Huh, really makes you think

Shocking.

What are they?

For that matter, Jews being so hellbent on destroying whites doesn't benefit them in any way. If they secretly rule the world, why do they need everyone else dead?

rightfully so
the worst thing about the holocaust is that it didn't happen

youtube.com/watch?v=1ft9iuZu0AI
this triggers the Holla Forumsyp

I've always just thought of that as "authoritarian socialism" if anything.

nothing new
if anything, it proves Holla Forums right

Stay mad goyim.

It'd be closer if it was

shabbos goyim are still only cattle
useful idiots you will prove to be, and useful idiots you will always remain; when kikes seize power, you will be among the first on the execution line

Reality is too harsh on my comrades. If something doesnt work you have to fix it or find a new working something.

No I'm Jewish.

I hope my 1/4 Mizrahi doesn't fuck it up for my 3/4 Ashkenazi when the jewish communist overlords come for me and I get my proper place as minister of music in the world government where I will make Frank Zappa's "Help I'm a Rock" the national anthem for the world :)

Whatever helps you sleep at night, buddy.

Ok /po-I mean fellow comrade

Hey Holla Forums, I'll drop you a hint.

"Capitalism" isn't another word for "greed" or "consumerism".

I thought the Jews were already in power. Your narrative is falling apart, Holla Forumsyp.

No homo but Leo Jogiches is pretty sexy.

<

You have to understand one thing comrade: the general right wing belief, Holla Forums's one in particular, is essentialism: people will always act according to their supposed nature, even against their own interests. Personal agency doesn't exist (except for Whites of course).
The Jew will always try to destroy the society he lives in because it's in his nature. This is an axioma, everything is seen under that angle.
You cannot reason with such line of thought, It's just like arguing the existenc of God using reason, when the nature of such belief is purely emotionnal.
Applied to Jew, you could point that they don't form an homogeneical entity, that they have differents opinions (Fucking theoritician of proto National socialsim was a Jew ffs), but the answer would be THEY PLAY BOTH SIDE.

...

This shit took way too long to make.

ebin

don't even try OP, they are impenetrable

Huh, really makes you think…

It's like you're retarded on purpose.

huh really makes you think

Shabbat shalom ya bastard

It's once again the conflict between materialism and idealism. Treating race and broader "identity" as a priori essentialist phenomena really isn't that far off from belief in a personal god with a knowable will.
We are the most realistic people because we reckon, at the core of our ideas, with just objects.

top fucking kek, this needs to go on fagbook

It's not real socialism because it's not an unrealistic utopia where all the infrastructure is used fairly by everybody in the whole world.

I btfo'd you
really made you think

You're memes are stale, Holla Forums

When is the "socialism is welfare" meme going to end with you stupid capitalists.

The means of production weren't controlled by the workers in Venezuela, therefore it wasn't socialist. How is this fact so hard for rightists to comprehend.

But didn't spic Stalin just literally give the factory to the workers?

Good!!!

In a mass or even world wide scale? People can barely find trustable fuckbuddies.

Let alone that you folk think that racial unity to try bringing people together is ebil nadzee stuff.

Well after the economy was deep into the crash.

Also I'm not sure if he completed it, or if he's given control to "representatives" or what.

That's actually some of the best right-wing propaganda I've seen in maybe a year, and this was campaign year too so there was more competition than usual.

Whoever did this needs to join our side ASAP.

he said he would and only unproductive factories, but didn't as far as I know. Venezuela has a mixed economy and LOTS of corruption, there are legit socialist policies like Collective Farming but it's pretty hard to build Socialism out of a Bourgeois State without a proper revolution (not the ballot box).
You'll find failed and booming economies in Socialist and Capitalist states with varying degrees of revisionism, there are too many factors involved to simply scream "X is shit so it doesn't work", there are bad Capitalist policies and bad Socialist policies (Social Democratic and Keynesian if you will, please).
some venezuelan-fag (anti-socialist) left this on the last thread, it's a pretty good explanation.

What I love about these people is that their entire narrative against us is that classic "LOL! economic illiterate much??" but whenever they show up they alleged understanding of economics they just say some of the dumbest fucking things.

Like, this dude's entire idea seems to be that the economics of a country is about money they have in a vault, and once it runs out you have crisis and you can no longer buy toothbrushes for everybody.

nice try faggot

...

It's worker ownership, or collective ownership, fam. The means of production being owned and administered to by a bourgeois state (or really any kind of state not dominated and directed by the working class) isn't socialism.

the means of production are not private owned faggot

The state has monopolies in lots of things

They're privately owned by the state :)

...

...

WEW
E E
WEW

...

...

If public= state owned
Private = porky owned
What is worker owned?

what do state owned meas?

if it isn't porky owner the only answer is by the people

people = public

Military infrastrucures by example belong to the state, they're not privatized yet but i don't think they're controlled by the workers as for now.

...

...

Engels, Anti-Duhring.

You can have a socialist party in power while the economic system is not actually socialism. Being a socialist country doesn't mean you have actually achieved socialism.

The populace at large has no control over these things. Seeing as socialism is giving control to the workers, and not control to the representatives of the workers,

money is a spook

Honey, honey. Your father and I weren't *born* in socialism, we *achieved* socialism.

the representatives o the workers are workers itself

Like Lenin or Trotsky. They represent the workers so they are part of them.

Slavery, child labor and intolerable tyranny are the definition of Marxism.

Well if you believe that then you are an anarchist and not a socialist. This isn't an argument that the state isn't socialist but that it isn't anarchist.

...

...

Only in the same sense that a board of shareholders can :^)

...

Marx still had Social Democratic aspects in his theory, yeah, it was the 19th century for fucks sake, he doesn't need to be followed to the letter, his critique of the Capitalist mode of production is what Marxism stands for.
This isn't fucking gospel, you don't prove centuries of theory wrong by >quoting a few outdated or contradictory statements when the thesis of the works is already polished by other authors.
You're only proving that you have no knowledge of philosophy or of how knowledge was built through history.

It can but it doesn't have to. Expecting us to take credit for everything every single state in existence has done is dishonest.

It is, most people are lazy and don't give a damn about anything, it's hard to find an employee let alone having someone you have no leadership upon.

And any current globalization is due to capitalist hegemony in business, it's like saying the world was going to be united under Rome while it was still expanding, but then places that lived under the same empire for centuries where quick to divide and are up to this day.

i think the problem is that the venezulen economy is so oil dependant, and oil prices fell and fucked the country, that and maduro is a shit leader,

they give a damn about how much money they'll take home, workers don't have to actively decide every little detail of how a company operates, they just have to have a say in it and have the power to remove whoever is in charge.

I love how you conveniently ignore Bolivia

The state is not controlled by the workers, therefore what it does is not socialist.

If you think voting gives you any real control over what the government does, you are in for a very rude awakening. And are probably an idiot.

Which is why no one likes M-Ls.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_class

Representation is a pleasant lie.

the country went to shit before the oil prices fell

the state is controlled by representatives of the workers therefore is controlled by the workers

The US elected leaders are elected by the people which include workers, so it must be socialist.

wew lad, people take note about how impoverished they are when they are starving, if that was the case we would already had revolutions from the amount of taxation and abusive prices that still maintain some comfortable life for them.

Then imagine all these clueless people having power and start fucking shit up because they are stupid or worse, because they are influenced by someone who can trick them.

Lolbergs actually believe that so yah.

no but it proves how worthless the idea that socialism is only when workers controll the means of production is

The workers picks representatives and then they make laws, and so on.

but those laws are subordinate to a constitution and previous laws that protect private property, hence making it impossible to extend even the shitty representative democracy towards the workplace.
Proper Socialist states generally are founded without property rights (Through Revolution) since it's pretty hard to change the entire structure of a state on-the-go.

You guys really are autistic

Not a joke
Not trying to be funny

Says who? If they have the authority, it doesn't matter who they're supposed to "represent". It's an illusion.

Half of his principles are tyranical and despotic.

Except that's the actual definition of socialism. By your own logic, capitalism is socialist because the workers can just buy stock in their own company.

You realize that was a list of demands for the Revolutions of 1848, not a description of socialism or communism, right?

A rich, capitalist minority mind you. Nothing leftwing about that, just big nosed booger eaters exploiting working class people by using divide and conquer strategy

You know these points don't define Socialism, right?