Communism will never happen because it doesn't take into account human nature...

...

Just kill yourself you stupid nigger.

Feminism doesnt give a shit about equality, it still advocates for capitalistic relations and holds that capitalism is a perfectly equal system.

requesting that picture of the rich lady beating the poor person

The history of mankind is the history of human nature being bent in one way of another. Was primitive communism "closer" to species-essence/human nature than slave society and was slavery likewise more human-like than feudalism? Most importantly, how does capitalism, the economic mode of production when one group of people sells their labour power for wages takes "human nature" in the account if the mass utilization of wages within the human society is a relatively recent development?
Not really, within the sphere of society communism would be abolition of certain socio-economic relations(of wage labour as well of the economic value that generates it), which is wholly different than "abolishing being prettier", which is retarded since it's an abstract option anyways.
Empty phrase that should be avoided unless it is defined properly. For us (economic) equality would be abolition of certain notions I described above, no need to describe it further.
Read Lukacs nigga.

wtf no

Communism is based on a coherent account of how humans and human economy acts.

In the same way that Capitalism is linked to George Bush sure.

This has never been the case in any socialist country.

because?

which is?

We used to live in tight knit equal communities. Are you saying between the fall of the Roman Empire and Feudalism there was no life at all?

How about in the early medieval city?

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/mar/11.htm

Look it's another "Holla Forumstard thinks he knows the meaning of communism" episode

Please tell us where you get your sources from that tell you Communists somehow work against human nature, or that it is slave morality given you even know what that means

Not the one from Emma Goldman (who was friends with Lenin and part of the communism party)

The problem is that you take small, separated tribes and not humanity as a whole. As long as there are people with different ideas, communism will never happen without some oppressive authority.

But that's exactly the point, it holds that everyone has the same capabilities. So, a smart, scientific person has to share the means of production with the stupid majority. It rewards lack of boldness, creativity. Since, everyone is entitled everything by birth, you don't really have to "conquer" anything, which is where humanity is grand at.

It is slave morality because it's envious of others sucess and wants to erase human individuality. It casts everyone as ants.

Emma was an anarchist and a feminist. Not just a feminist.

In Communism I work for myself. I am my own boss.

How would I be a slave?

...

As long as you lose the incentive to overcome adversity, you get weak. And if we get weak, then humanity would surely die. So, communism could even be detrimental to the human race.

You can do that in Capitalism, just make a company! It is slave morality because you think being bold, creative, strong is wrong and that people be as weak as you. It wants to subvert values inherent to humanity, as people are naturally attached to what's strong.

Communism are for Romantics, not Realists.

Where, in any piece of Communist anything, does its say this? I get you probably have no idea of what Communism actually is, but couldn't you at least have read a Wikipedia page first before making a fool of your self here?
Any who, Communism is not jealousy of other success, it is more stopping other from feeding off my labor and hard work like the capitalist does under our current arrangement.
Please take a brake from your low energy shitposting to to read some basic material

Here, I'll even give you the quicky for babbys like your self
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

please get in an understanding of what your railing against before you shit up this board any more

Actually communism is for übermensch, not stupid retard faggot shits.
Gottem

communism will never happen because it is an ideal. Like capitalism.

If capitalism actually happened once (I have my doubts), then the winners banded together to secure their business from competition, and we end up in big state, bureaucracy.

If communism actually happened (every time since the french revolution there was some secret society behind, so no uprising of proletariat), you would have the same, top officials become so because they are interested in acquiring power more than the average stakanov, and they want to keep their power to their family, so we end up in exactly the same bureaucracy as capitalism. On the surface it looks bleaker because my pig is my pig, while the people's pig is nobody's pig.

Democracy never existed past greek city states, and anarchy quickly devolves into the rule of the bigger mob.

Therefore I suggest a lot of kibbutz, each with his own thermonuclear deterrent. Or, if you want to keep your ideologies, try to find some safeguards from these intrinsic problems well before addressing other people's preferences.

Once again would yo mind substantiating your claims
So your 12, right?

/thread

Jesus user!
this has to be a low energy shit post!
I hope for your sake

Oh man, you're right! 1% owning 80% of wealth is completely normal and natural. Thanks for opening my eyes, OP!

Why are they rich? Because WE buy what they make. You want everything, but what have you given people to deserve that?

"they" don't make anything.

I think class is how much money you make: the post.

As it stands right now, humanity is not ready for communism. We would need to implement eugenics to ensure more mouth breathers who drain the system aren't born, and homogenize humanity so we have the same beliefs and ideals.

This is B8

Communism is not an ideal to be established that is instituted by the people with correct views, that was the entire fucking point of Marx and people who more-or-less agree with him.
Capitalism is an economic system where the majority people who work are paid with wages, I'm pretty fucking sure we live in it.
Blatant historical revisionism, both France in 1789 and Russia of 1917 were thrown into the revolutionary spiral thanks to the collapse of the system forcing the people to act.
Wow, you discovered that USSR was capitalism, except the party officials fulfilled the role of capitalists as the managers of capital. Good job!
In the polis there was a much more limited group of people allowed to vote, so it was less inclusive than the modern democracy.
Anarchy is not mad max society unless you're an "an"cap aka corporate shill.
I should've expected that by the idealist retard whose concepts are separated from the reality rather than deduced by the long-term developments of the currently existing system
(You)

Ya, this is B8

True, but they would had put a lot of risk and work into the business at the start, then it gets too big so you hire people to do all the things and you just have to manage it, or you could even hire a manager and sit back, thus what you lads call "porky"

Or you could buy stock despite having contributed nothing to the enterprise.

ITT: Holla Forums continues to be illiterate

Risk is only required insofar as their is a market to risk ones fortune on. The individual taking the "risk" is still not creating any value, nor does this "risk" they have taken now justify them to use the labor of others to gain a profit.
Please read marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf
It will explain my position better than I can

t. supermarket cashier who thinks he's of the same mettle as bootsstrap billionaires.

Thanks lad
Was meaning to read this at some point

The problem with ideologues like Marxists is that they create their own version of reality and shun anyone outside of it. It's like toxic echo chamber.

please try to be sincere while you argue here. Adhoms and strawmen will just get people to leave this thread.

What a pointless sweeping generalisation.

You are the idealogue, here. You realize 99% of the right's arguments are based on hasty generalizations like this one?

Where does any Communist theory say that?

Stalin was the most powerful man on earth in the 30's - 50's. Most of the most powerful men on earth were Communists and were looked up to and inspired more revolutions.

What are these non-arguments and stawmans?

You still have no fucking idea what Communism is. Sage because b8

If y'all don't want to understand, then it's fine. You can trick the mind of many people, but you can't escape reality.

The reality is that communism is inevitable.

Facts and reality are the number one enemy of the Right.

That's why you can't debunk even one of the arguments proving you wrong in this thread.

Here we can see an ideologue panic as he attempts to paint his opponents as "not wanting to understand", "tricking the minds of many people" or "escaping reality", thus attempting to paint everybody but him as brainwashed and/or idealist. This is indeed pretty ironic from the point of a spectator, as the poster in question has failed to respond to the scathing critiques of his shitty posts rehearsing the same petty arguments Holla Forums had seen a few hundred times before. Sad!

It's truely not bait. How else would you go about making all of humanity believe the same thing when everyone fucking hates each other?
The only other way would be to do so by force.
Utopia can never exist without sacrifice.

The eugenics isn't for ideals though, it's to make sure we have healthy genetics and to keep people from having children who shouldn't to begin with.

Humanity doesn't need to "believe in the same thing." My gott, so much unexamined ideology.

...

Everybody being able to shit people out whenever they want is immoral, selfish, and a detriment to a civilizations future.

Seems like you agree with Marx, people aren't equal. If you weren't such a brainlet you might know that.

...

We won't feudal serfs in XVIIIth century France weren't "convinced" into feudalism by reading Smith or Rousseau.
Read a book.

fuck

It's a good thing the Communist movement is not some vague ideologically biased concept, but a movement that finds it's roots in solid material reality

I'm not talking about religion. I mean a common goal, something we can work towards and be used to unite us.

The I suppose your wording was very poor

I guess that's why I'm not a true communist. More of an anarcho-syndicalist.

...

so your admitting your an immaterial ideologue?

Survival isn't good enough? Abolishing the global class system that is ruining the planet? Putting an end to the imperialist wars that impoverish East and West alike? None of that's good enough huh?

Read Zizek.

Transhumanism will fix it.

What would be the arguments against this free trade view?
I can think of one, destructive competition. It is true that they have the same chance but that chance is very slim because big business\corporations out compete and screw over small businesses starting out, so it more or less keeps the classes fixed, and they are generally quantity over quality.

Im thinking at the same time that there has always been leaders and followers since humanity could even be classified as human.
The masses do not want to think and would rather follow so they do not have to think. Then you have the few who are naturally curious and willing to learn about almost anything, who thinks for the love of it and is not a chore or a strain. These people often become leaders, and only them can be true leaders. It seems like capitalism only came about based on this.

Of course any form of government is not natural, only forms of anarchism is natural but this just leads to form another government down the line.

Then you have Fascism (don't really know what it is) but from what i hear about it, it is meant to be opposed to Communism and somewhat opposed to capitalism. I think maybe it tries to support small bussiness by tackling destructive compitition somehow?

Im just rambling on now. I have no clue what about political ideologies, don't know where i stand on anything.