How do we even begin to respond to these air tight arguments?
debate.org
Communism has always failed because it goes against human nature. It also violates basic principles of economics. It goes against the human spirit. It gives the government too much power over people's lives. It claims to be compassionate, but it actually results in a less compassionate society. That is my two cents.
Pure drivel.
One guy on debate.org
You don't. Actually find people who try to debate about the actual points of Marxist theory and disprove their shit. An example of this is people who try to disprove the LoV with questions that are accounted for with a combination of reading and thinking.
rofl
He's right though.
This is a good argument though.
If you're a misanthrope, why shouldn't you be a rightist?
God I hate that website. I don't participate in it or anything but sometimes when I search for people's opinions on shit this site comes up and shows both sides, and neither side on any given topic has anything interesting to say.
because communism kills more people, duh.
Remind me again which country has the largest prison population in the world?
Because i'm optimistic enough to hope that under a better economic system people will learn not to be cunts anymore.
That's just pessimism though, leftism doesn't make sense if you outright hate humans and feel they are unfit to exist.
It can't fail if it wasn't real. :'^)
...
But that's the one factor everybody conveniently seems to ignore when it comes to theorizing the long-term implementation of socialism. Why else do you suppose corruption is a recurring occurence regardless of the systems in place?
Le revolution could suddenly happen and we all have socialism and instead of capitalism, but then what? How do we prevent the system from being abused and corrupted? What failsafes would have to be in place to prevent shit from becoming Venezuela? Once the people are tired of socialism, what do you do?
Shit will hit the fan eventually, because no nation truly lasts forever. What matters is how you can keep things under control. Unless you can convince me that even after 500 years, the worst qualities of human nature can be countered and suppressed thanks to socialism while still proving to be beneficial to society, I'm largely inclined to believe that many are a proponent of socialism simply because they are sick of capitalism and want to see any kind of change at the core, regardless of the consequences (like voting for Trump, as a comparison).
Thinking people are only assholes to each other over money is obscenely naive.
You dumb fuck. If you knew anything about Marxism other then your bullshit understanding that reduces a capitalist country like Venezuela to some vague right-wing idea of Socialism, you'd realize that certain societies have general tendencies in which daily life produces and reproduces itself.
Under Capitalism, this takes the form of commodity production for exchange on the market in return for profit. Socialism is the abolition of capitalist tendencies and laws, particularly commodity production, wage-labor, products determined by the average socially necessary labor involved (which forces enterprises to compete with one another in lowering their costs & increasing productivity at expense of the workers) and bourgeois private-property (not personal property you stupid fuck I know you are thinking private = personal).
Whether this takes the form of a more statist Soviet form or a more CNT Spain doesn't fucking matter, because all your bullshit against the Soviet Union has been proven false over and over again. History will absolve us, cause your form of economics and government have brought widespread misery, genocide and war for the vast majority of humanity, and they would choose commie-blocks, free food, public transport and central planning any day to your shit in the loo India capitalist hell holes.
ML was a fucking mistake of god.
Tbh I'm starting to wish that the Soviet Union never happened
But capitalism doesn't take this into account either. The bourgeois don't screw everyone over cause their assholes, it because they are enriched doing so, and if they won't the incentive remains until someone does.
How can something fail if it's never happened?
Hurr durr I'm fucking retarded. Grow up in a fucking shantytown with 1 toilet per 50,000 people and then tell us how you wish the Soviet Union never would've happened.
Go fuck yourselves.
there are plenty of other ways that capitalism makes people into assholes.
You're certainly right in that I'm a dumb fuck, but that's not answering the simple question of how socialism does a better job of ensuring the long-term prosperity of a nation than capitalism, and if it's supposed to, why it has time after time failed to display such results im the long-term.
But how would that be put in practice? I'm more interested in the implementation instead of the theory.
It certainly might come to that eventually once the happiness of the people living in capitalist countries is shattered once everyone believes it to be the results of flaws in the system, but who's to say people won't turn to literally anything else once they're tired from socialism? I'm more interested in hearing how one can prevent that from happening, when it isn't the result of factors beyond the government's control.
'But they' is hardly a convincing argument in your favor, or a convincing argument in general if all your product has to offer is that it's not the competing product. Don't mistake me for defending capitalism either, there's more incentives to screwing your fellow man over than profit, and not all of them are exclusive to capitalism.
good thing reality doesn't care about your feelings, eh?
Arguable
t. Sniff man
Okay, sorry for my language, I assumed you were just larping from /pol.
I'll respond soon
Corruption does exist, and will continue to exist, wherever there is inequality of power or wealth in society. The political organization of socialist society is still a hotly debated question, as anyone should know from browsing this board.
The point of Marx is not to create a utopia where all are perfectly equal, but to abolish the capitalist mode of production and the distinction of class, in order to create a classless society absent of the exploitation of labor or the alienation of commodity production. Where this fits into a wider picture of social and political organization is still being worked out.
Capitalism is NOT a system capable of ensuring long-term prosperity. There is no way for capitalism to address resource depletion or create "sustainable" development, due to its inherent need for growth and development. Inequality of wealth and power, exploitation of labor, environmental destruction, etc. are externalities that are not able to be addressed within a capitalist framework. There is no way for capitalism to create "stability" due to the centralization of capital and the declining rate of profit leading inexorably to crisis. Historically these crises are resolved through civil or national wars, costing the lives of many millions of people.
Furthermore, the 20th century attempts at state socialism were fundamentally undermined, attacked, and destroyed by capitalist powers who recognized them as a threat to global capitalist hegemony. Any unbiased history of the Cold War will tell you that.
Thanks comrade, you responded so I didn't have to.
That certainly does make a lot of sense, even if the actual implementation of socialism still seems to be largely work-in-progress. As of now it seems like socialism has some severe trouble surviving incompetence and misrule, considering most of a nation's economic activity is predicated on what the government does. So when the administrators are great, so will socialism be, but humans don't make for naturally great rulers, which ties back to the argument that socialism is incapable with muhuman nature, whereas democracy is built around human weaknesses (with its own ironic shortcomings).
I guess an interim solution would be to inject measured amounts of socialism in order to counteract the problems caused by capitalism until a more stable solution has been found.
Human nature is freedom what a bunch of faggots
The argument that humans are naturally corrupt my challenge the idea that socialism can fix society's problems, but that doesn't validate capitalism. It just shows that no system can resist corruption and hierarchy.
That being said, while humans are naturally prone to corruption, selfishness, etc. this only becomes a problem when they have the power to exert themselves over others. If you minimize that power through decentralization (ie democracy) then it becomes much harder to do so. It's analagous to an arms race, you implement a system, some piece of shit finds a way to exploit it, you patch the flaw in the system, they find another loophole, etc. Classical liberals thought that capitalism would fix the flaws of feudalism and bring freedom, clearly people found a new way to exploit others, so not we have to find a way around the new problem.
It fails to materialize