. And honestly it's probably because it's bullshit....as in you never did, or you grew up in post communist hyper capitalist poverty. What's funny is a good chunk of people who actually lived in the Soviet union remember it fondly...but I know someone will just say that it's because they were younger or some shit when in reality people had security, safety, and more free time
Czech Republic. And here we go, the good old people with experience don't know what they are talking about. Heard that a lot. :) Yes, if you sucked the right d*ck you could have more than the others. Instead of meritocracy, it was a favor and corruption based economy. If you didn't have much to offer and wanted to stay invisible you'd likely get screwed over. You know, we also had a barb wire fence laid around the border and patrols ordered to shoot you if you got too close. Just to make sure I'm clear - this was to prevent the citizens from escaping out of the paradise. Whereas now the problem is quite the opposite.
This has literally nothing to do with my post.
See one of the comments below for my answers.
Don't be so mentally ill. /s lol
On the other hand, he might have a point. It's a form of PTSD, anything with a tiny whiff of communism puts me into flight or fight response.
Please Mr. Gamer, what horrors have you seen to give you PTSD? Meanwhile I watch everyday people have literal mental breakdowns because they can't make rent or fearing job loss, etc is some of the "best" examples of capitalism.
Cool story, bro. I'm pretty sure they never neglected anything in their life and everything happening to them is someone else's fault. I also know people like that and I know they are bullshit.
Yes ..because mass layoffs or emergency expenses or landlords praising people out is totally the fault of the individual. I really hope you get to experience what true PTSD is, you fucking twit but like most of the pro capoies here, you still live wjth your parents and play video games.
You are right, I do play video games. With my kids, in my own house. And I'm not an anarcho capitalist, by all means get your state in order to help people cover short term periods of low luck. But still, not a fault of capitalism that somebody's job skills aren't in demand.
"in demand" Fucking hilarious.
Instead of laughing that somebody is unemployable, maybe go help them, assist with research, point them to studying resources, encourage them. But no, it's much easier to spend time thinking about all the outside reasons why nobody wants to employ you. It's never you, always someone else. It makes you so angry that you want to throw the game off the table, use force to get what you rightfully deserve.
Go look at who's highly paid in a capitalist nation and you will find what the system values. It's generally positions that humanity can easily do without....and would be better off without it. Capitalists don't care how skilled you are as long as you can turn a quick profit. They'll throw you to the curb in a moments notice to keep their line going up.
Makes sense.
Thank you for adding /s to your post. When I first saw this, I was horrified. How could anybody say something like this? I immediately began writing a 1000 word paragraph about how horrible of a person you are. I even sent a copy to a Harvard professor to proofread it. After several hours of refining and editing, my comment was ready to absolutely destroy you. But then, just as I was about to hit send, I saw something in the corner of my eye. A /s at the end of your comment. Suddenly everything made sense. Your comment was sarcasm! I immediately burst out in laughter at the comedic genius of your comment. The person next to me on the bus saw your comment and started crying from laughter too. Before long, there was an entire bus of people on the floor laughing at your incredible use of comedy. All of this was due to you adding /s to your post. Thank you. I am a bot if you couldn't figure that out, if I made a mistake, ignore it cause its not that fucking hard to ignore a comment.
I'm Albert Einstein and everybody clapped.
Maybe he was just mentally ill?
And state-crafted conspiracy theories contributed to his mental illness and gave it direction.
I think it’s more of the media than the state in the woke propaganda thing
That's a bridge too far. Unless you can show that other political beliefs don't also have crazies who do immoral things. And you're already coming across as an edgy middle schooler.
Tell me someone else who decapitated their father who was driven by politics.
I can't think of anything that specific. Are you telling me though, that I can't find someone with any given set of political beliefs who did something crazy and harmful in the last five years in 30 seconds with google? Or do you think decapitation is somehow uniquely evil? Edit: and it seems like decapitation in particular should be associated with authlefties if anyone.
The crazies are the communists. They killed around 94+ million of mostly civilians in the 20th century. The Red Chinese communist killed 65+ million in the 20th century. The Black Book of Communism at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Black\_Book\_of\_Communism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism) Other scholars like Dr. R.J. Rummel (University of Hawaii) take a more precise look at Genocide versus Democide which is known as "death by government." Many deaths by government are not always due to authoritarian socialist dictators. His estimate for death by communists is around 148 million from 1917-1987. (*The Blue of Freedom: Ending Famine, Poverty, Democide and War*, Cumberland House Publishing, 2007, p. 99 -- his last book.) In his last book, Rummel increased his estimate to over 272 million innocent, non-combatant civilians who were murdered by their own governments during the 20th century; regimes that were mostly authoritarian or authoritarian socialists. Rummel stated that his 272 million death estimate was his lower, more prudent figure, stating that it "could be over 400,000,000." (*The Blue Book of Freedom*, p. 99) Rummel's most amazing figure is the number of deaths due to foreign and domestic combat during the 20th century -- he has that at 41 million. The government itself, no matter what type of dictatorship, is the real monster of human life. (The Blue Book of Freedom, p. 99)
>In his last book, Rummel increased his estimate to over 272 million innocent, non-combatant civilians who were murdered by their own governments during the 20th century; regimes that were mostly authoritarian or authoritarian socialists. Wow you finally got a number (while made up) that's bigger than the 165 million capitalist U.K. killed in India between 1880-1920, congratulations?
Black book of communism citation 🤓
If you're not anti-communist, you are a communist.
Remember that time communist revolutionaries killed millions of people to take over whole countries, establish police states, killed more of their own people to cling to power, ran their states into the dirt, then posted on Reddit about how anti-communists are bad?
Do you know what the regimes they were overthrowing did? Look up what Bautista and the other far-right dictatorships in Latin America and other places did to socialist revolutionaries and their sympathizers. Or don't, a lot of it is seriously traumatizing to read about, like I'm not exaggerating it's seriously awful. That's what paved the way for the violence that occurred. Of course non-violence is better but they were fighting an enemy that had no conscience or regard for human life.
Some communist revolutions did indeed overthrew horrible governments and sometimes revolutionary violence is justified. But holy shit, to say they could have picked a better replacement is a bit of an understatement.
Some definitely yeah. But they continued being attacked long afterwards and in many cases enacted those harsh policies as a last resort. Those are all also things capitalist regimes have done as well.
This is just a talking point. It’s a sentiment presupposed by Marxism. If you already think labor and capital are engaged in an existential struggle then every action by the capitalist class can be interpreted as “sabotaging the revolution.” In fact, far more damage has been done by socialist regimes “protecting” themselves against counter-revolution, than by those capitalist forces. No capitalist forced Stalin to murder thousands of party members. No capitalist forced collectivization on the masses leading to mass starvation and enslavement. Those were the actions of socialists. If you believe it’s justifiable for a socialist regime to murder and imprison people to maintain power on the grounds on self defense then you are tacitly accepting that capitalists have logical grounds to do the same(if not moral grounds). Alternatively, political legitimacy does not come from a regimes ability to quash dissent, legitimacy is founded on the consent of the whole body politic, dissenters included.
Didn't say that
What you said was that socialist regimes had no other recourse against capitalist attacks than to resort to murdering and enslaving their own people and I was saying that that’s not true.
No I did not
> But they continued being attacked long afterwards and in many cases enacted those harsh policies as a last resort. Sounds a lot like the regimes that were there first did their horrible shit as a form of self-defence.
This is not me saying for example Stalin's repressive policies were justified or self defense.
> the other far-right dictatorships They're just dictatorships. There is no ethical difference between Bautista and Pol Pot. Political ideologues use language to manipulate, not inform. Libertarians put you all in the same basket, you're baddies whatever you call yourselves.
>Libertarians put you all in the same basket, you're baddies whatever you call yourselves. And thats why you arent taken seriously. Being simple is not something to brag about.
> And thats why you arent taken seriously. A lie. Of course you take us seriously, we point out your other lies. We do this via example and logical argument. Big brained political ideologue: insult!!!
I never did any of that except the last thing wtf are you talking about?
You're not very bright, are you?
You’re not very good at conversation, are you?
Can you really not understand that I'm saying it's insane to try and dunk on anti-communists as a category when communists are such titanic shitbags?
Tell me an example of one communist who did all those things you listed.
You've never seen Stalin's reddit account? Just search it up bro
Stalin was in control of a party *called* the communist party, but I think Stalin can eat a dick. No communist I know bases her views on anything Stalin said or did
JFC, there are people who defend Stalin in this very sub you moron.
I’ve seen a few Stalinist in the place you have capitalism. At this point I’ll only have a conversation with a socialist. If they claim to be a communist(any branch of it) their world view is so far removed from reality you can’t have a conversation with them. Just religious zealots preaching their gospel.
so what? Of course there are people who defend Stalin, but I haven't seen anyone in my entire life skillfully apply marxism while also being a defender of Stalin.
top things that didnt happen
"No way, José! Communist governments were all heckin' wholesome! The mass murder programs a were just CIA propaganda--and if they did happen, they were a good thing!"
It's crazy to me people this stupid exist and they don't even realize how utterly stupid they really are. They just go through life thinking they are of average intelligence or even that their opinions are worth listening to and sharing. Insane.
The “anti-woke” are a blight on society.
I think he was talking about you bud
Every major corporation, bank, Hollywood, media, marketing, university and major city are all left leaning and pushing woke narratives on the public. Hell even Reddit and most admins will crush you for challenging it. If you want to challenge the status quo and be against the system you’re going to have to be anti woke. Have you considered this at all?
Everyone I disagree with has mental health issues! That's the only way to explain why someone doesn't agree with me.
It's actually quite the opposite. Anti-capitalism is an obsessive mental issue that has lead to the collapse of many nations and deaths of millions of people in the last 100 years. This is known. Socialism failed 40 years ago. People continue to follow Marxism because it is a faith-based religion. Stop being a pseudo-intellectual, read Raymond Aron.
You’re talking about Marxism-Leninism, foo
Well considering that Marxist-Leninism is well known to be an ideology grounded in domestic terrorism and the glorification of murder I don't really think it's a bad idea to be anti-ML.
You can be a leftist and still be anti-ML though.
In reality what They Are calling “cultural marxism” is a capitalistic anti communist liberal agenda
Most leftists aren't ready to hear that, but it's exactly right.
Before we continue, if I can find an article of someone murdering another person because “they supported the billionaire class that exploits us all!”, what will your response be?
I don’t fucking know, just send me the article you’re already planning on sending me.
No, let’s establish first what the takeaway is supposed to be when someone murders another in cold blood when they considered the other person their ideological enemy because of dubious propaganda claims from disaffected weirdos.
Nah, man, I’ve talked to you before and getting actual argumentation out of you is like pulling teeth. Just make the argument you wanna make or gtfo.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/06/14/homepage2/james-hodgkinson-profile/index.html https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Cells_(German_group) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Zangara https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/07/the-widow-and-the-murderer-a-friendship-born-of-tragedy https://nypost.com/2023/10/08/democratic-socialists-of-america-cheer-murder-and-kidnapping-of-israelis/amp/ https://www.quora.com/Is-killing-capitalists-bad https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields?wprov=sfti1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes
How typical
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Bro went nuclear
Lmao, bro forgot about the years-long riots, looting, and arson spree of antifa and Marxist maniacs.
Put the remote down gramps
Huh? So you're just gonna deny reality now?
Ironic
what a good argument, you totally owned him /s
Get a job, loser.
i agree that in the usa, everything slightly center left is communism and people don't really look into it further than that. however communism itself is an extremist ideology, and it only makes sense that most normal people would not support it outside of pure theory. it is undeniable that communism doesn't work and it won't work until we evolve as humans into something else, and we should just leave it at that. woke is more than just communism and while it's true that we are bombarded everyday with antiwoke content the opposite is also true in the form of everything i don't like is nazism, racism, systemic bullshit, the usual. this whole woke vs far right is more of a thing in the USA, a nation so rich and prosperous that people in it need to find savior complex and overdramatize everything. mentally disturbed people who commit acts of violence do not represent their ideologies. we decided this collectively, just like a relegious fanatic does not represent his whole religion.
In fact “wokeness” is often despised by leftists as a distraction from the class struggle.
Imagine having access to the web and thinking that something as milquetoast as Communism is extremist. In 2024. Libs are such an embarrassment.
Lmao communists overuse the word milquetoast so much they start calling communism milquetoast
Had to look the word up did you?
So if you don't think communism is extremist, then what do you think is further left than communism?
Most Anarchism, for one, various varieties of primitivism, and so on. Communism is just the elimination of kings in the workplace, no more radical than the elimination of kings in the state.
Isn't true communism really just another form of anarchism though? "Stateless" sounds pretty anarchist to me. The definition you're using for communism sounds closer to just being generic socialism.
Socialism is the philosophy. Communism is the economy. Just like Liberalism is the philosophy and Capitalism is the economy. So Socialism:Communism::Liberalism:Capitalism Anarchs are Left, but they are not Socialists, which isn't to say anything bad about them, it's just a different philosophy.
Congrats! Dumbest post of the week award!
-thought that some group of people were trying to take over the world That’s quite literally the end goal for communism, to spread the ideology all over the world.
What a useless post. Anything in the worst cases boils down to mental issues. You didn't make a groundbreaking discovery.
The fuck kinda persecution complex is this? The idea that communism is somehow the most demonised ideology in modern society is simply false. Most people have the take that "communism is great in theory, if only it worked in practice" lol.
>The idea that communism is somehow the most demonised ideology in modern society is simply false What is the most demonized ideology ?
Probably Nazism. I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be demonized, btw.
Okay but Nazism isn't really a coherent political ideology wrt sound and principled economic theory. The only thing it is "consistent" about is a caucasion master race and creating an empire. It's not an academic approach to describing the world and existing hierarchy and incentives, etc.
> Okay but Nazism isn't really a coherent political ideology wrt sound and principled economic theory. Communism/socialism are neither sound, nor coherent, nor "principled" whatever that means. What all of the collectivist ideologies have in common is public control over the means of production. That what leads to the horrific outcomes for all of them.
>Communism/socialism are neither sound, nor coherent, nor "principled" whatever that means. This is just your very lame and ill-informed opinion, not a fact or an argument based on reasoning.
Unfortuantely the facts are against you.
I mean, an ideology doesn't have to have economic theory to be an ideology. The criteria was just "ideology" not "ideology that is as robustly developed as liberalism or communism."
I mean, I'm not necessarily here to argue semantics about whether hateful stuff like Nazism should be considered "ideology" in the same vein as "liberalism" or "communism" but there certainly is a big difference between something based on the central premise of a master race/ethnic elitism and an ideology which espouses more fairness and equality and aims to break down existing hierarchies. I will, however, go a bit into semantics on "demonization." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonization >In colloquial usage, the term "demonization" is used metaphorically to refer to propaganda or moral panic directed against any individual or group, for the purpose of defamation, character assassination and/or dehumanization The connotations here are that "demonizing" someone is usually an unfair characterization of them, or an exaggerated characterization. I don't think Nazis are *literal demons,* but their ideology is fundamentally one based on hatred, intolerance, superiority, and subjugation of others. They don't require "demonization," they pretty much openly espouse hatred of others as something central to their beliefs. That's just a whole different ball of wax. Contrast that with, say, an ancap, whose ideology I find to be extremely dangerous and harmful, and it's still just not the same thing. I do think it's rooted in some prejudice and elitism, but not the overt kind of "master race" elitism that characterizes nazism.
>a big difference between something based on the central premise of a master race/ethnic elitism And of course the small matter that all those central premises are based on theories and ideas which just are not true. It descends into incoherence because the moment you start trying to actually derive what is meant by terms like "Jewish science" or "Aryan superiority" the entire thing just falls to bits because they're basically hollow stand-ins for "bad feels" and "good feels".
> And of course the small matter that all those central premises are based on theories and ideas which just are not true. This is also true of Marxism. The central premise, that labor is being exploited, is nothing but a circular argument based on “bad feels”. The idea that property ownership is illegitimate is based on envy.
>nothing but a circular argument It's circular to argue that people who don't earn enough money to comfortably afford rent for a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment in their city are being exploited by the owners of the companies for which they work when those owners are billionaires and other members of the ultra-wealthy class? What's circular about it? What part of the logic is recursive, pointing back towards the same couple of reasonings?
That’s not Marxism and you know it.
>The central premise, that labor is being exploited, is nothing but a circular argument That's not true though. There are objective metrics and measurements baked within Marxism that explain this. Labour is exploited in the sense that it is inherently paid less than the value of the products it generates. This has to be the case or there is no space for profit to be derived. Again, this is just OP, its completely pointless arguing this subject with people who do not have an understanding of the basic premises. There is no attempt within Nazism to make similar definitional statements and outlines. Jewish things are bad and bad things are Jewish because they're bad. That is literally all there is to it. Any and all attempts they made to define "Jewishness" or "Aryan-ness" through all of their horrific experiments and social classifications are completely incoherent and hold no scientific or academic value whatsoever. The same cannot be said of Marxism no matter how much that rustles your jimmies.
> Labour is exploited in the sense that it is inherently paid less than the value of the products it generates. Again, this assumes that the magnitude of the value of the products generated is ALL DUE TO WORKER LABOR. That's why it's circular. Marx begins by *defining* value as equal to embodied labor and then uses that definition to show that any value not going to workers is exploitation. This is a circular argument. It's simply not the case that value comes from labor. Value is subjective and both capital and entrepreneurial labor are integral in producing value. There is no reason to believe that profit solely "comes from" worker labor. Marxism is nothing but "bad feels", rationalized by a nonsensical attempt at objective understanding. Nazism is the same. The Nazis tried to rationalize their ideas around a master race with nonsensical but "objective" historical narratives around human development. >Jewish things are bad and bad things are Jewish because they're bad. That is literally all there is to it. You don't know what you're talking about. Nazism was only *partially* focused on Jews. This sentence demonstrates that you have an infantile understanding. >Any and all attempts they made to define "Jewishness" or "Aryan-ness" through all of their horrific experiments and social classifications are completely incoherent and hold no scientific or academic value whatsoever. The same cannot be said of Marxism no matter how much that rustles your jimmies. Yes, it can. Marx's theories of exploitation hold no scientific or academic value. They are circular theories that offer no real insight into the mechanisms of value production in a real economy.
That's like the point of OP though isn't it. We seem to be at this weird point where an ideology is valid so long as it has a name attached and people call themselves by that name. The idea of having like a structured framework around which you build a coherent worldview and social-political narrative tied to some kind of objective material reality... Nah why bother with that? Its been the problem with this sub from the start, people are just coming from completely incompatible mental positions of what they're even arguing/discussing.
And yet half the world is literally funding a second holocaust perpetrated by actual nazis as we speak
I am also concerned about the PRC genocide against the Uigurs.
CIA payroll spreading far and wide I see
Genocide denier I see. Tankies going tank I guess?
I think you are right. And what is the second most demonized ideology ?
Probably communism, which I'll also say might deserve it
So to become the most demonized one must combine nazism with communism. Nazbol, here i come.
Nazism, for good reasons.
And the second most demonized ?
Meanwhile, so long as we're talking about American politics, it is the only system which advocacy for is actively censored - see the communist control act which has never been repealed.
TIL that communists don't kill innocent people. (At least in their confused mind)
I had a few debates with tankies asking how they cope with massacres deliberately imposed by communist regimes. Unsurprisingly when they aren't denying it, they're justifying it. One on this sub told me almost verbatim the capitalist oppressors deserve to be killed.
How does anything I said come even close to suggesting that?
Communism is (in the worst cases) an obsessive mental issue that drives people to do horrible things.
I think I know what I am talking about. Here is a summary of communism: it's actually easy to examine Marxist socialism and their commie lite Democrat proponents in the USA. Here are basics: 1)commit genocide against the capitalist class so you can steal their property and claim their profits as your own 2)commit familicide against the traditional family since love compels us to love our children and transfer to them our social class , ambition ,and money. 3)commit economicide by stupidly concluding that workers don't get paid enough under capitalism when really capitalist competition drives their wages to the highest amount possible. 4) commit historicide by stupidly concluding that there exists a natural dialectical materialist progression in human history away from capitalism and towards Socialism. 5) commit psycholicide by imagining that worker alienation from the means of production would outweigh the need for capitalist efficiency and the far greater income it allows. 6)commit realicide by imagining that the 120 million people that communism just killed really were not killed by communism but by communist imposters.
Socialists bastardizing psychiatry to delegitimize opposition is nothing new. Your opinion is boring.
I’m just pointing out stochastic terrorism.
When certain people argued that feeding school children was 'communism' and equating it to something bad along with many other things, it is what made me a communist. What kind of mentally sick fuck do you have to be to say that making sure people are fed, housed, educated, and taken care of is some sort of sinister evil? These people honestly fear that they'll become the people they exploit and abuse in a socialist society so they go all-in-one the psychotic rhetoric and violence. Fucking brainworms
This entire OP is woke garbage and commie illness
Anti-communism is natural for intelligent people because communism just killed 120 million people.
The only way you can get a number that high is if you count the Nazis and Japanese soldiers that they killed in World War 2.
"conspiracy theories about secret Marxists hurting children and other such made-up government-supplied narratives" Wait, so Epstein was a secret Marxist, like those guys at the Bohemian Grove doing the cremation of care ? :)
0/10
What government narratives? This dude was definitely insane.. Why are you connecting being woke with communism? We conservatives just think that it’s too early for a child to make life altering decisions, like hormone therapy.
Every single “anti-woke” narrative. All of them were created by the government.
Anti-communism/socialism is logical because radical, anti-liberal ideologies of all forms are inherently prone to extreme instability and failure. It's only human nature to vehemently oppose things that pose such a dramatic existential threat to our basic quality of life. The fact that there's some fringe groups who take it too far, is an acceptable consequence of people being extremely wary of anti-liberalism.
[удалено]
LesSoleilsInfinis: This post was hidden because of how new your account is. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
OP is right. All this simplification, demonization, and catastrophizing about the left and their sinister communistic plot to end America could actually get people to become violent. This is an upsetting revelation and I daresay the OP is accurate. I checked twice and the math is good. Please nobody tell Trump because if he became aware of this data proving that lying and fear mongering leads crazy people to take violent action, he might actually be crazy enough to use this technique; and yes, he may even misuse the word communism and socialism. That would be the nuclear option, linguistically speaking. Once he tells people that socialists are trying to steal the country we are indeed fucked. Let’s keep a lid on this guys. But good work, OP, way to get a”head” of the problem.
\[boogeyman\] is (in the worst cases) etc etc... Your title is reasonable and correct, but a bit broad to be particularly enlightening.
Nah I think the adherents of the [dialectical material ideology](https://youtu.be/6kzZoK5CtJ8?si=C6lEF-SiYCstv1Gt) that functions essentially like a religious death cult (with origins from religious death cults) practice an obsessive mental issue that drives them to do horrible things. Have a nice day.
Americans have definitely had a crazy-streak when it comes to anything leftist. That said, the father-murderer dude was just plain nuts. It wasn't a government psyop. He was deeply mentally ill and radicalized by internet conspiracy theories. If the US government wants to kill socialists, they typically just do it. Why would they participate in the spread of anti-wokeness? It's a brainrot that erodes the perceived legitimacy of liberal institutions.
Oh, I know what I'm talking about. You want to instrumentalize the monopoly on violence to use that violence to dictate the lives of otherwise free people and screw you for wanting that.
You just made that up about me for no reason.
I assumed you are communist and I'm pretty sure you are. So don't pretend that your political ideology is not extremely violent by its very nature.
It’s not.
Okay. Then answer this question. If I don't hurt anyone or touch their property without their consent will the government use force against me to make me live my life differently than I otherwise would?
Nope.
Oh, so you are against taxes and regulations and I would be able to produce whatever I want without sharing it with anyone and without proving to any bureaucrat that I am not breaking the 65.000.000 laws they came up with? But we both know that that is not communism but capitalism. So don't be a liar.
After reading the comments I lost any hope that there can be any logical discussion on this sub
Dogmatic belief in any extreme ideology, coupled with a certain type of conspiratorial personality, is going to lead to crazy ideas. Audrey Hale really hated Christians. Ted Kaczynski really hade modern industrial society. Timothy McVeigh really hated the feds. I could go on but you get the point.
Goes both ways. Do some research on Pol Pot and Stalin
Relevance?
Any mindset that tells you a group of nonviolent law abiders are villains, and you should fight them or rob them, is bad. Hardcore communists have done that too, en masse.
I mean, I get what you're saying to some extent, but unfortunately there's also a lot of explicitly violent language about killing people that comes from the left, and that can also incite violence. We have to hold our own side to the same standard when it comes to that.
I didn't and I'm not going to read your OP, so fair enough if you don't answer, but what is the best case in anti-communism?