Why do you guys support Communism? It's doomed to fail wherever it's implanted, why do you enjoy so much the government monopolizing everything? Are you guys sick?
I honestly can't fathom this, I'm not trolling, how do modern leftists react to this fact, without saying it's "bourgeois propaganda"?
please learn the different between actual communism and totalitarian governments wearing the veil of it.
/thread
Fascism pretending to be communism is still fascism
why should I trust communists
they could just lie with their benevolent theories and monopolize the state and gulag the shit out of me
No, that's just the tankies. Actual socialists and communists are more about "well shit, that didn't work, maybe we should try something different"
you really need to lurk moar.
Yawn.
kek
Back to tardsville, Holla Forums, maybe with a book this time.
YOU LEAVE COMRADE STRAWMAN OUT OF THIS
...
OP, if we should assume that all or the overwhelming majority of communists are Stalinists or Maoists, why shouldn't we assume the same of capitalists as fascists?
Not a good idea OP, death toll of capitalism might be even bigger in such case
b-b-but that was all statism! Unregulated capitalism would never do that!
the only genocided we know about here in chile is the one caused by the fascist dictatorship of pinochet.
forocomunista.com
capitalism had caused way more deaths.
Yeah but Alllende was going to kill 1 gazillion if Pinochet didn't happen so checkmate socialists
Pinochet wasn't that bad, at least he wasn't Mao
...
...
Nothing new to see here.
troll or just idiotic? wait a minute
oh,i see.
Not that foreign aid is the best or anything, but I'd love to hear an ancap acknowledge that free market Montgomery would mean eight-figure death tolls per year on account of aid being abolished.
You're right OP
World War 1, the Korean War, World War 2, the Vietnam War, every American intervention since the 1950s, the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, the Libyan intervention, and the current proxy war with ISIS all definitely don't tally up to way more deaths and injuries then all those "communist" regimes combined
corporatism is just an evolution of capitalism, as long as both are for the accumulation of capital.
Yea yea, we know the drill, you blame any and all famines on the state and put in a boatload of unsourced other deaths but dont do the same for capitalism.
Sorry OP, some of the people here have spent too long LARPing as Che Guevara. Please don't take it as representative of our ideas.
We don't consider those regimes communist (except tankies, whom no one takes seriously) but totalitarian.
Now you're right to say this was at least allowed to happen by convincing the people they were aiming for communism.
This is why tankies are not taken seriously. We have seen that authoritarian regimes have in the past, failed horribly, and hence the majority of people on this board are sane and don't want to try the same thing twice.
Even leninists believe that socialism never came because of Stalin and the material conditions of the period. You see, in Marxist theory capitalism must be overcome in an industrialised nation. Russia was still feudalist at the time. I think Leninists would say the NEP was an attempt to industrialise Russia before moving towards socialism. There's a whole bunch of theory.
But long story short, most of us don't agree with this, and have spent time creating theory that avoids corruption.
Also consider that most those deaths were due to famines, which for the most part happened anyway, so it's ridiculous to blame a lot of them on the totalitarian states.
(not defending them, just saying we need to get our facts straight.)
Also consider the amount of deaths in wars capitalism, imperialism etc has caused. Or merely deaths by avoidable starvation alone.
Okay?
I didn't say anything about that in my post
The entire point of a Communist revolution is to kill 100000000000000000000000000000 people, obviously
It's okay to kill people if they're reactionary.
I agree
reminder that spicey is false flagging as tankie because he's disillusioned with leftypol
...
rip in piece of the people who were killed by living in a stateless classless society
...
Speak for yourself
point discarded
Well, we can't have an argument out of bad faith.
I could argue that Christianity is really about raping children and point to the catholic church and plenty of other offences, but nowhere in the doctrine of Christianity is child-rape encouraged.
Therefore, we have to accept that any idea can be perverted and criticize certain ideas by their merits.
Now, may Marxism-Leninism turn into a totalitarian hellhole? Yes, absolutely, and I believe it will. But socialism and communism has a long and much broader history before that.
Not every leftist is a communist, there are other type of socialists on this board.
never 4get
No, disowning. Every so-called communist regime was, if one looks at the political structure, was actually a fascist monarchal dictatorship.
When a person of power abuses a public system for private gain, it is no longer communism, but has become feudalism.
I don't understand how you guys can just say ALL these thing were not communist/not socialist. The USSR fell, China is not communist anymore, the Eastern Bloc countries fell, but they WERE communist or socialist. They said and proclaimed they were communist while doing communism. I would think you guys reaction would be something like "yeah but they were authoritarian and bad" but you guys all just say "no they were not leftist at all." What the fuck? I don't understand this board sometimes.
did they? how so?
They were a direct counter-revolution, as Marxists always are as it turns out.
These people are anti-socialists, because they seek to implement a system that is not socialist and has destroyed socialism at all costs.
None of them did socialism.
None of them gave the worker ownership and democracy in the workplace.
State ownership of factories?
State ownership and distribution of housing food?
Not socialism or communism.
Indeed, the opposite.
Not socialism or communism.
Please remove your flag and read a book.
By the way, notice the capital "C" in "Communist".
It's the difference between a Republican and a republican, a Democrat and a democrat.
Read a book, nigger.
Watch out kid or I'll gulag you in your sleep
nothin personnel
Literally everyone knows this stupid little sectarian point.
Acting smugly and condescending because people choose not to adhere to your semantic set just showcases your own desperate ignorance. Not to mention your utter inability to discern content from form.
Yes they are, that's the authoritarian variety.
Yeah, that's exactly what they are. Just the authoritarian communism and authoritarian socialism.
No, you. Just because it's not libertarian leftist does not mean it's not leftist. That's not how it works. You can't just discount the entire authoritarian half of leftist thought as ~not being leftist~ because you disagree with it. That's not how it works.
Spot on, comrade
Split, tankiddies.
Socialism is defined by worker's ownership of the workplace.
I don't see how state-ownership lives up to this criteria.
That's because it doesn't. *Libertarian* Socialism lives up to that criteria. Authoritarian Socialism is state/government ownership of the workplace.
Communism is a moneyless and stateless system.
Whatever has gone/is going on in USSR and China isn't communism.
No.
Socialism is the worker's ownership of the means of production.
How is private property suddenly socialist if it is owned by the state? What does it matter if a board of shareholders of bureaucrats control it, if it is controlled outside of the sphere of the workers themselves?
That's like saying fascism is right-wing democracy.
Their rationale is that it's owned "by the people via the government" because the people can vote for what party members, of the single party system, get to control things. Whereas in the libertarian the state is cut out all together by workers in the workplace voting on things, which I am sure you already know.
Yes.
How is public property collective property, though?
They way I've read that works is kind of basically the same as how any representative democratic republic works right now. Like, think of a public library in America. It's a "public" library but only because *the people* voted in a politician who said he would use money taxes, (a value representing the peoples labor, pooled together collectively. ) to build one.