I hate leftists and leftism in all kinds of aspects and matters

I hate leftists and leftism in all kinds of aspects and matters.

Convince me why I'm supposedly wrong against your criteria.

Other urls found in this thread:

psdb.org.br/a-luta-de-pt-e-psdb-e-politica-nao-ideologica/
noticias.bol.uol.com.br/ultimas-noticias/internacional/2016/02/29/e-preciso-comer-o-que-tem-diz-venezuelano-sobre-escassez-de-comida.htm
m.oglobo.globo.com/mundo/retratos-da-fome-na-venezuela-12337316
blogdosakamoto.blogosfera.uol.com.br
thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/24/venezuela-has-become-a-starvation-state.html
rudd-o.com/archives/socialists-are-responsible-for-the-utter-starvation-and-economic-failure-in-venezuela
internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2016/07/16/colombia/1468685161_621815.html
elpais.com/tag/venezuela/a
mises.org.br/Article.aspx?id=2410
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Mayer_Rothschild
scientificamerican.com/article/character-attack/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

lurk/read more

How about no, because I'm not at the beck and call of self-important autist like yourself who saunters in here expecting us to try to convert them to The True Path.

I forgot some things too.

You like Fidel? If yes, why?
You like Chavez/Maduro? Y/W?
You like Mão? Y/W?

Not asking the same stupid Lenin/Stalin/Trotsky/Kim. Because I want to know more about why you think contemporary leftism is somehow right, even though I got Mão.

Fidel no. Chavez no. Mao no.

Libsoc all day, every day.

gtfo pls

Wow, wow, wow. You're really talking to a conservative with that conviction? You really are so self-imposed and megalomaniac that thinks that "everything I want to be correct is correct and what it isn't is inadequate".

You guys are worse than Brazilians, seriously.

Then, who?

I'm willing really hard to understand you if you don't support current socialist regimes.

If anyone tell me the name of Bakunin here, you'll earn yourself the less amount of respect or credibility you could earn.

read the sticky and lurk more

You're probably really fucking rich then

Is that a meme I'm supposed to know?

lmfaaooo

Why do you dislike Bakunin?

And also, tbh, your English is a little difficult to understand.

I've already seen this, and that is the most fallacious thing I thought I'd listen in an imageboard, telling that if someone is poor they have the moral obligation to be socialists and Marxists.

I don't dislike Bakunin. It's the opposite.

The only good thing about Bakunin other than his "The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too." quote is that he exposed the contradictions of classical anarchism with his shit about the secret dictatorship, tbh

I seriously laughed really hard on the Allende one.

Hail, Pinochet.

I seriously laughed really hard on the Allende one.

Hail, Pinochet.

I seriously laughed really hard on the Allende one.

Hail, Pinochet.

I seriously laughed really hard on the Allende one.

Hail, Pinochet.

Bakunin is one of the most well-known leftist thinkers in history. I thought you hated leftists?

lol

no one here is talking about morals

no one here is talking about morals

This tbh fam

Just in case, I'm not spamming. It just wouldn't post and then it posted a gazillion times. I tried to delete too, but wrong password.

Jesus Christ

N1x, is that you? if yes you need to get your shitposting together

This is literally what he did affirming that if I hate leftism, therefore I'm a rich pig.

More like the other way around. There's no reason to support the right if you're not a rich pig.

Bakunin disagrees about Marxism. This is already enough for him to be least worst than any other Marxist.

hehehehehehe good

this is what conservatives actually believe

wrong pic my bad

I've told everybody I was a conservative.

Uh-huh. Another meme that I'm not supposed to understand.

So globalist capitalism?

Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

Yeah, thanks. That was the citation I was mentioning.

my point is you're a pseudointellectual twit who uses words like 'concupiscence'

Neoliberalism and Social-Democracy. I'm looking at you, Lenin, and don't think I haven't noticed you're telling people you're doing what you aren't.

You do realize Marx was saying that religion was a necessary and understandable thing to have throughout the past of history that embodied all the good of man ( its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification) but that belief changes throughout the ages and needs to move on, right?

wew lad have you ever read a victorian novel

I admit don't know about most of these but my family comes from Chile and Allende was a fucking disaster. Completely ruined the economy for the short period he was in power.

pls

...

Thank me for not forcing christian proselytism and christian moral and ethical values here.
By owning a minimally decent vocabulary is being a pseudo intellectual? Well, if it is, it's good, at least it's showing some progress. Thanks for the feedback.

So the shills for austerity and global capitalism, just add centre-right fags like tories and you've pretty much all components enabling globalism

Correct, anyone can masturbate over the dictionary, hasn't anyone ever told you that brevity is wit. The point of communication is to be understood not to show off about how autistic you are

oh, so Reagan and Thatcher were leftist now?

Fernando Henrique Cardozo was. Convince me he wasn't.

I'm not defending Pinochet, just saying that Allende was terrible.

But out of curiosity, how do you explain Chile being the only really developed country within Latin America as of today?

All right, thanks. You're right , I shouldn't be expecting anything more than the common bydlo sense from an imageboard.

Because of Pinochet, of course, however, Brazil had a similar military dictatorship without the manliest part of killing the left retard with Geisel, Figueireido and Médici, and Mr. Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva already said they would be elected anyways if the country was a democracy back in the time.

It started with Olimpio Mourão Filho, former integralist.

I'm ending this with a great deal.

DONALD TRUMP 2016®

LET'S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

great

hey, gramsci whatcha' doin?
Ruining the world.

And what you're expecting from Crooked Hillary? SUS?

ok lad
btw, Im not seeing any argument being made about how neoliberalism and their proponents like Thatcher and Reagan like I said earlier had anything do with Leftism. Actually really I'm not seeing any argument at all in this thread, and no reply being made to anybody trying to have a serious discussion with you.

Your grammar isn't even standard lad, stop trying so hard
wrong determiner, faggot

Jesus Christ.

You really thought FHC was right- winged?

Think again.

Surprise, surprise, filthy leftist.

psdb.org.br/a-luta-de-pt-e-psdb-e-politica-nao-ideologica/

Excuse me, Princess.
I haven't said anything about grammar.

...

And even though I haven't said anything about Reaganomics, you still gotta say something.

You know what was awesome about Reagan?
The jokes.

Oh, and Macarthism, of course.

...

...

exactly where does this counter what I said about, you know, what they actually did?

wow are you an autist, insisting on using fancy words and snickering at people who think its retarded but when it comes to basic grammar you're up against the wall

You said you didn't like neoliberalism. Do you know what neoliberalism means, or are you simply repeating buzzwords?

Thanks . You've convinced me that I should ignore you. You haven't even opened the article.

I really haven't explained. You guys do the thing for yourselves. I don't need to point out things like you guys do. Go back to yelling. At least I already presupposedly know when not to listen.

ok lad

Which? The part where you merely say I'm repeating things I don't understand?
No state interventionism/Keynesianism doesn't means it's automatically right-minded. That's my point, but you insist saying I don't understand neoliberalism and depise it because I don't know what it is.
That's not an argument. That's being a leftist.

Saying that annulation of taxes and no state is being an ANCAP, the retard that thinks the fault of everything is of the state and we should live in a world of everything private property.
ANCAP is not right. If it's something, it's stupidity, literally communism, but in the opposite. Instead of a Totalitarian Absolutist State, we have no state at all.

ANCAP isn't right. Try harder.

Why?

Wrong about what? What is your postion?

What criteria do you think we hold?

What the fuck kinda way is this to start a thread?

Conservatism.

Against your criteria coming from the other political espectrum.

Since you were the only one who respectfully asked the question and was really willing to help me comprehend the question and discuss, I'll give it a second chance.

I also asked about new leftist regimes and what you think about them. Meaning that, I want to know your perspective about, Maduro's government , for example.

No memes, please.

And again, sorry for the reckless and uselles shenanigans they were holding previously. I couldn't take it. So many bullshit threw at my face. I couldn't do anything except throw with back with a knife.

I'm not sure you know what the word "criteria" means.

You honestly sound like a teenager trying to sound intelligent on the internet.

The socialist program in Venezuela is commendable and something to be applauded - I hope the socialist party manages to hold onto power through their current crisis.

I'm sure you'll get a lot of weird edgy leftcoms on here bleating about "muh state-capitalism" though

...

I do, and again, you've convinced me why leftists got no credibility after all.
And I won't try to convince you otherwise. Continue believing in what your indoctrination papers tell you, certainly for the help of all people.

I would've answered you with respect, but since you insisted in disrespecting me…

And, of course! People eating rats and dogs for the sake of not starving is definitely better than living in the Coca-Cola empire.

It's easy to say when you don't live in Cuba.

Can you please explain your use of the word then? It seems to me it has no place in the sentences in which you used it.

So… I'm "indoctrinated" because I know the correct definition of words, or because of my politics, despite living in a reactionary country? Once again, clarity is needed in your post.

kek

Could you source that? It seems to me that the only report of such a thing comes from an opposition politician in Venezuela, and was only picked up on by far-right fringe media.

Yet I'm the one who's "indoctrinated"…

noticias.bol.uol.com.br/ultimas-noticias/internacional/2016/02/29/e-preciso-comer-o-que-tem-diz-venezuelano-sobre-escassez-de-comida.htm

m.oglobo.globo.com/mundo/retratos-da-fome-na-venezuela-12337316

I won't take the Mises and Liberal Institute because I already know you'll say shit.

Instead I'll take one of someone who has the same talk of yours, but he's already admitting and saying that "AMERICA IS BUYING THOSE PEOPLE. VENEZUELA IS A-OK".
blogdosakamoto.blogosfera.uol.com.br

thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/24/venezuela-has-become-a-starvation-state.html

rudd-o.com/archives/socialists-are-responsible-for-the-utter-starvation-and-economic-failure-in-venezuela
Retard.>>792970

if you're poor and not a marxist you're a class cuck

Holy shit, can someone just nuke Brazil?

Remove integralism REMOVE INTEGRALISM you are worst brazilian you are the brazilian smell

internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2016/07/16/colombia/1468685161_621815.html

elpais.com/tag/venezuela/a

You're not good at denying facts.

Right winged media, ain't it?

Most part of the journalists, predominantly majority, are leftists. You're not lying for yourself.

OK

You are definitely very, very basic

I asked for proof of your sensationalist claim that "people in Venezuela are eating cats and dogs", and you provided absolutely none. Did I ever deny that there are food shortages in Venezuela? No.

You are literally the only person here spouting lies and bullshit. If your argument is so watertight, why are you resorting to outright lies to support your point?

mises.org.br/Article.aspx?id=2410

Butthurt, Mises Right Winged media!

I won't even answer the other memetard.

Can't argue with that logic.

Mises was right all along, freedom is capital.

Now you'll say what?

That Integralism was "Fascism"?

hahahahahhaahaa

You've just posted an article that links to THE EXACT SAME SOURCE AS BEFORE

I asked you to find another source, and given half an hour to find one YOU FUCKING COULDN'T

Do you appreciate how much of a fool you have made of yourself here?

And it wasn't? Are you really this retarded?

They were literally a copy-cat of Mussolini's party and, yet somehow, weren't fascists.

You're a good troll.

Correction

If you spent at least one single minute to move your butthole and read, you would've known that Integralism is one of the most centrist bullshit ever created.

They said "both Marxism and the Capital instinct were despicable". Gustavo Barroso. Search for it.

Even Plínio Salgado said the same shit.

You're just trolling. Or really just retarded.

I just opened the Mises article, I didn't even see what sources were.

I took the sources from Google.
Google it, Venezuela "El País" and every single thing.

That Mises article is old. I swear it's coincidental if the links I gave were the same, goyim.

But keep believing socialism works, keep all the proletariat uncomfortable!

Read the shit.

What you're telling me is like saying that the Nazis were left-winged because it was "National Socialism" and what he said in Mein Kampf wasn't took in consideration because REASONS.

Keep believing yourself, gotta keep the porkies well fed

What the fuck are you saying.

Integralism is a form of fascism.

Nazism is not left wing. Niether is Fascism.

Do you even lurk Holla Forums?

I saw that article months ago. See that it is, in fact, from two to three months ago, and even though you said "the sources Mises gave were the same I did", they mentioned sources and sources more than 10 times, even with The Daily Mail, that I didn't get.

Because subdevelopment and Black People. I can't stand with that.
And your argument is highly fallacious.
It's like taking Christian Doctrine, picking a place that it didn't hold as it should and they abandoned. like Africa, lel and say that Christianity's values fail because it didn't work at your favorite subsaarian shithole.

Yes, I do.

And "muh, Jews, it's their fault".

Sorry, can't go with that.

I didn't say that it were. I said that what you told me previously was practically like saying that.

How can you take conclusions without even reading their theories?

Now what, Getulio Vargas was fascist? Muh, Plano Cohen?

You don't understand, I'm talking Specifically about the ludicrous claim that people are eating dogs. There is one source for that, an opposition party member. He is the only source for that you have provided.

I'm not having some far-reaching argument about Venezuela right now - I am specifically challenging your biased, inaccurate portrayal of the country, using emotive language that has no basis in fact.

...

Okay, I can understand that this can be a sensationalist affirmation and it can correlate it to please convictions. And, the only thing that can prove whether this is true or false is, minimally, filmed evidence.
But I can understand that even that can be faked, though, so let's take this consense without another fucking aggression, please?

Jesus Christ.

I still got the right to hate leftists with all pieces of my heart.

Who cares about your rights?
They are contemporary anyways.

...

...

Now, what? Getulio was a fascist?
You gotta be fucking kidding me.

I won't even say how erroneous is an affirmation to call everybody a fascist since it's based primordially on Italian Nationalism. It's like calling a Romanian a Nazi.

I genuinely laughed.

Who even said anything about Getulio being or not being a fascist?

No one. And no, he wasn't one.

I've already heard people attaching him to "fascist roots", and it wasn't even only once .

You've won it. I'll fight it, as a christian fundamentalist, as much as I can.

I've not seen a single person claim that in this thread.

You're just deflecting everything, because you know, deep inside like the cocks in your ass that you're wrong.

And integralism is, still, fascism. And Getulio wasn't an integralist.

Oh please, it stopped being Italian-exclusive within a decade since it became a thing.

thanks, I guess?

I'm not wrong.
And I didn't say anyone stated that either, dumbass. I said it because dumb leftists like you like doing those things and no, Integralism is not fascism.
Terms like "homophobia" are also etymologically incorrect.

...

...

All leftists here support gayzism, drugs liberation and all this kind of shit?

I have no idea what this means

lmao

and they say that leftists don't know anything about economics

lmao

He probably meant homosexuals rights, cannabis depenalization and liberal-lolbert societal stuff.
The "degeneracy" if you prefer.

This will explain some things.

Don`t care about sexuality and I support death penalty for drug dealers.

Does that include liquors shops?

Vai virar amiguinho deles, vai, Gustavo Guerra.

Bicha louca do caralho.

Do you have the other one that asks when America was ever great?

Preferably we can create cultural and social conditions that allows us to steer masses away form consumption of alcohol before we could make it illegal.

this one?

Yes, thank you

Not sure what "gayzism" is but it sounds kinda cool.

CARA NAO TEM NADA A VER TO SO TENTANDO ENTENDER AQUI

Beleza. Vou te deixar conversar com eles. Mas fica de olho nessa sua bunda.

Whatatwist!

I used to
I'm ok with them
He was a military genius but also a buffoon when it comes to politics.

I'm a tankie and I hate these sorts tbh

Most of their politics is based on a weird desire for an authoritarian state rather than a desire for the implementation of communism.

...

JESUS AKHUBAR

Isn't the flower with a hand Social Democracy, not purely Socialism?

New sjw buzzword?

I knew a trump supporter who did adderall and cocaine. leftism=/=drug liberation

It serves no function and harms human society. There are no gains for collective in that kind of hedonistic pleasure.

It's a term that has existed for while in the anti-SJW (more lifestylistic than political, as usual) terminology in Brazil, fags shoving crosses up their ass and stuff.
Literally the only way forward, there's no way poor whites will stand getting their meth-addicted kids jailed.

because castro stayed in power for 45 years.
while jailing people who critise him

Top Kek.

I bet you want to ban non reproductive sex too.

It's a buzzword used mainly by evangelical fundies and neo-reactionaries in Brazil, it's the same thing as the homosexual steamroller

You hate Marx because you haven't read him beyond Holla Forums. His materialism is a self evident truth of history.

so your idea is we hate him because we havent read the specific form of propaganda needed to love Marx?

No. Neoliberalism refers to Reaganomics and Thatcher. That's literally where the term came from. People who were more liberal domestically(not a lolbert, like "we should have some welfare for the people") but conservative domestically are called neocons.

I respect you and your convictions

No. You just don't understand him period. Reading his works is not "reading propaganda". I used to be a Holla Forumstard and I know exactly why you hate Marx(or why the majority of Holla Forums does) and it has little to do with this actual works which make sense. Disregarding the manifesto, Marx mainly wrote critiques of Capitalism and if you took the time to read them you'd realize how his critiques are spot on. It isn't "propaganda". Unlike Hitler, Marx was not a blowhard pseudointellectual. He studied philosophy and economics and had a superb knowledge and addresses his opposition while formulating an argument in his books.

little do with with his actual works*
superb knowledge of philosophy and was a Hegellian in his early career*

Meanwhile, Hitler and the Nazi's had to appropriate Niethzche to their regime to feign the impression that they were deep and cogent.

doubt it
We dont really all follow Hitler famo
for one hes german
we tend to stick to our own
only Germans and Americans hold him in a special place of their heart

wew all this while being a social parasite
living off the handouts from his family and friends
i dont trust that an upper middle class jew knows about the plight and struggle of the european/global working class man/proletariat
I noticed history wasn't among the subjects Marx would have studied hmm?
why? are you admitting it is utter and complete and total bullshit

Yeah I did I used to be a lolbert and used Holla Forums.
Bullshit, Atleast in 4pol you have third reich threads and they're very popular.

He did study history. And he came up with one of the fist " material" outlooks on how history progresses. Marx was nothing but "a jew" but by his blood. His father had him baptized as a kid and he took to calling people he didn't like "dirty jewish". He knew nothing of Judaism and thought of it as a stupid superstition.

I said to disregard the manifesto because he wrote it early in his career as a pamphlet of the news paper. The steps he list for how to achieve communism at the end weren't nearly as developed as his other works. He didn't spend a lot of time on how to "achieve communism" as he spent more time writing critiques of capitalism. I say to disregard it because if you want to open up your mind and try and read Marx I would recommend Capital instead.

No. Marx was a journalist, albeit not super successful. But he wrote pieces so scathing as the establishment he was kicked out of Prussia. Again, all of what you're saying sounds retarded to anyone who's ever actually read or researched Marx beyond Holla Forums.

I dont use half-chan fam

still find it quite odd that the fathers of communism and modern capitalism were cousins dont you?
Marx being related by blood to the Rothschilds doesnt strike anyone as something odd?

so he came up with a fantasy that he never finished explaining and spent the rest of the time criticizing the system that allowed him to live in a nice house in london and feed for his numerous children and wife in comfort

like what?
it was Prussia, the socialist reformist state what would he have to complain about?

so am I! why did you change your mind famo?

It serves a social function with minimal harm to collective, so no. Alcohol on other hand tends to be more taxing to society than what society has to gain form it.

Think about it a bit m8. Posadism is the closest that Marxism gets to nihilism, although it has to wrap it up in the symbolism of ayylmaos and dolphins and other New Age stuff.

I don't know if you're trying to say that Smith and Marx were cousins but that's blatantly false.

Same as the Rothchilds thing. I googled both these things and could only find conspiracy crackpot stuff.

no wonder.

No. What do you think socialism is?

Because I read Capital.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Mayer_Rothschild
right under the family section,
tbh wasnt sure what their relation was just they were definitely related

sadly i wasnt sure what the video entailed when i posted it

now thats hardly fair
the man never worked a day in his life and dictated to people that had suffered all their lives what they should be doing instead

the state interfering with the people through any means whatsoever under the presumption they are doing something beneficial for the people

one book changed your mind
sounds like a born again christian to me

Well that's interesting. Anyway, I don't really care if he's vaguely related to a Rothschild. It still doesn't negate his points about capitalism and he was far from the first socialist. Jews tended to stick together.

Again he spent his life working as a journalist. I don't know if that that's an issue or you think it's a bad career but he spent the last part of his life working as a European correspondent for the New York Tribunal. He was not a NEET.

So you have no idea what socialism is

Yeah you should read it. Also because I've had my parents relationship destroyed over capital. I was a socdem most of my life but went lolbert when I found Holla Forums . Capital is a brutal analysis of capitalism as a system. You literally can't even define socialism properly.

What was the saying about the glass house already?

According to this definition every state in history has been socialist. You might be legitimately retarded.

again no i dont consider that real work
he was paid to sit on his arse and read and occasionally attend a political event

I dont like capitalism
i dont like socialism
but im not falling for the Marx meme like you did

i dont an in depth analysis to understand that it doesnt work

give me your definition then fam
articulate
i have a broad understanding of socialism and i dont intend to write out a page explaining my views

Okay cool. I don't care you define work. He was paid to do something and he did it.

It's like poetry.

If you read any of his books you'd see how retarded what you're saying is. Full communism would literally be without a state. It's TECHNICALLY a form of anarchist philosophy.

No you just don't know what it is period. You can't define it and you think it has to do with some Stalinist bureaucracy when in reality it fucking doesn't and you're a retard.

Socialism is the abolition of private property. AKA the elimination of the capitalist class and wages in favour of worker management of the workplace. Co-ops even exist in the capitalist systems.

but it never gets to that stage does it
its no different from the percieved notion the jihadis have that with a worldwide caliphate comes worldwide peace
same with Marxists and communism
that a worldwide revolution will end with worldwide peace

and why is that a good thing?

Socialism is that the workers are owning the means of production. So farms owned by farmers, factories owned by the people who work in it and so on. As opposed to capitalism where shareholders who don't do shit in business are making the decisions and squeezing people and ressources for profits..

Not if its abandoned halfway through or if it isn't socialist to begin with. Anyway stop moving goalpost, Marx encourages in his books to go out into the world and find people like Rothschild and lynch him. If this is part of some grand conspiracy it surely isn't very well thought out.

Because the capitalist class are parasites. The workers rely on their capital investment so that they can profit off what the workers to, and products that are produced and gain their value from the labour of the workers and of which the capitalist takes no part of. The only defence I've heard is "they put up the original investment", but that makes no sense. Why should we live in a system where we are relying on the investment of a parasite?

Also don't act like you're above anyone because you're to much of an anti-intellectual to bother reading Marx or any other socialist and try and get a deeper understanding of him beyond Holla Forums.

Circular logic. If its so easy to start a business why not call up some of your friends and start a coop, they all just have to pitch in a few thousand dollars, right?

lol classcuck

sounds great got some comics here too

violence against your fellow citizens, judging men and women without fair trial?
how fair of you

and that somehow rationalizes the abolition of private property rights?

This filho da puta privatized the shit out of Brazil's Northern Region.

LULA DE NOVO COM A FORÇA DO POVO!

I never said it was easy. In fact my family is struggling to start a business up right now. I said the capitalist class who fund it take no part in the labour that they profit off themselves and are therefore parasites.

He encourages violence against exploiters like Rothschild, yes.

Yes. Private property is not personal property. Private property is a factory or a means of production.

Also

top kek where do you think you are?

different poster famo

oooo a south american
whats your views on FARC?

How is decision making not a labour, or management?

Also I doubt it is even possible to start a coop on heavier hitting industries without the capitalist class, like space engineering, mining or weapon development.

different workers though amirite

why doesnt communism work then?
why did it fail everytime it was introduced?

What do you understand by private property? A factory where you exploit the work of other people and your damn house and toothbrush are not exactly on the same level.

So you're answering by repeating your own definition of socialism, against what socialism actually is?

Why aren't you banned yet?

What the fuck is the first comic supposed to mean? These people have different opinions which is bad?

It's so deep in the hole that it doesn't even need a joke. It's Two Minutes Hate.

Extraction of surplus labor was the same for them, even though they could have hypothetically worked under a different employer.

Because communism has never been achieved you dumb fuck.

it is socialist you are referring to, and it failed for myriad of reasons having to do with specific historical and material conditions in each case it was introduced. make your question more specific.

For this I would bring in the Marx LTV. The only objective thing you can measure two commodities between them is the amount of human labour expended into them. When making a commodity the act of investing in it maybe takes 30 minutes(probably less I'm being generous.) They amount of time put in by the capitalist class into the product directly is so small, that there is no reason for them to have exclusive rights over the products profits.

Anyway, the USSR was mostly shit but it industrialized about as fast as it would've under a capitalist system and were the first country into space, so that last part is blatantly false. There's no reason to have the capitalist class. They do nothing.

The guy who makes them is an odious little creature neo-nazi from Daily Stormer. An abomination which is the mixture of underage redditors and memester Holla Forumsyps.

The point is to say commies are hypocrytes because they don't give all their monies to the poors, even tough that as nothing to do with communism. That's called a strawman user.

You mean twice by non-Marxists?

I used to see them as mindless drug dealers, until I've seen what are they fighting for

I'm skeptical towards revolutionary, armed socialism, but I'm rapidly losing hope on bourg democracy.

but one thing I'm sure of: death to neoliberalism, especially to Brazil's North and Northwest regions, everything was going to be privatized to make sure the working class would be oppressed, and the rich would still be on top

The government isn't a coop, though is it?

Just in case there's an actual outsider wanting to ask questions…

It's not personal or anything, but it's just that we get such threads often, so sometimes we get a bit angry and shit. I don't think there was a single time I got to Holla Forums's first page and didn't see at least one thread about someone asking to be "convinced" by us. It's beautiful that people are interested, but it does get annoying for a regular poster. That's why we have the pinned FAQ.

If I could hazard a guess, these threads would get a lot fewer shitposts if the OP said something like "I read the FAQ and I'd like to ask further questions".

because thats wrong
The only way to stay true to your beliefs is for them to be challenged
i serve a purpose user

its the fact of the matter that most so called socialists dont practice what they preach

its been instituted more than twice user

tell that to the Peoples Republic of China, the Democratic Republic of Korea, the Khmer Rouge, Vietnam or the United States of Soviet Republics

tell that to the Ukrainian farmers the NKVD stole their houses and land which they needed to farm to grow food from

as you should be its a very bad system
noone likes being ruled over by elites

but one thing I'm sure of: death to neoliberalism, especially to Brazil's North and Northwest regions, everything was going to be privatized to make sure the working class would be oppressed, and the rich would still be on top
well large swathes of Brazil are practically third world shitholes
the elites of Brazil make barely any attempt to not look like a collection of corrupt parasitic vampires from what ive seen

By?

scientificamerican.com/article/character-attack/

Yeah. He ran Cuba pretty damn well considering the circumstances and was a damn good revolutionary. His brother is a dirty revisionist though.
No strong feelings.
Overall, yes. His theory was great, but he had trouble applying it correctly because he let the rightists push him around too much.

By and large, it isn't. The only self-styled Communist countries left have already fallen to revisionism, and leftist movements (in the west at least) are too fixated on identity politics circlejerking to actually get anything done.

Name one

Okay, the Peoples Republic of China, the Democratic Republic of Korea, the Khmer Rouge, Vietnam and the United Soviet Socialist Republics never achieved Communism.
What do you think they preach?

why do you hate art, culture and history?

Russia for starters

First spacefaring nation, collapsed when neoliberalism was adopted.

Lot of people dead, but it didn't fail any more than a typical burnt out nation.

What's this artist's name again? My only beef with him is ow gorgeous the girls are, which is factually innacurate because chinese women are hideous.

But the paintings themselves are glory.

No but the government is not based around private property and profit that goes towards any particular person. It goes to the welfare of the state( or I mean in a non-corrupt one)

Yes. That was not communism. None of them ever claimed to be so and the Khmer Rogue has almost nothing to do with Marxism at all.

spotted the Kulak. The previous year the capitalist grain system had shortages. Because of this Stalin nationalized the system. Besides the grain and the farms being means of production, these places were literally some of the most important agricultural areas in the country. Letting these people horde their grain and not trying to redistribute it so that the population could be fed was not an option. Russia did not go through capitalism and create a surplus and an educated population because of that(which Marx said was necessary for socialism). They were feudal, expecting peasants to be able to industrialize and then run that system on their own accord when they couldn't even read without some authoritarian measures is a pipe dream,.

I'm dumbing it down for the lolbert.

why was neo-liberalism adopted famo?

oh now now, 10's of millions in a few decades and you start to rival the black death matey

because relying on slave labour to build your infrastructure isnt a failure

No, you came here to shitpost and to show up dem pinks cucks, admit it.

Zhang Da Zhong.

I can tell you some truths about it
Stalin was selling grain to the west for cheap so he could finance his first 5 year plan to industrialize russia
the great depression happened in the west so he had to sell more grain to make up for the loss in prices
so to get the excess grain he emptied the grain silos throughout the entire soviet union and allowed 9 million people to starve to death in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Fuck off

Is an-fem poster a chink? lol

Would expect nothing less from a lolbert. The deaths we know are documentable from it are much lower than the high 7 million estimate. About 3.5 million people most likely died.

Regardless, capitalism has killed far more people through imperialism and even has started famine( like in India) that rival the Holodomer.

But they are. Chinese women are ugly. They are stunned and insipid, they have crooked teeth and a sickly palor. with the only redeeming quality being their hair.

1.5 billion?
you know the population of africa was about an eighth of that for about 1000 years?

irk comr8, I've seen some pretty Chinese peasant girls before. I'd agree if you said Chinese men, though.

Also Stalinism does not equal Marxism. There are a lot of different leftist theories. Holding up one and saying "SSEEE!!!" makes no sense.

It says 150 million. Can you not read?

obviously not i forgot to bring my magnifying glass
wheres the part of the infograph where its says 'estimates' since thats what these all are

WHAT THE FUCK IS LEFT?

I can't tell if OP is legitimately retarded or if he's just a dedicated shitposter

If we have perfect racial homogeneity, commodities will magically produce themselves.

And the estimate of 9 million people is what you just used to disprove socialism. The famine of the Holodomer was no worse than capitalist ones like in India. Though like I said, I have no intention on wanting to go back to Stalinist USSR.

Fascism :^). That's what all lolberts are anyway. See: Mises.

This is true. Haven't any of you heard of the true story of Yakub, the creator of the white race?

Whatever you say, m8

Even then, they are still fairly insipid 5/10 at best.

well id bury my face in those hairy pussies thats for sure fam

I just want to be clear that Stalin apologist are not the majority of leftist. What Russia tried to do was considered impossible according to Marx. So using the USSR or Mao as representations of Marxism or socialism in general is dishonest.

got to love these completely unqualified statements from leftcoms

Well pussy is pussy that's for sure, I'm not saying I wouldn't slay the shit out of those particular examples.

Yes.

Russia never went through the Capitalist stage and even then they were never socialist.

I'd cut off my left foot to get inside one of them for a full 24 hours

socialism is state capitalism - yes things would have gone easier had they gone through a long spell of capitalism first - but that also would have hindered the revolution

JUST

Now you're just putting that slit into a pedestal m8, at the risk of sounding like MTGOW or whatever.

im just joking im not exactly a prime physical specimen tbh

Socialism is worker management of the workplace. Tito's market socialism and the syndicalist communes of the Free Territory and Kekalonia are literally superior in every way to the shitty state capitalism of the USSR. Your "state socialism = state capitalism" was shit, and the lolbert is right when he says Stalinism was responsible for atrocities. There's no difference between a tankie and a Nazi in the sense they both deny the horrendous actions of their ideologues.

you know what? Me neither, Just today I was admiring just how uneven my facial features were and how pot-bellied I had become from a steady diet of flours and sedentarism.

Quite frankly I'm fucking tired of that shit, might have to swing by /fit/ and get back to the gym, I'm 25 years old and I can't afford to be wasting the best years of my life into being too lazy to actually take care of myself.

you obviously know nothing about the USSR then if you think there was no worker management of the workplace

which isn't the definition of socialism anyway, but i wouldn't expect a propagandists leftcom opportunist to have read any Marx

top kek

The USSR had worker management to a degree but Stalin's centralization plans just show how the fact they didn't go through the capitalist stage was the nail in the coffin for having a successful transition. Had they gone through the capitalist stage, the Holodomer literally wouldn't of happen.

Tell me tankie: why is it that the Stalinist vanguard would ever give up their "muh muh privilege" to transition to communism?

honestly if you think there is some sort of "other" definition of socialism not set out by Marx then I'm not sure how you expect to speak to people on here.

Or course it wouldn't have. This is such twisted logic though. You expect a bunch of communists, when the opportunity for revolution arises - to sit around going, "but guys, capitalism hasn't progressed enough in Russia yet, we might cause a famine in 15 years time!"

Any opportunity for revolution should be seized. If this is before capitalism has fully manifested - then that's unfortunate. The transition to socialism is going to be more difficult. However it will also uplift a lot more people very quickly.

More people would have suffered if there hadn't been a revolution - the idea that USSR caused famine is ludicrous - do you think they didn't happen under the Tsar. They did, and they would have continued to happen. Collectivisation brought an end to the regular Russian/Ukrainian famine, it didn't cause it.

More completely unfounded comments is it? Nice

The famines in Tsarist Russia were comparatively small. Not 6 million people dead. Tell me some ways that the USSR was superior to say, a capitalist transition?

I'm asking why the leaders of the vanguard would not eventually become alienated from the working class and pursue their own interest.

Jesus christ, this is like arguing with some right-winger on reddit. Ignore all the causes of a particular tragedy or disaster - it's all because "muh communism". Also take care to ignore any similar events that have taken place in capitalist countries.

How does this work? You make up a statement, and I am tasked with disproving it, despite the fact that the statement itself is completely unfounded?

That's to far. I don't think it's "muh gommies". Can you name a famine that killed as many people in as short an amount of time as the holodomer?

Like what? What excuses it?

In what way. I'm asking why the heads of the vanguard would not pursue their own personal interest, even if the intended interest if that of the working class.

Your arguments seem to follow the usual "muh gommies" line.

There were many causes which coalesced to form such a disastrous famine. Drought, disease, unrest and revolt, mismanagement.

Also, your name a more deadly famine argument is sort of flawed because: there are examples - google it - and also because it is one of the most recent massive famines in history. It's a bit of a false dichotomy because the world's population grew exponentially before and during the 20th century. Previous famines wiped out much higher percentages of populations.

Education, reeducation, ensure leaders are from the working class, eliminate hereditary muh privilege, democracy, Maoist cultural program etc.

It is entirely possible to have a vanguard party without the members pursuing personal interest - again a false dichotomy.

This is The first time I saw somebody saying this about Raul.

Not every single right winged that you've seen here is me, dumbass. Read my actual posts and you'll see hat I'm a conservative that hates leftism.

Yeah cause you're stupid.

Chilean here, you're bullshitting unless you live in Las Condes or something, Chile is poor as fuck

Lula 2018.
I want to see that country burning and its economy ruined.

I've heard from everyone else that Chile is pretty much decent place.

Sorry, can't trust a leftist, folk.

Arguments Whatsoever : 0

No need to wait for Lula to accomplish that

Temer and his boys are already on it!

Temer is not a convites leftist.

Lula will just fuck the country the same way Dilma did.