Why are you a communist/socialist left/pol/?

Well I do have a lot of reasons but probably the oldest one is that

Read a book.

Mainly I just like to prove people wrong. A defense of capitalism on anything other than egoist grounds is a logical absurdity, yet almost every argument for it is a moral one.

You think you can control me, bootlicker? I do as I damn well please. I'm not your fucking slave, my property.

You damn right i'm not a communist. Fuck Marx.

Exploitation, pollution, war, racism, planned obsolescence, greed, alienation, poverty. I oppose all that and more. Whether that makes me a moralist communist or not, I don't know, nor do I really care.

I just want free shit, my nigga

Well, if those things affect you, and they undoubtedly do, that you have practical reasons.

Fair

50/50

Nope

Nope

'ending is better than mending'. yeah this one is pretty dirty

See 'human nature'

I don't really get this concept tbh.

pretty sure everyone opposes that one.

Communists are all ultimately anarchists, although they tend to support the creation of a transitory socialist system to accomplish that aim.

When a person sees and recognizes what capitalism actually is, the broad effects that it has, and the mechanisms by which it functions it becomes very difficult for that person to continue to support it. Apart from socialism and anarchism (including communism) there is no other viable economic theory. Besides, communism sounds really pleasant.

see the business end of a loaded gun and pull the trigger
except capitalists, who believe poverty "natural" or righteous

Capitalism must be maintained by war, because war is necessary to keep the economic periphery producing resources at a tiny fraction of their value.

Racism is not a particular concern of mine, but it is one of the divisive devices that helps to keep the working class competing with itself rather than organizing against the bosses.

That thing that only seems to behave the way that it does while a capitalist mode of production is in place? Never mind all of the hunter/gatherers, pastoralists, agrarians, slaves and serfs.

Alienation is a degree of loss of control over what affects a person's life. It means that a person is unable to affect the material reality and the institutions that determine his living conditions.

It is not a question of opposition or support. Poverty is a structural issue. Capitalism requires poverty in order to function. Socialism and communism do not.

I do it for self-interest. Even if I became a bourgie, I still wouldn't enjoy it too much since I'd still have to part-take in the market system and race to the bottom.

Whatevs babe. Call it human nature. Call it asshole-itis. It is an aspect of life. Always has been, likely always will be.

Because I wanted to make the world a better place. OP should read Marx and quit being a faggot. It's only ever the stupid tankies that bitch about anarchists.

Well recent evidence supports your claim, but I disagree that every capitalist system requires war like we've been seeing.

Does it tho? Disregard how unlikely this is but just consider for a second a system where any wealth over what, 50 million was taxed at 99%, and capital controls were in place to stop money fucking off. This new tax was used to alleviate poverty, that is free home for everyone who isn't working or is working but not making enough. Is this impossible to imagine?

...

You need a new tactic lads.

wha…? you first raised the "human nature" "argument"

Call it human nature. Call it 'being an asshole'. It is endemic to human society.

"hurr animals kill" isn't an argument, it applies to all quantities in nature. Should we roll around in our own shit because that's natural too?

...

That doesn't mean there is no results in trying to curb it.

see

I'm not playing this game lads. Its stale af.

Agreed. My point is this asshole aspect of people won't disappear just cause workers own the memes of production.

Nice question dodge.

Why aren't you rolling around in shit outside right now? That's "human nature". That's the nature we lived in 10000 years ago.

But it curbs it, so? Would you stop taking medicine if it only curbs your body from dying? Why are you letting perfect be the enemy of good?

Because I can read

REEEEEEEEEEEE

Kek. You just want to keep on going there huh. Fine. Human nature was a baity term I regret using however it is a commonly accepted way of describing some traits common across all societies at all times.

No we should not roll around in our own shit. I put it to you that every time someone has tried to socialism, you've ended up with genocidal maniacs or sociopaths in control.

Because I learned what Marxism really is. It's clear that capitalism is just another system of exploitation like slavery and feudalism before it.

I don't even disagree with you. I just disagree that Communism practical solution.

Violence is also human nature, hence why so much entertainment is centered around it. But our society has countermeasures against it.
Create the proper countermeasures against corruption and greed ie. proper codified legal system that severely punishes those guilty of it and we will culturally condition it out of our society.

Communism isn't a solution, it's a goal.
The solutions are Leninism, Anarchism, Maoism, Trostkysm, Leftcommunism, asking bourgs nicely…

Too bad you're not part of the nepotism class then.

wat

Right I'm out of the conversation on human nature. Well Alinsky'd you damned kikes.

But the VAST majority of posters here don't want to dirty themselves by advocating a specific path. You tankmen are the exception. You admit that the transition to Communism (which I still think unworkable, I see hierarchy forming naturally unless something stops it) will likely not be pretty and may be authoritarian. For this I respect you.

It is hardly just recent history. You can go back to the sixteenth century with Spain and the Italian city states, and you will find that the powers in the capitalist economic center were in a constant state of warfare, occupation, and subjugation. People are not convinced to labor for significantly less than their labor is worth without the threat of violence. Furthermore, competition between capitalist powers is often necessitated by the profit motive as was the case in long feud between Britain, France, and Spain. Control of resource production must be achieved by all available means.

Absolutely. The suppression of wages is the only means by which capital can be created, and in order for the consumer base (which consumes vastly more than it produces) to exist those who do produce must only receive a bare minimum of renumeration. Also, the impoverished serve a vital function within capitalism. They are what marxists call the "reserve army of labor." The unemployed and the underemployed, by their mere existence serve as a threat to laborers that they can be replaced at any time. That keeps laborers from becoming powerful enough to challenge their bosses. The impoverished also provide capitalists with a hedge against population fluctuations that costs very little to maintain.

It is important to bear in mind that money has no useful value. It is not a resource to be acquired and expended. It is only a device to facilitate exchange. All real use-value exists in the form of goods and services.

Such a plan would be unsustainable for several reasons. Firstly, the state could not levy an intollerable tax against the very individuals who control it. It cannot have the power to do so, as it is primarily a function of the economic system. Secondly, for reasons stated above the elimination of poverty would remove an element that is vital to the functioning of capitalism. Without poverty, wages would rise dramatically, and profits would plummet which would result in a sea change in the relation of economic power between workers and bosses. It would obliterate capitalism. Thirdly, society can only consume as much as it can produce. If the impoverished were not underconsuming then the consumer base would be unable to consume at its current level without replacing the capitalist mode of production with something that produces at a greater rate (socialism). Again, it would destroy capitalism.