Every right wing argument ever btfo
Every right wing argument ever btfo
With central planning we could get that up to like 200 mil easy, maybe even 600 mil within 5 years.
those numbers seem kinda low, and how do you even kill 7.665 people
Muh Six Gazillion Jews
capitalism gets criticised for not preventing deaths
communism intentionally causes deaths by the millions. on top of all the preventable deaths that it would absolutely not prevent.
Virtually all of those deaths are niggers, whose lives are worth nothing. 20,000,000 x 0 = 0
no, he's got 8, 7.665, 3, and 500 people dying from those things each year
Commies not welcome
clearly bait but ill bite
if the number of deaths caused by communism - more like 160 million anyway were scaled to every country in the world (eg every country had the same death rate as communist china/ soviet union) it would be exponentially more than 20 mil per year
the countries with capitalism have the lowest death rates of any nations throughout history
it is only the nigger countries that have high death rates because they are fucking poor and stupid
came here to post this but this user was faster. well played
show me a capitalist country and I will show you actual numbers
Most of them die in Africa so who cares
Commie makes propaganda
Does not knowing how to write numbers
The joke wrote itself.
to entertain your stupid communist argument I would like you to have a look at this chart. as you can see the more capitalistic countries ( the ones that allow for the free market with minimal state intervention) such as america, most of Europe and nu Zealand are usually economically successful first world countries with a good standard of living.
the less capitalistic countries such as most of Asia and Africa are shitty 3rd world countries where most of these deaths are occurring.
in light of this clear negative correlation between capitalism and deaths we can conclude that capitalism actually prevents deaths.
Aww man its good to see commies getting btfo literally everywhere
any proof on those numbers, or is this just some figure robert conquest pulled out of his ass?
so, 2+2=44 because the moon doesn't rotate on thursdays?
this dosnt address the point made in the post and is a total non sequitur
commies can't even feed their own countries but think they can somehow stop world hunger and cure diseases on top of it
top wew, OP.
dude did you even read my post. i directly showed how when a country has genuinely free markets (capitalism basically) fewer deaths will occur. whilst when the state tries to control/prevent/limit markets and or redistribute wealth through welfare(socialism) the nation will usually turn into a deadly shithole. like is it any wonder that starvation went up in Zimbabwe and south Africa after the state tried to seize control of farms (the means of production) from white farmers and redistribute their busnesses.
so areas with heavy socialist infastructure like sweden, norway, beligum, leichenstien, the netherlands, France, and luxembourg are hellish shitholes?
literally no one is buying your ancap horseshit, not even you.
DONBALD J. BLUMPFT BTFO ETERNALLY
Not an argument
forgetting those 3 zeros
7.665000 = 7.665 though
did u know hitler hated capitalism, it is very jewish.
with that said, are nazis still right wing?
this is an actual argument, refreshing
I would say a couple of those places are FAMOUSLY unsafe lie france and sweden but that dosnt account for every example of a first world socialist country, and TBH I am not an expert in the countries you listed and dont know the ins and outs of their situations
u werk an make munnee?
u werk an gib me munnee?
simple concept flooper flugfcucks
rember krippy krunkft is not reel gabdilism an stalin wuz a heroooooo
implying the US/Europe are in anyway capitalist
implying it's the US/Europe's job to feed. bathe, and supply water to all of the niggers on the planet
Why can't they do it themselves? That shit was figured out > 20k years ago by white cultures. Why not blacks?
Yes, because the right wing orients itself towards hierarchies, and the statist economic system of the Third Reich was very hierarchical. Hitler believed that there should be strong businesses, as per social Darwinism, although they take their orders from the state.
if you look at the chart again you will see that the countries you listed are still in the green economically. furthermore Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Austria, Germany, Italy and Switzerland do not have a minimum wage which has contributed greatly to low unemployment rates in those areas.
so they were relatively centrist
In capitalism, private individuals own the means of production (factories, fields, etc.) That seems to be an accurate reflection of the economies of the USA and Europe, and really basically the world. You can say that China, Vietnam, Cuba, and all those other nations are Communist, or even socialist, although they really have no intention to give people the means of production. Looking at their history, they are traditionally very hierarchical countries that used socialism to justify their strict control and power, although are making no steps to decentralize power. Will China ever relinquish such state control? Will Cuba, Laos, North Korea? They have those ideologies because of the founders of their socialist states, who either did so because they were genuinely socialist (Mao, Castro to an extent) or because the fighting style of the Soviet Union was admired by them and they wanted to ally with it (Vietnam, Laos). Ho Chi Minh, while he did pass reforms, wasn't really interested in distributing economic state power to the people; he just wanted to liberate Vietnam from the French. It was really people like Lenin who wanted world communism and social ownership of the means of production, while their successors just kept up the image to control the people. Stalin, who superseded Lenin, certainly wasn't interested in spreading the ideology unless it provided him a security buffer against the other nations. Really, he was interested in the well-being of the Soviet Union, rather than that of people across the world. Now, there is no such interest at all – the "Communist" countries are only so in the name.
Lack of clean water, hunger, malaria and disease in the nigger countries is the fault of western capitalism and not the corrupt socialist regimes that actually run those countries
Leftypol actually believes this
Consider the following. The biggest part of the cost of delivering aid to Africa is not the cost of the food, which the west indeed has a surplus of, but the logistics. To prevent these deaths would first entail constructing and maintaining a network of roads, airports and seaports spanning an entire continent (that happens to be the size of the US, China and Europe put together) ravaged by constant regional tribal conflicts. There is not a single nation on this planet that could undertake such a project even if it were to permanently station its entire labor force in Africa. Even if there was, would having the workers working for the benefit of someone else not be contrary to the purpose of your communist state?
Are niggers really stupid? It sounds like a dumb question, but there are a lot of Nigerians in foreign countries who do really well in their universities, and it could also be that their conditions (shitty infrastructure, desert, ethnic differences in countries) are what are preventing them from succeeding. But also, it seems that in their native languages they lack abstract concepts, which seemingly demonstrates their lack of cognitive potential. What's the truth about this?
Also, instead of selecting the members from the two most intelligent races, wouldn't it rather make sense to select individuals after the black line in pic related? So as not to have dumb and smart Whites and Asians, but to have only smart Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, and Asians, although Blacks and Hispanics will be in lesser numbers?
Perhaps in Communism it could be seem as an investment and possible spreading of ideology, kind of how China is doing now in Africa, alleviating its problems little by little while developing it.
Colonialism is good
You should more or less look at it percentage-wise. There's a much much lower percentage of very intelligent blacks compared to whites and East Asians. So niggers are clearly pretty stupid, relatively speaking.
It has done a lot of good. I doubt Africa would be civilized much without it, although it's kind of a training wheels kind of deal, like an exaggerated version of foreign aid. Although here's the question: is it better for nations to have a colonial relationship with each other or fellow country status instead, assuming they're both very well developed?
There are a lot less intelligent Blacks than Whites or Asians, percentage-wise, although in the case of deciding who gets to receive aid and be incorporated into the civilized world, shouldn't it be had that the most intelligent of all groups be let to stay, rather than the races with the highest averages?
drink dirty water
get the shits
die of dehydration
FUCKING CAPITALISM REEEEEEEE
I'm not sure what you're asking. Those with the highest percentage of intelligent people also have the highest average intelligence.
Another good experiment would be to ship all blacks in the US to Africa and watch the results.
Is your form of communism different from every other form?
They'd all die if we shipped them there and cut off aid.
If your country doesn't have clean water by now through aqueducts and shit that has existed since the Romans, then you're fucked and you deserve to die.