Holla Forums BTFO by ex-soviet citizens

Of course my bad. I forgot that you were all NEETs and min wage workers. Which is why you are socialist in the first place.

really electrifies the prefrontal cortex

Ah, here comes the classism Holla Forumsyps try to hide.

It's almost like you just want to shit on socialists no matter what, oh wait.

wtf is up with Holla Forums's pregnancy kink lmfaoo

If I was in charge of the fourth reich coddled obese bourgeoise Holla Forumsyps would be the first to go.

...

...

liberals who pretend to be egoists can NEVER refute this

It is in accordance with their human nature

It's in accordance with their (your) autism

lol

well memed, fam

I bet their parents were kulaks

SOCIAL FASCISTS GET OUT

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

How many layers of irony are you on my man?

I have a pretty nice job, but regardless of that my employer takes the majority of the value that I produce. Socialism would mean that I received the full value of my labour.
You would still be expected to work under Socialism you dipshit, it's only under Communism that a percentage of the population could just not work. Good job demonstrating you don't have any fucking idea what you're on about. Socialism is the workers owning the means of production and being in direct possession of the products of their labour, not big gubberment and lots of handouts.

they have a black on white pregnancy fetish. do you even know Holla Forums?

I make 35,000€/year go fuck yourself, Holla Forums. I`m making more than the average earner nearly by 5k a year.

Yeah but you aren't a socialist.

Confirmed slightly above min wage worker

Kill yourself, failure.

No person who has anything of worth in life: a house, a career, a nice car, etc. will ever want a revolution to take all of his property away. Only the welfare bums who have nothing want a revolution. That's you.

Personal property and private property aren't the same thing you fucking nonce.

We don't want to collectivise your fucking toothbrush.

I hope you don`t actually believe this.

...

I'm sorry, why can't I advocate for socialism while still acknowledging that the Soviet Union was, by and large, a shithole?

On the offchance you're from Holla Forums, you know Nazi Germany was a fragile state that relied on slave labor?

Why the fuck would I want my private property taken away you dumb cunt?

Hurr durr we'll take your land but you keep your toothbrush

Die. Swine. No middle class person would ever want your shitty revolution. Keep it and shove it up your ass you low life bum.

We just like the iconography and the music.

Posting images of Stalin is mostly ironic.

Pro tip, a majority of Soviet citizens voted for the Soviet Union to continue.

I'm not a Not Socialist as it's still collectivism. I'm more of a classical liberal but I think that socialists are a danger to everything that classical liberalism stands for.

Middle-class people are wast minority of global population. Over half of humans live under 2 dollars a day. It is time that you should start to share your gf/wife with the collective.

...

Private property = capital, for example, a factory is private property, a tractor is private property. They produce goods/services. Personal property is your stuff like your car and your house, your stuff isn't taken away under Socialism, and only full retards advocate Communism without personal property.

Read a fucking book and stop shitposting and performing mental gymnastics.

Nah we coming for that toothbrush too faggot

when will this meme end

I already knew that you fucking subhuman.

Okay come and try and I'll just you in the head, nigger.

this

Do you really think rich people are literally exponentially better than you?

Why are you so submissive user?

You haven't given a reason why I should want that to be taken away and given to a collective of low life, low Autism Level bums.

I would rather the private property be int he hands of rich smart people than you bums.

taking from thieves is justice not theft so you better hand over that toothbrush whitey :^)

You guys are really predictable.

Of course you wouldn't want it taken away. That's why the

I mean same lol. Besides the Soviet Union wasn't that shitty, at least nowhere near as shitty as Capitalism. In a referendum in 1992 the vast majority of Soviets wanted to stay in the Soviet Union.

lol

Rich people are just people who started businesses that benefited society. Bill Gates is rich because he created software which is used by billions around the world therefore he deserves to be a billionaire. Donald Trump is rich because he provides people with luxurious accommodation.

The more impact you make on society, the more you will earn.

If I want to earn more money, I just need to have a greater impact on society. If I create a product that is cheaper and better quality than what it is out there, then I will become richer.

In capitalism you get rich by proving goods and services that people want and will pay for. And I see nothing wrong with that.

In capitalism I am in control of my destiny.

It's not perfect efficiency but it's certainly up there. It's way more efficient than socialism that's for sure.

It's not because you're rich that you're smart, plenty of stupid people are born into wealth.

And those stupid people end up losing that wealth, faggot.

...

Not an argument, faggot. And it's true.

Bill Gates is rich because he had a monopoly with his garbage OS, Donald Trump is rich because he was born in wealth and fucked over people and banks for a living.

I wonder when was the last time he wrote a line of code? Like any porky he manipulates money to make more money and pays his programmers a small fraction of the value they provide. So yes even a programmer being paid $100k/year is being ripped off. Why the fuck do you care about the well being of the 1% of whom you are not part of? Nobody "deserves" billions while we have people starving in this country. Bill Gates is smart and he deserves recognition, that doesn't mean he should be paid many times over by the work of others just because he wrote code in the 80s.

this. I don't like Russell Brand but this is a good quote

"When I was poor and complained about inequality they said I was bitter; now that I'm rich and I complain about inequality they say I'm a hypocrite. I'm beginning to think they just don't want to talk about inequality.”

Who do you think actually makes the technology you use on a daily basis? Tip: It's not the guy sitting on a pile of cash paying engineers to develop new technology and automate its production. Stop simultaneously pretending rich people are intelligent benevolent overlords who reached their positions through pure meritocracy, and simultaneously viewing working class people and greasy balding men in wifebeaters.

If the workers owned the means of production under socialism they would be wealthier as capitalists would not take a large cut of the value their labour produces. Working conditions would improve because workers would be in control of the workplace, and their comfort would not be sacrificed for profitability. Many other ethical and environmental issues would be hampered, as workers could collectively decide to change things instead of a Capitalist having full control.

Do you seriously believe this? What do you consider to be the line above which someone is "smart" and someone is "stupid", is the ability to take a large lump sum of money and produce more money by exploiting workers a fucking superpower?

...

Social mobility is purposefully supressed in capitalism. Those stories of people "making it" are the great exception. They may be talented, but they are extremely talented.

I don't hate all Capitalists, I just hate the ones who know that they are oppressing people and don't care. However, I want to dismantle Capital entirely, and this means seizing the means of production from even the Capitalists I don't like.

Maybe while he's still a worker, but as soon as he owns the means of production (i.e. becomes a manager/boss, owns the factory, owns property, etc) half of his success can be directly attributed to the workers who serve him.

smells like patriarchy.

truly we have found the king of boot lickers

My god…the wagecuckery

Sweet mother of god dude you have to be the most severe case of classcuckery I've ever seen!

autism

...

...

See the Hazlitt quote above.

A person could literally start off in life homeless and become a millionaire or a billionaire and you losers will try and discredit him.

Fuck you.

Because he owns the majority of the shares in his company because.. he fucking made the company you fucking moron.

You don't deserve a share of the profits because you haven't contributed capital to the business. You didn't buy the equipment. A worker merely seems his labor in a voluntary transaction. You agree to work for $12 and you get paid $12. There is no theft. The only theft is in socialism.

In USSR all your surplus value went to the state. It's even worse than in capitalism. Also don't give me that USSR was not socialist. Fuck off it was the most successful socialist regime of all time and it ended up in bloodshed and misery.

What about all the time you wasted climbing to the top?
All the humiliation? The extra hours? The boring, soulless work?

You may "climb to the top". Of course. We socialists acknowledge that that does happen.
What we focus on is the climb itself, and if it is even necessary.

Oh no, the horror of universal education, healthcare, housing and transportation cheaply available or free for all.

this

middle class is a meme

there is a "middle income" but there is no "middle class"

Like I said, of course that's possible, but only after working shitty job after shitty job, loads of stress, wasted time (see 8 hour work day), etc.

not an argument, "faggot" :^)

Only 6% of the US population are self-employed and 90% of all startups fail.

You don't starve in the street. Most western capitalist countries have welfare states, moron. Also you can live with your parents/relatives/friends or stopping being a parasite and work for a living like everybody else you special snowflake piece of shit.

Socialism is literally projection. You claim the capitalists are the parasites when really it's you who is the parasite because you just want to not work and still be able to live.

thank god we destroyed vile soviet totalitarianism and now live in a free system where 0.00000000001% of the population can go from homelessness to being a millionaire

So…what's the point of owners again?

So basically you don't want to bother working hard but want everything given to you? Is that it? Bum. This is why you will NEVER achieve anything in life. You'll go into old age, wasting your whole life waiting for that revolution of yours so you can steal from people who actually worked for it.

It's a sad life. Hopefully you're still young and you wake up to the fact that this philosophy only forces you to become a failure.

the modern welfare state was not the gift of capitalists, it was a result of class struggle engaged in by socialists and trade unionists

it has also been crumbling since the 1980s because of capitalist ideologues like reagan/thatcher

The USSR only ever got as far as state capitalism, under Socialism the workers are in the means of production. Even if their end goal was Socialism/Communism they did not achieve it. A Dictator taking control of the state and repressing the population is not a requirement of Socialism, that happened in the USSR, and we saw what happens when a country is ruled by a dictator, it would have been brutal regardless of their economic system.
Based on what? Every worker should be paid less than they are worth and most of the value of what they produce should be taken by the person who owns the means of production just because? That's literally slave morality.

Yeah, yeah. but socialism doesn't work. riiiiiight ;)

I do not want to perform unnecessary labor to produce surplus Capital for my boss. If that makes me a parasite, then I'm the proudest parasite there is.

In socialism and communism, labor directly benefits the workers, instead of benefitting the workers somewhat and the boss a shitton.
And then automation comes in, and instead of leaving us unemployed and destitute, it means nobody has to work anymore!

I will literally die before that happens.

fucking THIS.

Only a percentage of the labor goes to profit you fucking moron. Most of the time, the profits are way lower than the expenses, one of the expenses being labor.

I swear you socialists are just giving excuses as to why you shouldn't work. Hurr durr I don't want to be paid $25 an hour I want to be paid $27 to include the profits that I made to the business. As if that little bit of profit you contribute to the business as a worker would make a difference to your personal life.

Anyway the whole life of you getting a piece of the profits is retarded because like I said you haven't contributed to capital to the business and you don't own the private property which was paid off by the owner. Without the owner's capital, private property you wouldn't have a job in the first place and you wouldn't make that $25 an hour.

Reminder that there is literally nothing wrong with laziness

zpub.com/notes/idle.html

Also, funny thing about this quote it doesn't mention the fact that Marx did acknowledge that capitalism did have benefits specifically how much wealth it creates, but the problem is that eventually the rich have the majority of wealth and the poor have none. The poor tend to revolt when they have nothing to lose. This has been proven to be a case through most of history, but you like most lolberts are historically illiterate so trying to use history would be useless here. Also, I like how you bitched about somebody trying to discredit Hazlitt. Oh no how dare we question your all important God Hazlitt!
I usually don't use ad hominems, but since you keep using those I'm going to go as low as you.

I've seen people work hard for a lifetime only to be chewed up and spat out. Hard work doesn't guarantee success.

I don't know what fantasy world you live in user but most people I know who busted their assess working hard for a company didn't get shit except a meaningless promotion that made them work longer hours for barely any extra pay. If all it took was to work hard where are all the hardworking millionaires? Shouldn't there be a lot more if that's all it took? When I look around I see lots of hardworking people earning shit all. The fact is unless you're lucky and working hard in the right field that focuses on useful idiots it's impossible to get rich. If god forbid you are passionate about something that isn't purely profitable in the correct economic circumstance of the time. I'd rather work hard at something I care about than be a corporate bootlicker like you. Even corporate bootlickers most won't end up being filthy rich otherwise who would be left to be office jockeys. Face it user your whole life is a sham and you're gonna die joyless and without passion like most in this world surrounded by the hundreds of thousands you worked your whole life to earn, you neglected everything to chug corporate dick to get someone else rich wow WHAT A LIFE. And I haven't even started on the third world.

2$x40hrs=80$x4weeks=320$ more a month, thats a car payment right there m8

Here's some pictures of the free market paradise known as Hong Kong. I guess according to OP they just didn't work hard enough.

What are the odds though?

Well its run by the communist party.

I don't give a shit how small profit is in comparison to everything else. Is that your argument? It is a bad one.

Without Capital OR Private Property I wouldn't NEED the job or the $25 an hour.

I feel like you Capitalists think of Socialism in Capitalist terms.

I really don't hate you, I feel I have to assure you of that. You seem like an earnest person who is willing to debate and not just some dumb troll.

DO
NOT
USE
PHOTOS
AS
AN
APPEAL
TO
EMOTION

Honestly comrade. Make a good argument and use your head.

In a free society there will always be poor people. Just like there are short people and tall people. People are different and thus will use their time differently and thus some will be more productive than others. Being productive isn't just about working hard, it's about working smart as well. A guy making an app that eventually gets used by millions of people around the world is working smarter than some coal miner for example.

...

I don't know but it's still possible, which is my point. In capitalism you can pretty much go from homeless to billionaire. It's in the realm of possibility because in capitalism class is not static.

What's more likely is that the poor person will work hard and eventually become middle class. It's happened in my family and to all my relatives. My family came to this country with practically nothing and are now middle class. Same with my uncles family and literally everybody else we know. I'm now middle class and will continue on that. So while my grandparents were low class I am now middle class thanks to capitalism.

There are also people that are born into wealth. They don't have to use their time a certain way at all.
The very fact that those people exist was reason enough for me to become a socialist. All the theory I've read since just further solidifies that.

Stop ignoring my arguments. Yuo are like styupet baby

You didn't refute the guy in the video.

Also you can't have your cake and eat it too.

First you brag about how USSR was a great example of socialism and how it went from a poor agrarian country to an industrial power then when I point out the flaws in the USSR with all the bloodshed and deaths you guys claim it wasn't real socialism but it was state capitalism instead.

Make up your fucking mind.

The photos aren't meant as an appeal to emotion. They are meant to prove a point about what the free market does to it's people and show why capitalism is against people's self interest and to make OP mad.

And the middle class is falling because of capitalism too, but I guess that's cronyism's or socialism's fault isn't it?

My point was that people are different and used height to illustrate this. Because people are different, some people will be more productive than others, some will contribute more than others and some will become richer than others. Equality is slavery.

looks like pic related

Yeah, sure is a free society when less than 100 people own more wealth than the poorest 2 billion. Sure is free when economic mobility is awful across the board. Sure is free when only poor people have to obey the law.

Freedom is what you do with what you are given. Under capitalism what you can do scales exponentially based on what you are given. If you have little to nothing you are fucked.

You're basically using any poor person who achieves any measure of success to justify poverty. "Lol it doesn't matter, because of capitalism one in 50 million of you could become really rich, keep toiling away and making me money you working class pig."

That's because not everybody here agrees on the USSR you faggot. We all have some similarities, but we're not the same.

I think a coal miner would fucking hit you over the head with a pick axe he heard that shit. Working smart isnt real either a service or product provides a societal need or it doesn't. It's telling that you think that some iPhone fart app is more important to society than someone who does manual labor for resources. As far as I'm concerned some cuck who wants to get rich making 1$ apps doesn't deserve one tenth the wage of a coal miner

But what if you're not smart enough to self manage? It's the reason why Mondragon is tanking.

It's about working smart as well.

I don't doubt that most fast food workers are working hard physically but they aren't making an impact with their labor input. A person who is working at Google is not working hard but his work is making more of an impact to society and thus he is payed a lot more.

It wasn't perfect but it had some successes and we can learn from it.

Isn't that

Fair enough, I guess I'm just like that because I once got burned by a Capitalist for making an appeal to emotion in an argument. Read Susan Sontag's Regarding the Pain of Others.

You're ignoring a lot of what I was saying. Go back and read what I typed again.
I'm getting tired of this, so I'll go by my flag and advise you to #ReadaFuckingBook.
I recommend The Sword and the Dollar by Michael Parenti. I think you will be very influenced by it.

How do you think management would work? There would be people elected within a business to manage. It isn't going to be a bunch of miners organising a mine, managers would still need to exist, managers aren't the same thing as capitalists.

smh

yep. Russians hate Gorbachev and Yeltsin for a reason

You fucked up right off the bat.

It's not about you. It's about what the market of people who use his app decide what he is worth. If millions of people enjoy his app who are you to say he shouldn't make more than that coal miner?

A coal miner is not making that much impact on society. He can only mine a certain amount of coal at most he will impact like 100 people by himself with the coal that he mined. A programmer will impact millions. Thus the coal miner will be middle class at best and the app developer will be a millionaire

Do you not find it strange that you literally cannot imagine a world without managers and bosses?

Forgive me, Capitalist. But this is the most disgusting thing I have ever read.

Because leaderless societies work so well.

I'm not an Anarchist who believes all Hierarchy is evil. Huge bureaucracies and Capitalists are not needed, managers are, imagine a building site without managers, it would be complete chaos.

How is anything that I've said wrong? So you think a guy who develops an app that provides a service to millions shouldn't be worth more than some coal miner because of muh feels? GTFO.

Would managers get paid more than the workers in your utopian society? If so where is that extra money going to come from?

You've unknowingly summed what is wrong with capitalism better than I ever could. The fact that you think this is an acceptable situation shows the evils of capitalism and proves that you are full of ideology. Anyway good luck powering all your utilities with that fart app.

The coal miner is literally required for society to function you autist his work inherently effects more people and more tangibly than a lanyard wearing dickhead making a shitty app
kill yourself

Seeing is how they're doing harder work, yes.

Remember user, soviet russia isn't communist, except when it does good things then it totally is, also the 100 million didn't happen it's a capitalist myth.

They're communist when you talk about them beating Germany, but when you talk about their flaws they're state capitalists.

...

Again see

The coal miner would have more impact if he built a machine that could mine the coal thus he would more coal -> affect more people -> become millionaire.

By himself, the coal miner can only mine a small percentage of mine and thus his impact is very low. Let's say he mines 10kg of coal per day. How much affect will that have on society? Not that much. He'd probably power the homes of say 20 people for one day.

An app developer who creates a service that is used by millions is benefiting a lot more people by himself. MILLIONS > 20 PEOPLE.

You could make the argument that coal miners AS A WHOLE make more impact, yes, I would agree, but individually that one miner is not making that much.

This is a false dilemma. Two people who contribute to society should be able to live comfortably within that society. One shouldn't be so wealthy they no longer need to work while the other one has to be saddled with debt to afford a house and car.

Under Socialism a manager would be paid more because their skillset would be less prevalent, Socialism isn't everyone being paid the same, it's just the workers owning the means of production. I'm not too sure about Communism as I'm not too well read on it yet, you'd be better asking someone who is how they propose that would work, as while their argument that people work for fulfilment holds some weight, some jobs that are needed in society are stressful or unpleasant.

youtube.com/watch?v=VXNj2BobjJ4
video related, it's me trying to argue with you

The product determines it's own value along with the consumers. Exchange value is wholly dependent on use value.
Just because it's not vital to society doesn't mean it has no use. Looking pretty is a use.

Making decisions that can make or break the company is harder than bitch work.

Experience is worth more and is harder to come by than simple ability. A head electrician on a building site is worth more than an apprentice even if he does less work directly, hard work is respectable but it isn't necessarily more useful than experience and knowledge.

A manager doesn't just mean some guy in a suit who went to business school and yells at people performing manual labour. They are often people who are experienced workers in a particular profession that oversee and direct less experienced workers and ensure labour is used correctly and efficiently and plan more complex operations.

That's not for you to decide. That's for the collective society to decide and they decide it via the market. The market is just a collection of people deciding to make someone rich or someone poorer.

Jewelry is actually a great example of the absurdity of exchange value
are.berkeley.edu/~sberto/DeBeersDiamondIndustry.pdf

Besides, there's nothing to say that jewelry can't exist in socialism/communism.

Okay now I'm actually going to quit. I'm getting a headache constantly correcting you.
Hopefully my comrades pick up where I left off.

But I'm the one correcting you.

Okay one more thing. In socialism/communism, you would never have to worry about your company being "made" or "broken".

Imagine if..hear me out…we got rid of the market…so some invisible force doesn't arbitrarily strike down hard workers in certain industries…then we could like…coordinate divisions of labor directly towards social goals…whoa…

So there's no accountability or consequences for fuckups? Good to know for sure that I'm smarter than you by a large margin.

But it's not some invisible force. A market cannot exist without people. The market is literally just people deciding shit.

If people decide that the quality of a certain product is bad and they don't buy that product, then that company will fail. Now you can attribute that company failure to an invisible force called the market yes but really its just people deciding that they have a shit product.

The thing about capitalism and economics is that they make the market seem like God or something when in reality a market is just a large collection of people.

you need to think harder about what it means to be "made" as a "company" or "broken" as a "company".

All the words in quotes are completely meaningless in S/C. If you read more I think you'll understand why, and I think you'll also understand what those word REALLY mean within Capitalist ideology.

And as I said, read The Sword and the Dollar. Should be at your local library (a socialist institution). Enjoy!

I refuted your point that it was broadly applicable to Leftism, which itself encompases a wide variety of political beliefs and ideologies, some of which disagree with each other pretty strongly.
Hey, that's our line, you thieving kulak!
Nope. I said it accomplished some great things which seem to be underrated by the West, and >imblied that it was held to often-unreasonable standards given the mess they had to work with (and no, I don't think Lenin/Stalin/Kruschev/[insert Soviet here] did nothing wrong, or that their worst excesses were necessary or proportionate). Not that it was necessarily a good example of socialism.
right
I said it's debatable whether or not Stalinism should be considered real communism. We debate it all the time here and don't seem to have a consensus yet, nor do I have enough info on the intricacies of either to determine whether or not I think it was.
I did, sorry it triggered you. Your assertation that everybody leftist is btfo by the fact that the USSR had flaws is shit because communism =! every single leftist political alignment, because the USSR =! all communism, and because the USSR might not even be communism.

Libraries have existed before socialism. Plus public buildings aren't socialist.

I wonder if there's a term for the forces of a large collection of people moving together with no greater concept of societal need dictated after the fact by market forces…

Let me ask you this, since you admit that the market is not some god like force just the social interactions of many people, why is the market necessary? Why do you need that intermediate between converting your labor to commodities you need to survive? Is there an honest necessity for the market other than punishing and rewarding people who did nothing wrong except work in specific fields at certain times? Wouldn't it be better if we could harness the market force to be more efficient and benefit societal needs directly? Imagine if we could allocate an eighth of the world's population to combat climate change? Wouldn't that be fucking incredible?

You get shut down, or go out of business if you fail.
Read about mondragon's failure. Business reports and documents contain more facts than books

Why does going out of business matter so much in Capitalism?
What is the system of allocation of resources that makes going out of business matter so much in Capitalism?
Why do we view going out of business in Capitalism as a shameful thing in Capitalism when it can happen by pure chance?

It's not always shameful. People can fail in socialism too, my man. If you want he facts read some spread sheets, court documents, and other pieces of factual paper work, not information that's been filtered through an un-reliable author.

Literally not an argument.

You know as well as we do that the vast majority of the successful under capitalism were raised within the confines of affluence and material social muh privileges. This is an absolutely true fact which is not only empirically provable but an implicit, logical product of a system in which being in a position of success from birth provides more opportunities for success. A system which necessitates a vast working class in order to continue its productive mode, a system which would invent whatever arbitration necessary to maintain that class. Despite whatever propaganda and anecdotes you might feed us about some single lucky soul who "climbed the latter", you will find that we remain unconvinced: exception does not invalidate trend. And even among those extraordinary cases all of them were the result of pure coincidence, as many millions more have worked just as hard or harder and received nothing in return

Capital has and always will be an unfair and unrewarding system. To pretend that it is anything else is at best ignorance and at worst a lie. Your quotes and petty anecdotes do nothing to dissuade us.

Read my post, looking good is a use. And the use of monopoly isn't the main reason why diamonds are expensive. It was De Beers marketing that made people want them. If people didn't want their rocks then what does it matter?

Isn't there no such thing as collectives just individuals?
That miner is contributing individually into something of substantial value while the lanyard is contributing more into some crap that we could all easily live without

but the issue of capitalism is that the coal miner isn't being payed for that 10 kilos he produces, he's being payed a lot less and a capitalist who in most cases works off site in a large office is exploiting him, to the point where the capitalist makes more money off him per hour then he gets to take home at the end of the week

...

Diamonds are used to drill through marble, granite, obsidian, etc. to use in real estate development.

Socialists fall to their knees and pray to the gods of democracy, yet never realize that demagoguery is little more than marketing.