/lit/ - Literature

>socialists
>buying books

>>14241785
>has never once been implemented correctly.
This is true and can't be refuted but what you are looking for is this man who's in his recent lefty arc has crushed every single socialist that has talked to him using logic and economics.

>>14241785
I know the absolute best books that are criticisms of Marxism/Socialism. Like the ones that pretty much refute every point but you won't ever find them because they are obscure and because I'm pro socialist and I don't want you to.

>>14241785
It doesn't work bc the people who try implement it always do it for their own personal gain, the bad people always end up at the top of the communist ladder since it lends itself to being abused.
Not to mention that Marx didn't give anyway to implement communism in the face of a capitalist world. Even China which is supposedly Communist abuses capitalism to gain power over other nations. Marx also wanted everyone to have a gun and land of their own but that'll never happen with government in place which by the way is what communism is: a government.
Power corrupts and communism pretends it doesn't.

I'd be for hopeful and less clinical toward communism in the west if it wasn't the identity police who would have total power if it was implemented. It's already corrupt, people who climb the LGBT ladder do it for social status and not for the benefit of the people, something which Marx hated. Younger generations are increasingly supportive of the ideology bc it promises peace but generally it only leads to bloody revolution after a few generations.

Read the dispossessed, space communism and how it'll fail every single time.

>>14241873
That's good bait. I almost fell for it.

So reddit is commies now? Notbjust faggy liberals?

>>14241922
A system where you need to be selfish to progress versus one where you don't.

>>14241927
Reddit will always be liberal. Anti communism gets to the top of it often. My friend told me.

>>14241807
>those arms
Yikes

>>14241873
Communism revolution have literally never been successful in an actually developed industrialized nations which is like the one huge pre-requisite Marx wrote. Russia was a peasant country and basically had to create capitalism to meet the requirements, even Lenin admitted this and created the NEP (New Economic Policy) to create a market. Everything after that has just be an inferior clone of already flawed premise, China being a more retarded version of the Soviet Union, NK being a more retarded version of China and so on.

>>14241922
Philosophers havent supposed such as "human nature" since Hume btfo it.

>>14241955
He can't keep up the weight with all the fucking he is doing.

>>14241947
You need to be selfish to climb any social ladder, retard. Everything on this Earth is built this way.

>>14241958
Imagine thinking the Soviet Union was ever going to introduce to socialism LOL i bet you think China is waiting for the right time too

>>14241958
Even the Communist revolution in Russia only happened months after a Democratic revolution.

>>14241965
He's not fucking any of them.

>>14241977
He is literally in a open relationship with a hot girl (the one on his right arm) 10 years younger than him and flies around the world fucking twitch thots on stream. Steven Bonnelli is a chad in real life and in the debate ring.

>>14241950
Yeah they're unronically more anti-commie than 4chan at this point, Russiagate/HK riots gave all the libs their a huge hateboner for communism.

>>14241967
Communism is classless so there is no economic ladders to climb.

>>14241965
>ywn pull this much 5/10 poon

It hurts

>>14241973
You have terrible reading comprehension.

China, USSR, Cuba, and NK aren't really reputations of communism. All you have to say to counter this is that it was a flawed implementation, and that this was not only a simple error to be corrected, but an even more airtight reason, is that all of these nations are subject to outside forces.

In the same way that communism is "refuted" by China's fall in Dengism or whatever, capitalism is "refuted" by its constant recessions, or that millions die or suffer as a result of it, etc. People simply apologize for capitalism because they see it as a mere force of nature and therefore blameless. This is just a darwinist materialist ideology. If you take up Marx's historical materialism, communism appears blameless. And then you can simple say "global capitalism has been tried and its fucking awful. But we've never tried global communism."

>>14242002
the right side is 5/10 the left side is 8/10

>>14242009
Aren't refutations*

>>14242005
>Everything after that has just be an inferior clone of already flawed premise,
is this the part i missed

Who cares, social democracy is what clearly works and theres nothing worth dying for especially le workers RISE UP global gobbunism

>>14241997
>Communism is classless
Only in theory.

>>14241958
>An actually developed industrialised nation
Same problems will occur in a developed nation, if you think prosperity can be shared and people will be happy to do so you're delusional.
Nobody in a developed area would fight for communism and risk their comforts.

>>14242016
I don't know since your previous post has nothing to do with that statement, I definitely don't think China will ever be communist in anyway or ever has been, I think the Soviet Union was an earnest attempt at least during Lenin's lifetime but not meeting important requirements and being isolated on the world stage it was pretty much doomed to failure, everyone copying a failed experiment to make even more terrible and flawed states which only became compounded and more extreme as they spawned more replications.

>>14242009
They use the ideology of communism to control the populus which is really the only real world use of communism.

Marxism is a school of criticism, not a system of government. I really doubt most people on those sites are claiming that Marxism-Leninism is the ultimate system of human organization.

>>14241785
This is bait but funny

>>14242009
Nobody thinks capitalism is moral. Just how nature isn't moral. Supply and demand has existed since life first evolved and will continue to exist will past our mass extinction.

Living beings need things and this will never change

>>14242066
Control the populus to do what? You get richer and more powerful as a capitalist. That's why the Chinese worker was put to the whip when Mao died and the Chinese business mogul class was born.

>>14242045
But that's what we are talking about

>>14242080
This.
Communist ideologues quote Marx but Marx would have been disgusted at the ideology.

>>14242044
Social democracy steals mean you have to slave your life away so the capitalists can have their billions. I'd rather not spend the rest of my life doing that.

>>14242055
I never understood the meme that Lenin's Soviet was a failure to the ideals of Communism in any way. They achieved all of their goals and even attempted to expand outward when they tried to annex Poland in the 1919-1920 war. The thing I notice with contemporary Communists is they always preach the same objectives (e.g. psychological and linguistic warping, gulags, re-education centers, thoughtcrime, violent suppression, etc) except with the Frankfurt School "repressive tolerance" touch. Growing up in a post-Soviet country, I would say Communism succeeded far more than any Western mind would be able to comprehend. The largest problem with Western people is that they are usually caught up in some economic argument, but economics are not the focal point here. There is no surprise, for example, that Marxism spawned all kinds of pseudo-psychological theories like psychoanalysis (and the psychological warfare employed by the security services of the Soviet state, etc). In fact, I see contemporary Leftists in the West engaging in the same kind of psychological behavior as the security services were in the past.

>>14241785
>never once been implemented correctly.
Which means that every attempt has disastrously failed.

It would only be "true Marxism" if every single problem humanity has faced would be solved by it, but since Marxism is a non-functional idea Amy attempt at implementation will result in failure.

>>14242095
Unless you become the ruler yourself there will always be somebody above you. Horizontal based societies do not last very long because they are very easily subverted and typically the subversion comes from its own membership, not outside forces.

>>14242088
>Implying Chinese business aren't tightly controlled by government ideals
Just read the leaked documents from the detention centers. They're instructions for the guards and repeatedly site the communist party as a reason for they they should oppress and brainwash the prisoners.

What the fuck do you think the HK protests are about. They're screaming for help because they know what communism really is. Recently HK got 85% approval for the pro-democracy protests.

>>14242102
I strongly disagree, Marxism is a highly functional idea it's just Western people do not understand the psychological aspect. For example, the Communists may have lost the Cold War but they won the Psychological kulturkampf in the West for sure.

>>14241807
Destiny is pretty cool here's a picture I took with him a while ago

>>14242088
Mao is a fantastic example and many modern Leftists perhaps inadvertently draw some inspiration from him. His annihilation of Chinese cultural heritage sites, for example, is a fantastic tactic that is still employed by the New Left today.

>>14242085
Capitalism is merely historical. This is what you dont understand. It is not a force of nature, it is a product of men. Before capitalism, land was common, men kept what they made and made what they kept. Their "force of nature" was the king's men riding into town and collecting protection money. Applying for jobs and working a wage is not a force od nature. Communistic societies would also have "supply and demand." Of course they would. Capitalism does not own supply and demand and this was never a claim of Marx. In fact Marx's whole philosophy is constructed on the idea that material needs are what is primary to man, as after all he must eat.

Capitalism is not nature. It is a specific ideology, by men. The consciousness of man is beyond simple nature, because we can choose. We can choose to produce material wealth in a different way that does not contain the irrationalities of capitalism.

>>14242108
So there is something worth rising up for you just don't think it works.

>Unless you become the ruler yourself there will always be somebody above you
What are you talking about specifically? What is someone gonna be above you in?

>Horizontal based societies do not last very long because they are very easily subverted and typically the subversion comes from its own membership, not outside forces.
Source?

>>14242121
hey that’s pretty good! :)

>>14242116
Marxism is purely a criticism of capitalism. Marx felt obligated to give ideas towards an alternative but I doubt that communism is what he had in mind.

>>14241991
>open relationship
lmao
shill your e-celebs somewhere else

>>14242113
You really think the PRC is communist?

>>14242138
Open relationships are chad if you're the one doing the fucking

>>14242108
>>14242131
I think it's better just to ask if you think there is no alternative to slaving away for the capitalists. I'm not talking communism but just a workable alternative.

>>14241991
>dimunitive balding manlet who appeals to 105iq pseuds by talking fast, being contrarian and using fallacies can still only get in an "open relationship" with a 5/10
She's fucking chad but thats not him. He likely pays for her somehow so she can then go to nice places with chad.
I cant imagine any woman would want to procreate with that. The length of equal to that of his shoulders. He's deformed freak, was probably born a month too early

>>14242143
he's fucking filthy twitch hpv sluts who want fame because he has a lot of money. hardly an accomplishment

>>14242137
Bro, read the manifesto and the german ideology. Marx wanted communism, because he wanted history to proceed past capitalism. His response to "communism will fail" would be "good! We will learn from its mistakes and build something greater." He is a dialectician in every sense, he believes economics performs a labour of the negative, until it gets it right.

>>14242010
I would have the sex with the second from right badly

>>14242152
Length of his head*

>>14242131
Man has always "Rose up" against his master throughout history to become the new master. Nobody wants to be on the bottom rung of the ladder, it's a healthy imperative to possess a competitive spirit. This is precisely the entire downfall of all idealistic talk of a horizontal society. I think of the Spanish Civil War where those Anarchists preached all kinds of talk but at the end of the day resorted to establishing a hierarchy, out of necessity for the day, and wound up eating themselves alive until they were destroyed from internal and external forces.

The same exact scenario played out in the Rojava experiment, only this time there is the added hilarity of begging the so called "imperialist" for more aid and help to keep alive its existence. Whenever you peel the layer back behind the facade there is always the same scenario. Thus, it is simply unwise to trust anyone speaking of revolt for the sake of a "bold new world" or "horizontal" stratification because chances are they are just going to stab you in the back the moment the dust is thrown into the air.

>>14242155
How many girls are you fucking

>>14242149
I don't believe capitalists exist, I think the whole term is rather infantile.

>>14242137
These "critiques" are usually all the same: meaningless pilpul attempts to deroot societies, creating rift and unrest, and then attempt to harness power. The Bolshevik's were a Marxist success story in the fullest sense of being.

>>14242171
1

>>14242152
He isn't balding. He is a manlet. He does talk fast but he wins all his debates. Lefties can't answer basic questions about their societies function and Melina isn't a 5/10 she is at least 8/10. Girls like intelligence.

>ultimate system of government
>impossible to implement

They oppress and kill in the name of it just like every other nation that uses it's ideals.
If it's used for oppression it is oppression.

Maybe communism would feed the starving and group everyone into a single easily controlled caste but after a few generations people would get demolarized and only live to serve the collective and people that refuse would be sent to camps to secure the power of the people at the top of the hierarchy.

>>14242187
cute :3

>>14242201
How the fuck are his shoulders so narrow, he literally looks like a 14 year old

Anyway why are you forcing this pseud to live vicariously through him? None of those girls are attracted to him or even likely fuck him

>>14242201
I don't have any idea who this is or what it is meant to be but it looks and reads like cancer.

>>14242156
He also believed in bloody revolution

>>14242207
That makes sense though. When you propose an ultimate system you have plenty of time to wait.

>>14242178
>I don't believe capitalists exist, I think the whole term is rather infantile.
I mean there are people who own capital and people who don't.

>These "critiques" are usually all the same: meaningless pilpul attempts to deroot societies, creating rift and unrest, and then attempt to harness power. The Bolshevik's were a Marxist success story in the fullest sense of being.
You don't have a problem being a wagecuck for the capital owners to buy more ferraris?

>>14241785
You've been trying to implement it for over 150 years now and it has never been done correctly. Maybe reality is incompatible with it?

>>14242215
He's obsessed. This guy was on /tv/ earlier shilling Destiny in a Nick Fuentes thread. Just ignore him.

>>14242218
I would prefer bloody revolution to what we are presented with today.

>>14242222
>I mean there are people who own capital and people who don't.
*There are people who subsist themselves by utilizing capital they own and there are people who subsist themselves by wagelabour

>>14242215
>Anyway why are you forcing this pseud to live vicariously through him? None of those girls are attracted to him or even likely fuck him
He was married and had a kid before streaming

>Anyway why are you forcing this pseud to live vicariously through him?
Gotta bow down before greatness. He is the chosen one.

>>14242229
Oh? And what is reality? What does it whisper into your ear? Man is just a bunch of chemicals following physical laws, and communism didn't fit into it?

>>14242243
You mean are forced to. Why you such a bootlicker trying to justify being a wagecuck?

>>14242247
>was married
>open relationship
>following immoral people
>let alone e-celebs
yikes dawg are you 14?

>>14242233
I do shill Destiny often but that wasn't me. You can't expect Fuentes thread and not get him.

>>14242261
Do you not have any intellectual heroes? Do you have a problem with Chomsky having a poster of Bertrand Russell in his home office?

>>14242256
You have to work in either system, nothing is magically making many forms of work worth a shit

>>14242222
>who own capital and people who don't
Yes and "capital" in the fullest sense of its meaning has always existed even in hunter-gatherer societies. This broad extension to call the Industrial Age a "capitalist" one was simply an attempt to categorize rapid technological based development in an attempt to subvert it. To me this just seems like a large farce and infantile.

>wagecuck
>capital owners
It has always been this way, I can't think of a single society that didn't have some kind of system in place. Even the most primitive of tribal societies still keep a kind of capital in place to ensure tribal authority, be it in the form of an "elder council" or "shaman" or whatever other title they can make up.

I also don't buy into the massive amount of cynicism. For example, growing up in a post-Soviet country made me realize that competitive economics within a nationalist framework was an objectively better system that the one in which we had just escaped from. Our economy is currently the fastest growing in Europe. Most other European countries are either slowing (Germany) or rapidly declining (France, Greece).

Compared to the cap system that was in my place during Communist times for my father, I am already making more money than he was at my age and given my youth the sky is the limit. "Capital owners" were no different than the local Party Board. The biggest difference is that now I have a shot at uplifting myself out of a centrally planned economic system that did not allow for much personal character growth.

The system is not perfect for sure, I am very skeptical about any kind of egalitarian talk or following in the footsteps of the decadent West, however, it is still a far better place than it was 40 years ago.

>>14242276
Less hours, more pay, control in workplace, becoming an owner. All turn work into no longer being wagecuck.

>>14242283
>Yes and "capital" in the fullest sense of its meaning has always existed even in hunter-gatherer societies. This broad extension to call the Industrial Age a "capitalist" one was simply an attempt to categorize rapid technological based development in an attempt to subvert it. To me this just seems like a large farce and infantile.
People own capital. Socialists want a society in which people don't own capital. What's the problem?

>The system is not perfect for sure, I am very skeptical about any kind of egalitarian talk or following in the footsteps of the decadent West, however, it is still a far better place than it was 40 years ago.
Just more coping with the fact that your entire life will spent making scraps while your boss gets rich off of your labor.

>>14241947
>a system where you need to be selfish to progress vs. a system where selfish people can exploit naive people and progress
Wow

>>14242166
"man has always rose up against his master to become the new master." Fuck off faggot. The entire argument of some nature of man being in direct confrontation with communist ideals is moronic, man is something which changes. To possess a competitive spirit is new-speak for "capitalism is nature." Noone wants to be at the bottom of the ladder because people are probably dying if they are at the bottom of the ladder in capitalist societies, not affording food or homes. Communism is not egalitarianism, we don´t mean that everyone will have the same wage or do the same thing, the problem is that some people in the current society can do nothing and still gain money, at the detriment of poor people. When Catalonia fell it was because of Franco, not anything else.
The problem with Rojava is that as Trump obviously digressed from the problem as soon as he was defending Anarchists.

>>14242284
So starting your own business sounds like a solution for you. This is incredibly difficult to do is a centrally planned economic system (Communism) and even more difficult in countries with high tax rates, particularly when they are also egalitarian. It means you will never really be allowed to possess much of anything and never be able to control your own destiny.

I am simply not of the opinion that the "luxury communism" meme is even desirable, because it would most assuredly just translate into a bunch of morbidly obese flesh husks hooked up to machines while a Central Committee controls their entire lives and disposes them when they aren't needed as machines.

>>14242297
>So starting your own business sounds like a solution for you.
Stealing the surplus value of my fellow man? I'd rather not be a slave owner.

>This is incredibly difficult to do is a centrally planned economic system
Market Socialism. I already said forget about communism.

>>14241964
>looking to philosophy on the question of 'human nature' rather than evolutionary biology

>>14242241
>The basis of the Communist brain muh violences gives meaning
You wouldn't fight and if you did you would be scorned

>>14242292
>Socialists want a society in which people don't own capital.
Yes, my parents lived in this system for the majority of their life and I lived under the system for the first few years of my life. It was not only abysmal but inescapable. It is a totalist world of psychological imprisonment. The economics aren't even the worst part in these cases.

>making scraps
This sounds like a hard projection. I am making more than scraps and I have no jealousy towards my boss. He has been working in the field for decades and has a vast knowledge of the trade. It would be irresponsible for me to think that I can simply outmaneuver him without the proper training, which is something I can do as I develop my own character and career. This is something entirely impossible to do in Socialism.

We have this board-game where the premises is basically waiting in different queues until you can complete your shopping. Of course, reflecting back on those days standing in lines with my mother I realize now it wasn't so much the economic situation was bad (it was bad, but we weren't dying for example) it was that your life was constrained in a psychological torture chamber where you couldn't escape. You worked with so called "comrades" while the Party shouted their pre practiced lines about solidarity, etc and at the end of the day you went back to your "commieblock" and stared at the grayness of it all (of course the Communists wound up trying to paint these commieblocks at one point which made for some hilarious child hood memories).

>>14242311
>Yes, my parents lived in this system for the majority of their life and I lived under the system for the first few years of my life. It was not only abysmal but inescapable. It is a totalist world of psychological imprisonment. The economics aren't even the worst part in these cases.
You lived in a society in which the state owned the capital. No difference to capitalism.

>This sounds like a hard projection. I am making more than scraps and I have no jealousy towards my boss. He has been working in the field for decades and has a vast knowledge of the trade. It would be irresponsible for me to think that I can simply outmaneuver him without the proper training, which is something I can do as I develop my own character and career.
You really think your boss works 500 times harder than you?
>This is something entirely impossible to do in Socialism.
No it's not?

>>14242307
Ah Mr. scientist is here to tell me how people really are. Tell me Mr. scientist, what experiments have you done to prove the psychological theories you extract from evolution?

>>14242256
Where was I justifying shit, you stupid American nigger? Just correcting your terminology.

>>14242310
>violences gives meaning
very nice strawman. Fighting for a meaningful cause gives meaning though
>You wouldnt fight
yes, I would
>you would be scored
by how and why would I care?

Don't bother projecting your own spinelessness onto me.

>>14242326
Justifying owning capital is justifying being a wage cuck.

>>14242297
>I am simply not of the opinion that the "luxury communism" meme is even desirable, because it would most assuredly just translate into a bunch of morbidly obese flesh husks hooked up to machines while a Central Committee controls their entire lives and disposes them when they aren't needed as machines.

Literally Capitalism. Capitalism as a system offers you not what you may need, but what you want. Capitalism is driven by profit, for all the capitalists care you may as well be a "morbidly obese flesh husk" hooked up to mcdonalds machines while a market controls your entire life and disposes of you when you die off mcburger syndrome.
Capitalism as an idea is fantastic for accumulating wealth, no objections, the problem is Capitalism is "amoral" so to speak, it goes with profit, and does not heed the giant Ecological collapse we are going into because it is not profitable, and does not care about poor people because it is not profitable.

>>14242306
>surplus value of my fellow man
What surplus value...?
>slave owner
We have objectively more room to grow and operate now under a more open market economy than we ever did under Socialism. This is a simple fact. And if you were someone who was not supportive of Party policies you simply would not exist. For example, in my home town there was a hospital owned by a wealthy surgeon (one of the first in our regions, a very accomplished man who survived German and Soviet occupation) but when the Communist Party asked him to enlist in the Party he outright refused. As the months dragged on, they psychologically tormented him until he gave in. But not everyone gave in and those people usually wound up dead or in Siberia during many of the round-ups of dissidents.

>Market Socialism
This just sounds like a stepping stone. After surviving Socialism once in my life, I simply have no desire to ever see it return. I am also always amused when I hear Westerners talk of Socialism in a positive light as if they somehow just forgot the last 60-70 years of history in Central and Eastern Europe. Regardless, we most likely don't share the same country so you are free to do what you think is right. I just hope you fully understand what you are talking about, because writing idealism is not reality.

>>14241785
Shafarevish - The Socialist Phenomenon

>>14242332
>What surplus value.
The value of their labor that I take from them.
> For example, in my home town
I don't give a shit about how you lived under state capitalism. Not relevant to anything.
>After surviving Socialism once in my life
Wasn't socialism. State ownership is not socialist.

>>14242311
Why does your life have to revolve around the idea that getting more money, means that you are devoloping greater character? How is material gain correlated to growth in character?
In my opinion the greatest goal of communism is the opinion for self-fulfillment, not working your way up a corporate ladder to gain more and more, but instead doing things which you enjoy, creating art or spending time with your loved ones. Is it really greater to climb to the top of the corporate ladder, than to create something which is your own?

>>14242320
>state owned the capital. No difference to capitalism.
I can see large differences in this so called "capitalism" (a term I simply don't believe in but I use it here for the good spirit of debate) and the Socialism that my parents and I knew. We are able to purchase commodities, for example. It wasn't that we had a severe lack of money, it was that there was simply nothing to purchase and the system was centrally run and therefore poor. Government employee's cannot be expected to perform as well as private ones and we have a long list of special names for government employee's in my country, as I'm sure most countries do.

>You really think your boos works 500 times harder than you?
I don't know where this "500" number came from, but certainly he has provided the intellectual framework for the company and it was created by him several decades ago, albeit in a much cruder and less polished form than it is today. Regardless, he has labor of a different variety at this point in his life. Direction is needed in human affairs, it is inefficient otherwise. The Socialist system produced very inefficient labor directives that usually just resulted in taking short cuts (e.g. you could never really lose your job in Socialism, we have a saying that translates to like, "Whether drunk or asleep you will still be paid" - actually we had a serious alcohol issue that derived exclusively from this Socialist model system).

>No it's not?
Then we have reached the point of circularity most likely. You seem very regimented in your views, which is unsurprising for me. We have a lot of cinema, for example, dealing with the fact you weren't really anybody in Socialist times because development of character was relatively impossible to do. It usually led to critiques of the system itself, and that was simply not allowed. If a community starts complaining about Socialist policies then there is only one way to deal with said communities. We had our share of street fights against the Milicja.

>>14242322
Ah, Mr. Philosopher is here to tell me how people really are. Tell me, Mr. Philosopher, what mental masturbation have you done to prove the phenomenological theories you extract from Hegel?

>>14242330
So if "capitalism" is translating directly to elements of Communism then perhaps "capitalism" was always a poor choice of words and a meaningless concept used solely to critique a free market system? It just seems circular to me in that it seems to act like a smoke screen.

>"amoral" so to speak
Morality economics are a miserable state of affairs. Been there done that.

>Ecological collapse
I am not sure Socialism will have an answer for this either because Socialism is very poor at handling negative situations and forming realistic solutions to immediate problems. Also, Socialist functionaries tend to either by hyper radicalized or calculated politicians and the list of cover-ups of various disasters is probably worth someone writing a book about. Although perhaps this has already been done.

>>14242328
You're the only one who wants to fight.
My point about violence was that it's pointless and only meaningful to you and the people who instigate it. You want to fight bc where you find meaning isn't where normal people find meaning and so youre a degenerate that puts society at risk.

>>14242374
>can see large differences in this so called "capitalism"
Sure but it's not a system in which socialists would support. It doesn't matter whether the capital is owned by the bourgeoisie or the government. It still has the same problem of someone owning capital over the work so there is no point talking about it.
>I don't know where this "500" number came from,
CEO's in the US make 300x the workers. Not saying the bosses don't work hard but 300 times harder?
>Direction is needed in human affairs, it is inefficient otherwise.
There is still direction under socialism. They aren't getting rid of managers.
>The Socialist system produced very inefficient labor directives
All the economic literature on worker ownership shows it to be more productive than private firms. Capitalist economists have no problems with worker owned firms.
>.g. you could never really lose your job in Socialism,
You can though? You would be voted out by the workers.
>actually we had a serious alcohol
Still talking about your state capitalism

>>14242387
I'll tell you what I extract - It is that there is no such thing as human nature, because it cannot be shown, and any claim otherwise is a pathetic perversion of science.

>>14242342
I could start my own business I suppose, and that is a potential plan down the line (but I am hoping that my country will lower regulations and taxes otherwise it is still quite difficult to start your own business) but for now this is the obligation I must fulfill to continue my training, knowledge gathering, and work experience. I don't think this is such a bad system particularly with that infamous "specter" lurking in very recent historical memory (e.g. the last Communists did not leave until the 90's, and many still operate even despite attempts to root them out).

>State ownership is not socialist.
We heard this one all before too.

>how you lived under state capitalism.
The problem with you types is your dogmatic approach to life. It's probably because you Westerners have given into Critical Theory and destroyed all value in your society. It is at least an interesting show for Central and Eastern Europeans. I am generally interested to see the kind of chaos that emerges in the next several decades. Of course, we just ask that you keep it contained to your geosphere and leave us well out of it, we've had enough fun playing Socialism.

>>14242401
Society deserves to be at risk.

>>14242412
You have obviously read no socialist history or theory. This is basic socialism 101 stuff I'm talking about.

>>14241807
word on the street is he has a fat cock

>>14242424
i thought that was shroud

>>14242417
Try telling that to the millions of happy families and people living with full stomachs.


You deserve to be put down.

>>14242436
naw why do you think destiny has twitch thots orbiting him
his 8x6 cock makes them cum buckets

>>14242412
>It's probably because you Westerners have given into Critical Theory and destroyed all value in your society.

What are these values which we should defend? Rich getting richer while poor people die daily from preventable causes? Exploitation of workers?
Please enlighten me based capitalist

>>14242444
he got a weird cock i know he has some kinda of dick problem but i dont remember what it was

>>14242408
>Sure but it's not a system in which socialists would support
This is some broad, idealistic talk that seems like an incredible stretch and reminds me of the "Party Line" commitments that the former Socialist government imposed on everyone, which was usually to the detriment of the local populations (e.g. a radicalized functionary cannot be expected to even remotely understand common people, and it's well expected they would despise them anyway).

>There is still direction under socialism.
Yes there was "direction" but often it was walking into a wall for several years, suppressing valid opposition voices, and creating a large mess of a bureaucracy to handle even simple issues. Western Socialists are also heavily egalitarian which is something even the Bolshevik's learned is not a realistic approach (of course this was during their great purges of opposition). That is another thing I often wonder about. The road to Socialism requires a radical shift in politics and will require executions or at least deportations (Soviets did both for example during their re-arrangement of society). I am unsure how this would realistically work in Western countries. In places like the US it would seem impossible given the growing demographic divide not to mention the huge opposition that would naturally react.

>...worker ownership shows it to be more productive than private firms
That's very good, we had worker ownership once. Now we don't and things are a lot better. I'm sure your literature is well researched and I hope you enjoy your experiments, but we are simply not interested. I am saying this because you have tendency to launch violent invasions into my country during your experimentation phases. I could care less how you try to resurrect that old system so long as you leave us well out. Actually, this is my primary motivation for talking with you because I imagine you share a similar mentality with many other Western Socialists.

Also, by this measure, if a company decides to organize itself a certain way I don't think there is going to be anyone stopping them. We have such "co-ops" still here, although they often close down or change hands.

>state capitalism
This word seems like the epitome of applying psychoanalysis to a real development of Socialism and trying to shift the narrative. We were already subjected to these psychological games and are relatively immune to them at this point. But you have repeated this concept more than once so you are dogmatic about its existence.

>>14242411
>you cannot know nuffin about human nature
>humans are the abstract ideals of tabula rasas as opposed to organisms which evolved according to the demands of natural and sexual selection

>>14242445
God, hating blacks, and Mozart songs

>>14241785
Fanged Noumena

>>14242422
>when a Westerner tries to tell you you haven't "read no socialist history or theory"
The egoism of Western people is always something that greatly interests me.

>>14242445
I have been very fair with you and have only used this term "capitalist" because you insist on holding onto it. However, I don't believe the term exists so from my perspective this is the usual labeling technique done to create a box for opposition leading towards the way for relocation, displacement, execution, etc.

>Rich getting richer, while poor people die daily from preventable causes
And we were told that in Socialism everyone would be fed, clothed, housed - and we were. But compared to what we have access to now those commieblocks are miserable eye sores filled with nothing but poor memories. Sure, they were cheap and affordable but imagining a human being can subject themselves to this kind of relegation of their existence for the rest of their lives is the greatest lynchpin to the naive viewpoints of Socialists in general. Particularly when I hear Western people, whom instead of trying to rationally reflect and reform aspects of society are instead preaching radicalization. You must forgive me for holding you in such a skeptics light, because I've heard this all before and saw what it did to people.

>>14242458
I don't understand this reference remotely.

>>14242454
>This is some broad, idealistic talk that seems like an incredible stretch and reminds me of the "Party Line" commitments that the former Socialist government imposed on everyone, which was usually to the detriment of the local populations (e.g. a radicalized functionary cannot be expected to even remotely understand common people, and it's well expected they would despise them anyway).
Are you baiting? Why do you keep talking about your country. Marx himself said state ownership was anti socialist. The problem socialists have with capitalism is the capital being owned by the boss. The surplus value is taken fromthe worker and the worker has no control over his life. Tell me how a system where a government official takes the surplus value, has control of the capital, and tells the worker what to do is socialist?
>Yes there was "direction" but often it was walkin
Again don't give a shit about your country.
>That's very good, we had worker ownership once. Now we don't and things are a lot better.
lol no you didn't unless you lived in Yugoslavia and I would barely give you worker ownership there.
> I could care less how you try to resurrect that old system so long as you leave us well out.
System really hasn't been done much.
>We have such "co-ops" still here
Coops here in the US have a higher survival rate than private firms. Coops at 60% and private firms at 40%

>>14242478
This has to be bait right? Really good one if it is.

>>14242454
You are really just saying "things went bad down here in eastern europe, therefore everything socialism is wrong"
He literally said "worker ownership shows it to be more productive that private firms"
You respond by saying "that is good, that the statistics show better, but me, I say worse"
Pathetic, try to read some theory and actually approach the issue in a way which you actually believe it could change your mind. Do you believe the poor people in your country could simply "start a buisness?"

>>14242483
>Again don't give a shit about your country.
Likewise, which is why I am pro-Socialist for your country because I already know the outcome for you and probably this will mean a greater development for my own country. It's the dream of every Pole to see Germany, for example, turn into the Socialist "utopia" of our People's Republic days.

>Coops here in the US have a higher survival rate than private firms...
But aren't these private firms objectively more powerful? It seems most of your anger is directed at successful private firms. How will you handle enforcement of ideology anyway? It's something often left out.

>>14242489
No it's not bait, it's simply the amused observations of a former Warsaw Pact country laughing as the West implodes.

>>14242497
The only thing that's guaranteed during turmoil in Europe is Poland getting stomped. Enjoy.

>>14242491
You did not provide statistics and the data I have seen from my own eyes is that none of these co-ops are operating on the levels of the private firms.

>the poor people in your country could simply "Start a business"?

I am not of the opinion we must all share a "class" but there was a time when my family were laborers under a Socialist system and now I am a university graduate, so I would say the collapse of Socialism has led to a direct benefit to my own life. I also see our economy doing great (best in Europe in terms of growth and stability) and our society, though having problems like all societies is relatively stable especially when I hear from Westerners.

>>14242497
If this isn't bait all I have to say is read Chomsky. I'm not gonna sit here for 10 hours until you understand the difference between state capitalism and socialism.

>>14242497
What values do you believe in? I asked you in the earlier post >>14242478 but you deflected and said
>I have been very fair with you and have only used this term "capitalist" because you insist on holding onto it. However, I don't believe the term exists so from my perspective this is the usual labeling technique done to create a box for opposition leading towards the way for relocation, displacement, execution, etc.

You still have not talked about the "values" that are lost in the west now?
What are these values? I really want to know if you are going to say some /Pol/ tardish so I can just leave you alone, or if your stockholm syndrome is just this great.

>>14242510
>You did not provide statistics and the data
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2524912?seq=1

Meta analysis so 43 studies not just one.

>>14242506
Ahaha, for the first time I think you will have to worry more about your own country getting stomped. We are going just fine, whereas it is highly unlikely your country will be operating as a cohesive unit within the next several decades. But thank you for good wishes.

>>14242513
Tell you what. We will keep our free market here in Poland and you can turn the US into a Socialist super state and we will see who is better off.

>>14242519
>Tell you what. We will keep our free market here in Poland and you can turn the US into a Socialist super state and we will see who is better off.
Alright it is bait.

>>14242440
Oh? And the millions who starve and suffer? Just unfortunate causalities.

>>14241964
>Hume is a blank slate constructivist
That's a fucking bizarre way to read Hume lmao
>Philosophers havent supposed such as "human nature"
What? Pretty much every philosopher deals with "human nature" in some form or another.
Kant assumes the existence of universal categories of thought intrinsic to humanity (or at least a "rational subject"), this carries over to Hegel and (most) of the other German Idealists. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and related place humanity within a naturalistic context that implies certain intrinsic traits. Psychoanalysts do something similar.
what the fuck are you smoking?
>>14242274
>intellectual heroes
>an eceleb
this better be bait.

>>14242524
Who are the "millions"?

>>14242517
The studies seem to date from the 70's and 80's but I will have to review it. If only he did a comparative model of "workers coops" in Poland during this time and then cross referenced them to the firms we have today and the overall general productivity and purchasing power of the individual Pole today vs. then.

>>14242538
>this better be bait.
Destiny is the best critic of the left that I've seen.

>>14242541
You ever watch Kieslowski? Very comfy poland in the 70s

>>14242523
This isn't bait, again, I am really amused at American Socialists. The problems in your country have reached a breaking point, indeed, and I am quite sure you will not exist to finish off the century but the increase in radicalization instead of sensible reform, for me, only proves that your egalitarian experiment was doomed from the start. At least it provides us with a wealth of data on what not to d.

>>14242556

>>14242555
Krzysztof Kieślowski was very interesting, dark, but interesting. He did demonstrate I suppose the reality of the "culture" that Socialism produced for us though.

>>14241922
it's called historical materialism dumbo

>>14242568
What is the Socialist plan, for example, to quell your ever growing violent demographic shift? Also how do American Socialists intend to deal with your large, multinational companies?

>>14242556
I think you should just get rid of the word socialism for the things I've saying. It's so vastly different to what socialism has thought to be historically that there is no point in even using the word. Make it just Market cooperative capitalism or some shit like that.

>>14241785
All you need to do is refute the labor theory of value, which is hardly difficult

>>14242524
>The millions who starve and suffer
>Implying a bloody revolution would help them
Hahahahahaha you think communism would solve all the world's problems holy shit. You're ill. Only more would stand to suffer if you had your way.

This is what your brain on communism looks like folks.

>>14242570
I've watched other polish directors from the time but he is the only one so far who really gets down to what life was actually like. Do you know of any others?

>>14242541
I can't speak of Poland, but the US is good if you "make it." That doesn't mean that it's good for the lower classes. The average family of 4 requires anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000 per month. Food alone runs about $1,000 to $1,500 per month. When I was in SE Europe on vacation, I could live off $1,000 per month easily. You would starve with that here unless you had additional income. This country is beyond fucked for the lower classes.

>>14242582
I would rather accurately define it for what it was and what my people lived through rather than play a game of semantics with Americans. Particularly when things are looking quite poor for you compared to the growth happening here.

>>14242591
What I'm talking about is so vastly different to the society you lived under so why would we use the same terms. It's opposite in every single regard.

>>14242045
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism

>>14242322
exactly, the act of interpretation necessarily involves philosophy in some form or another

>>14242456
you are not smart

>>14242589
There is the famous Andrzej Wajda but some critics of his thinks he worked too close with the authorities at times that he lost some of the art he wanted to produce, although after seeing his film Katyń I am skeptical about this. He got some critiques as well from Poles for his scene showing Polish cavalry charging tanks with lancers (which became a kind of meme to my understanding) and which of course never happened.

>>14242590
Yes but you can't really translate American dollars into local currency because the local currency has a radically different value and the income of people is also different. Also, from my understanding, the social binding of America unraveled harshly since the 60's Cultural Revolution in addition to your loss of industry as a method of social mobility. As in, you don't really need the massive population anymore that you now possess. Sometimes I think Americans forget just how big they really are.

>>14242044
Social democracy is unable to deal with demographics and outside threats.
Freedom -> Democracy -> Individualism -> Feminism
Feminism, lead to a fertility crash, which lead to population replacement by foreign populations. It's an absolute failure of a system with really long lasting consequences, possibly irreparable ones. A plague is better.

>>14242603
I am highly skeptical of this and even more skeptical of implementation of your rhetoric simply given what I know, lived through, and know through my own studies here. We heard a lot of the same kind of talk during the 50's and things only got worse. Then, as the system faded and this new system emerged things got worse at first (90's were a really bad time here as were early 2000's) but now things are stabilizing and progressing forward. Of course, our current government is trying to implement Socialist policies which are crippling us (e.g. massive welfare programs) and making it hard for Poles to start businesses but it's nothing like it was before.

>>14242618
I've seen some Wadja but he felt more like he was trying to make films than trying to actually show society. Based on research Kieślowski seems to be the only one from that period. It probably comes from him being a documentary filmmaker first.

>>14242618
Of course, but it's interesting to compare. The average salary in SE Europe is what, $400-500/mo? A family of 4 is better off with that than a family of 4 here is with a household income of $4,000/mo.

>>14242643
Ahh, okay I understand. I misunderstood you at first and thought you wanted someone similar to the era. You have seen "Trzy kolory" by Kieślowski, yes? I only ask because it is considered some of his finest work.

>>14242635
We live under capitalism right now. Cooperatives exist obviously since all type of firms are allowed to exist under capitalism. We know there is no inherent problems with worker owner firms. If these cooperative firms starting to grow under capitalism what would be the harm?

>>14242646
Yes, but you know SE Europe has their own fair share of problems beyond economics and many scars still plague them. But I have no idea, I have never been to America. I am understanding your cities are doing poorly, but this is not surprising for me.

>>14242656
If you start your own business then I don't see any harm. But this is not where my thoughts dwell. Also, at some point in time these cooperative firms will come into conflict with one another and then the real fun and games begins. Particularly when it comes to propaganda and then the creation of bureaucratic shell organizations to try and create some artificial boundaries and balance.

>>14242654
No I haven't but only because I watched the trailers it looked more like the artsy type of film I didn't want. The ones I liked from him were Amator and Przypadek. Still haven't got my hands on Dekalog yet.

>>14242672
>If you start your own business then I don't see any harm
If these were to grow naturally to become the large majority of the economy I don't see how there would be any harm to society yet it would become a sort of Market Socialist economy.
>Also, at some point in time these cooperative firms will come into conflict with one another and then the real fun and games begins.
Sure but this happens with private firms too.
> then the creation of bureaucratic shell organizations to try and create some artificial boundaries and balance.
What do you mean?

>>14242674
I am quite surprised someone outside of Poland has even heard of Kieślowski so this is kind of exciting news for me. I'm afraid it's quite late for me now and I won't pretend to have some kind of big knowledge on cinema so I can't really help you all that much in trying to find someone in a similar style, unfortunately anyway because I would really like to help.

>>14242679
>Large majority of the economy
In every single sector? It doesn't seem probable to me and will most likely create factionalism, it already has it seems in the US which is splintering.

>Sure but this happens with private firms too
Yes, but with private firms it seems relatively straight-forward. The concept of rivaling Socialist firms seems like a parody to me.

And I was referring to the endless bureaucracy that Socialism produced and left us with in their wake. Government programs are a disaster, but it seems typical in every country I have visited so I won't claim it exclusive to here.

>>14242680
He is popular here with the people here who are really interested in Cinema. 99% of people don't know him though.

>>14242697
>In every single sector? It doesn't seem probable to me and will most likely create factionalism, it already has it seems in the US which is splintering.
It would be in every single sector that had workers what would prefer to not be in a private firms. I can't think of any sectors where they would prefer to be in a private one.
>Yes, but with private firms it seems relatively straight-forward. The concept of rivaling Socialist firms seems like a parody to me.
It would be no different. They are still just firms competing with each other on a market but the people in these firms will be happier in the places that they work.
>Government programs are a disaster,
Free market socialism is a thing. Libertarians who think cooperative firms and the free market are both equally important.

>>14242456
>I have a theory. Lets falsify it.
Good. Now tell me your psychological theories and how you intend to falsify them.

>>14242735
Perhaps but it seems that these cooperatives cannot compete with the profit intake of a private company and I'm also uncertain that it will save America either, particularly when your problems aren't really economic but social and that social division seems to get hotter every year. We all seriously thought you were going to have a civil war following the 2016 Election and the next election cycle isn't looking any healthier. I doubt it will get any better for you guys either. I also do not think Americans are ready for the massive amounts of luxury good item cuts that will naturally come into place following socialization in fact, I am not sure what will prevent the system from becoming centrally planned in the fallout of all that nor am I really convinced it will be done peacefully. But I suppose it isn't my problem either.

>>14242774
the US will have left-wing caudillismo with an added dose of anti-white hate (mostly encouraged by white people), something like Lula's tenure in Brazil is the model really. You could never have Soviet Socialism in the US. Besides, Western (especially Anglophone) "socialism" only superficially adopts Marxist rhetoric, the real end of any "socialist" policy is to preserve personal autonomy which is hardly compatible with Soviet Socialism.

>>14242807
Sounds like a nightmare, glad I live far away.

>>14242821
Western people are psychologically fucked up, it is for the best that you are far away. UK/US are especially bad because of their pathological relationship with colored peoples/colonials.

How would socialism work? First of all, you need a homogeneous society. Let's assume you have that. Next, you need people with good traits. Hard-working, caring, unselfish, etc. Look at people you know. You can immediately spot the dicks, the good ones, the bums, etc. People are born and act in certain ways despite whatever system they're under. So how do you expect such a utopia to last? You need a powerful elite. This is why I'm a monarchist socialist.

>>14242126
If by historical you mean as old as human civilization. Peasants/serfs/farmers, whatever you want to call them, paid tax (whether material or monetary) to local counts, who in turn paid to dukes, who in turn paid to lords, who in turn paid to kings.
There was never a "well, I'll just settle here then" mentality without paying somebody to be there. As for keeping your production, farming isn't a one-to-one ratio for harvest to production. Some seasons you have less seed to plant then crop you harvested, so you buy more seed from either a neighboring farm who has extra, or a market, to equalize or exceed the last season's production.

You sell your excess crop, which is bought by millers, who grind it and sell it to bakers, who bake it and sell it to the populace.

Market mentality, i.e. capitalism is paramount to human civilization.

>>14241785
Basically any true internal account of any real communist political party.

>>14241922
People are both selfish and unselfish and neither capitalism or communism works. :^)

>>14242587
>All you need to do is refute the labor theory of value, which is hardly difficult
The labour theory was used to justify capitalism initially, Marx just played with the logic to get at a different outcome... socialism can be better defended in subjective marginalist terms anyhow (although the Marxists wouldn't agree).

>>14242856
>How would socialism work?
Work is treated as a common pool resource. Bad actors exist and create more negative social costs under other arrangements.

>>14242615
mfw

>>14242411
This works against macroevolution too. Do you dare go that route?

>>14241785
History. Marxism claims to provide a dialectic that can predict history, but fails in every single regard.

Left wing people are trash. They deserve to be exploited and that is what you should do to them. I would go so far as to say that if you CAN abuse a Leftist, you should. Left-wing money looks much better in a right wing wallet.

>>14242542
Erik Striker.

>>14241785
His idea is that class conflict will inevitably see the bigger class wage class war and win, destroying the bourgeois. The reason for there being class conflict is that the bourgeois are exploiting the proletariat. When he says "exploitation" he means this in the sense of the labor theory of value, i.e. that all of the extra value in a finished product is a result of labor inputs, and profit is the difference between what the worker is getting paid and the actual value of the product when it's sold. But, if like literally every other economist you reject the labor theory of value as dumb, reductionist bullshit that's been out of date for well over a century and instead believe in the basic outline of supply and demand, then the notion of exploitation as he thought of it is gone, and the whole problem driving class conflict is gone. And indeed, the fact that all of these years later we still haven't seen workers seize control of the means of production, and that they're essentially satiated with drugs and entertainment, and objectively speaking they're so much better off than they used to be, there's just no reason to assume it'll happen.

>>14243114
You work for a wage

>>14241964
Actually, did you know that the phrase “human nature” was coined by David Hume? The “human” in the phrase isn’t actually referring to homo sapiens, it’s referring to Hume! The more you know!

>>14243132
A salary. And quite a nice one.

>>14243114
All history can be explained with Marx and that's the problem according to Popper. :^)

>>14243131
>But, if like literally every other economist you reject the labor theory of value as dumb, reductionist bullshit that's been out of date for well over a century and instead believe in the basic outline of supply and demand, then the notion of exploitation as he thought of it is gone, and the whole problem driving class conflict is gone
Why would you do that? Marx predicts capitalism will be revolutionary and plagued by constant crises and that appears to be the case. "The basic outline of supply and demand" doesn't elaborate much about reality since we'd be much closer to some global equilibration one would think by now

>>14243181
Popper is the only worse brainlet than Marx, besides maybe Schelling.

>>14242201
>8/10
You must be one ugly fucker lmfao

>>14243230
Post an example of a 8/10 and a 10/10

>>14241785
Bookchin, Ecology of Freedom

>>14241785
>Reddit, etc. have convinced me that it's the ultimate system of government

>>14241785

>>14241785
Kaczynski's "Anti-Tech Revolution"

You only need to read the first chapter.

>>14241873
Marx had the same argument that the liberals did: for communism (liberalism) to work, a majority of the capitalists (monarchic) countries would need to be taken or reformed.

>>14243855
>New Thing Bad: The Book

>>14244116
cringe techno-optimist

Unironically its post modernism that refutes marxism as it reduces all analysis of power and injustice into absurdity. But its still leftie and Im not sure if thats what youre craving for

>>14241967
Built by whom? Your statement presupposes a system that requires no selfishness.

>>14242085
Plenty of Americans believe in the gospel of wealth, so in America at least, capitalism is thought of as moral.

>>14242102
Your assertion would be true if any one of the various communist regimes had been earnest attempts at a correct implementation, but none of them were.

>>14242139
For lots of people, "communism" constitutes everything America doesn't do.

>>14242143
So they're chad if you're the girl.

>>14242542
Then you've never read David Brooks, and he's, like, the tip of the iceberg. Don't confuse your illiteracy for the greatness of your chosen e-celeb.

>>14241967
Read Mutual Aid, brainlet

>>14241997
Nothing in nature is classless, we love hierarchies.

>>14241785

You don't need to read anything, you just have to go outside, look at society, and look at how people behave. I don't mean extensively either, give it an hour or two.

hai guise

>>14245400
>/fa/ cunt

>>14241785
Authoritarianism can easily turn sour, particularly if it has no morals (materialism).

>>14241807
>This is true and can't be refuted
Nonsense. Look up "No True Scotsman Fallacy". This destroys the communist.

>>14245610
For it to be No True Scotsman it has to be a Scotsman we are talking about.

>>14245400
Go home workerist

>thinking you can refute an immortal science

>>14241785
>has never once been implemented correctly.
Retard. Hutterites. Israeli Kibbutz. Your mind resist to acknoledge this fact. You can't. Because it would distort your very world view. Your mind wouild break if you are weak, which i presume your are. Typical cognitive dissonance. Since your mind is too weak to acknowledge a fact, you just denying the fact. Sadly, i noticed that it's not only cultural leftist who do cognitive dissonance on a regular basis. Far right do it frequently as well.

Fire in the minds of men.
The Road to a serfdom.
Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity
Our Political Nature: The Evolutionary Origins of What Divides Us
Everything by Carl Smith and Bertrand de Jouvenel and Charles Tilly and Anthony de Jasay
Political Messianism: The Romantic Phase
A Farewell to Alms

>>14246751
Race.

>>14244683
Anon I hate to tell you this but walking around and watching/listening to how people behave will only confirm every observation of Marx’s he’s read in Kapital.

>>14241785
read human action by mises

>>14242201
>he wins all his debates

>>14247112
>yo give me someone even more methodologically retarded than Marx
>no problem

>>14243230
Here it is, a 10/10. Don't get too jealous.

>>14243295
>>14247617

>>14242090
You can have all the theory in the world but it is useless if even after trying 4-5 times it always fails miserably to materialize and never reaches it's goals desu senpai

>>14247767
What society tried to become stateless?

>>14247767
Yeah but capitalism also only works in theory, and then in reality, millions suffer, the planet is desecrated, culture is destroyed, etc.

Doesnt really make sense how capitalism gets a pass no matter all of its flaws but then another economic system is completely bogus for not being immediately perfect. Just seems inconsistent.

>>14247767
they way I see it is, in socialism you share eveything, the good and the bad where as in capitalism the downsides are brushed under the carpet or they happen else where. Anyway, neither theory has been put to practice in pure form.

>>14247899
I think it's because there are capitalist countries that are pretty nice places whereas the socialist states have all been shitshows. I suspect this has happened for more subtle reasons though. If Norway or Iceland went full socialist the countries would probably still function pretty well, but these countries never seem to have the conditions necessary for socialist revolution to occur. Germany in the 30s offers an interesting thought experiment, Germans are ridiculously good at being prosperous and if they had become socialist instead of Nazi you wonder if they would have pulled it off a lot better than any other socialist country.

>>14248214
Shitshow isnt really the fairest assesment. If you look at North Korea, Cuba, the USSR, and PRC, what were they like before communism? Russia wasn't exactly a highly developed liberal paradise before the USSR, by all standards it was poor, and workers in cities were treated like dirt. There was a brutality to Stalin, of course, but there was also an immense brutality to the workers of england during their industrialization, or worse, the slaves in their colonies. Cuba is another example, what were they before communism but America's brothel? I know The Godfather 2 isn't a historic document, but what was happening there in reality isn't far from the truth. Now Cubans are masters of their own nation, and are surely not any poorer or less free than those before Che and Castro. Communism doesn't really make badly of nations, at least not worse than capitalism.

>>14248318
I think you're agreeing with me m8, that's what i meant about it being hard to say it's socialism that caused the shitshow, none of those countries were among the best places to live in the first place, and the very high performing countries have never had a socialist revolution, so we don't know what it would look like in such a country.

And you're right about England and its colonies and so on. My point was just that there are actual examples of capitalist countries being nice places for extended periods of time, whereas the case is a bit more iffy for socialist states, so superficially looking at the situation it's not hard to see why one looks better than the other.

>>14241785
You’re welcome