COMMUNISTS ON SUICIDE WATCH

Holla Forums BTFO

HOLY SHIT HOW WILL THEY RECOVER

The soviets won WW2 and the space race

We're way ahead of you lad.

...

by using tons of capitalist money? cool

with rockets based on the V2

...

The memeing was aggressive

kek

They literally weren't.

Soviet rocket designs were original and done by Korolev and used completely revolutionary design principles, it's why Korolev is considered the greatest rocket scientist to ever live because he designed half his shit while in a fucking Gulag. it was the US that just took the V2 and upscaled it.

kek.

...

Technically no on ever implemented actual state-less communism, because it's humanly impossible.

Begging the question:
That which is natural, is good.
N is natural.
Therefore, N is good or right.

Korolev lived in the USSR since he was 10 years old, your argument is platitudes.

You were cherrypicking data. Not all the designs were based off R-1, obviously. Otherwise soviets would have faced technological stagnation and such state could never put the first man made satellite into the orbit.

That is pure speculation, since you can`t realistically evaluate entire ideological work of 200 years using single state as point of your evaluation.

Korolev completely threw out the old rocket designs when he designed R-7. The R-1 is not a progenetor of the Soyuz series. In contrast, the Saturn-5 was built by the very same person who built the V-2.

No it's called understanding human nature, but it's no news that communists rejects everything that has to do with that subject, which is why fundamental communism will never even be tried.

Unless you genetically modify humans into perfection that fits state-less communism, but to do that you need the technology that can only be achieved through a competative capitalistic free world, ironic isn't it?

Considering the sample size of the subject there is no way to empirically prove your claims.

The Saturn 5 that actually made it to the moon?

OP here. I can't believe you guys took the b8 this easily.

And do you think USSR didn't take over the institutions which were already eatablished? Such as Universaties? Do you think USSR scratched everything and started from zero? Allow me to laugh. The longer USSR was under communistic rule the worse it got, it's not sustainable for an economy nor for social advancement, history proves me right. What your perfect ideology is in your head has nothing to do with the USSR and it's apparent failures and flaws.

Holla Forums will bite into a hook with nothing on it tbh.

I`m fairly sure that most of those institutions were completely destroyed in the civil war. Even illiteracy was on the rose after it.

It means we're in it for actual discourse and not for the memes, fam.

...

I bet you've done some deep studies on that.

Yes, surely a hundred years of Leninist experiments under constant pressure from western powers prove that Private Property is the only way to organize Society.
You're not convincing anyone, we've heard this stuff for months.

Great, I'm gonna tell every graduate from Oxford and Cambridge now that their whole degree is based on medieval science.

Sample size? What about hundreds of thousands years of human history and biology/psychology? Humans seek power and control by nature, humans form tribal thinking by nature, it's impossible to implement a state-less society if you take that into account.

Tribalism means groups vs groups, it's the very fundamental reason for the existance of states in itself, you would have to erase those parts of our thinking before you could even bring up the idea of communism. Which is why I mentioned genetical engineering.

Subject was stateless communism and socialist states in general there is no reason to go for fallacy such as changing the subject.

Russia was medieval before communism? Damn you are some kind of super enlightened scholar aren't you.

I just explained why state-less communism isn't possible, human nature. Are you arguing that humans do neither of what I just said? How is it a fallacy?

Still trying to change the subject and continue your intellectual dishonestly huh?

Genetic fallacy through irrelevant premise and reactive devaluation:
Humans create human nature, therefore whatever is unnatural among them is not of the human's creation, but explicitly unnatural. What is not natural is not good, therefore the unnatural understanding, leverages the bad argument. Sans actually presenting a case for why the argument itself lacks merit, you've shifted focus onto the origin, your knowledge of history and of science, instead of the actual appearance and place in the knowledge itself.

P.S example: Fortune cookies are not reliable sources of information about what gift to buy, but the reasons the person is willing to give are likely to be quite relevant and should be listened to.

We had a thread about this literally a few hours ago, lad.

No user,you are retarded.
And you like to move goalposts too.

Most of the important scientific advancements happen in government funded projects, or to say it with the words of Stefan Molyneux: "The markets have no need for all you physics nerds with your silly theoretical groundwork".

Besides, there's nothing wrong with using the technology of the current system to advance to your own desired society. Capitalism was build on advancements that happened during feudal times after all.

Which you didn't study but Marx did.
Both lead to a very social view of humanity, there are pretty much no species where children are born as dependent of companionship or as capable to learn social norms as humans.
Gonna need some sources on that, social status and community bonding appear to be much more important in just about every civilization that didn't become a net extractor of wealth.
So what?
Native american TRIBES were pretty much stateless, you're contradicting yourself.
And if you think modern states are the product any reasonable tribalism you're retarded.
Groups defined by shared values, defined by material conditions…

If that's what you took away from that you are the retarded one. The universities or educational institues in USSR was not a creation of communism, they were established before that, hence why communists inherited it(took it by force), they didn't create it.

That's why communism rode on creations before it was in power, you can't take credit for something you didn't create, nor the products coming out from it. You can alter or influence something, it still doesn't make it your creation alone.

Spooky.

Humans creating human nature would imply we have 100% free will and able to shape our minds and actions entirely, I've never seen a rational argument made why that is the case. We simply don't, our main driving force for survival is sex and reproduction, which has biological and psychological effects which controls us, it's something we will never rid ourselves of.

Don't see how that favours your argument at all.