Left-Wing Discussion Thread II: Behind 700,000 Bunkers

[Collatis]

Economic freedom plus capitalism is freedom.

war is peace freedom is slavery ignorance is strength

[Valgora]

"Pro: freedom"

Economic freedom plus capitalism is freedom.

So no rights except those dealing with economic freedom and having capitalism = freedom.

That makes sense.

[Torrocca]

The fact is, those men didn't represent the ideology once they seized dictatorial status. They destroyed the idea of the revolution for their own gain because, again, the ideologies call for the rule of the people, not the rule of a dictator.

Like it or not people like Stalin and Mao still genuinely believed in Socialism and considered themselves Communists.

But for the sake of argument, let's assume every Communist dictator ever wasn't really a Communist and doesn't represent the ideology. Now, how do you explain the shortcomings of Socialist revolutions in consistently producing this result?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

If Stalin fucking believed in Communism, he'd have worked toward dismantling the Soviet state and creating a stateless society run by the people. Same with Mao. Same with the rest.

"Pro: freedom"

Economic freedom plus capitalism is freedom.

Nope.

[Zakuvia]

So...at what point did we stop talking about actual issues and just start finding ridiculous ways to name-call the 'other side'?

Pretty sure we've always done this. What's the point of politics if you don't get to insult the other side a bit?

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.

"Pro: freedom"

Economic freedom plus capitalism is freedom.

Criticism =/= support of abolition. No system of economics or politics is perfect, and to illegalize criticism of...well, just about anything... is dictatorial.

[Genivaria]

Pretty sure we've always done this. What's the point of politics if you don't get to insult the other side a bit?

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.

I've personally seen ALOT of this in the past few months and it's quite tiring.

[Australias (Ancient)]

Pretty sure we've always done this. What's the point of politics if you don't get to insult the other side a bit?

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.

Economic freedom plus capitalism is freedom.

Criticism =/= support of abolition. No system of economics or politics is perfect, and to illegalize criticism of...well, just about anything... is dictatorial.

Most criticisers of capitalism want to overthrow it and from history it can be shown those systems literally collapse

[Torrocca]

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.



Criticism =/= support of abolition. No system of economics or politics is perfect, and to illegalize criticism of...well, just about anything... is dictatorial.

Most criticisers of capitalism want to overthrow it and from history it can be shown those systems literally collapse

Yes, and do you know why most criticizers of capitalism want to overthrow it?

Because it's shit for the majority of the people, that's why.

[Kubra]

Like it or not people like Stalin and Mao still genuinely believed in Socialism and considered themselves Communists.

But for the sake of argument, let's assume every Communist dictator ever wasn't really a Communist and doesn't represent the ideology. Now, how do you explain the shortcomings of Socialist revolutions in consistently producing this result?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

If Stalin fucking believed in Communism, he'd have worked toward dismantling the Soviet state and creating a stateless society run by the people. Same with Mao. Same with the rest.

There's no reason to suppose that honest belief must come with a peculiar set of policies, that's a very lutheran assumption.
I mean, Posadas probably earnestly believed in Communism, but, well....

[Australias (Ancient)]

Most criticisers of capitalism want to overthrow it and from history it can be shown those systems literally collapse

Yes, and do you know why most criticizers of capitalism want to overthrow it?

Because it's shit for the majority of the people, that's why.

It seems to be providing a majority of the people in the world with jobs, food, electricity, water etc. It seems to be doing better than what communism ever has done. I mean I can't watch wrestling and read my Spiderman comics in North Korea.

[Torrocca]

Yes, and do you know why most criticizers of capitalism want to overthrow it?

Because it's shit for the majority of the people, that's why.

It seems to be providing a majority of the people in the world with jobs, food, electricity, water etc. It seems to be doing better than what communism ever has done. I mean I can't watch wrestling and read my Spiderman comics in North Korea.

Having a job doesn't mean jack diddly squat when 99% of the jobs around the world don't even provide a living wage.

[Sanctissima]

Like it or not people like Stalin and Mao still genuinely believed in Socialism and considered themselves Communists.

But for the sake of argument, let's assume every Communist dictator ever wasn't really a Communist and doesn't represent the ideology. Now, how do you explain the shortcomings of Socialist revolutions in consistently producing this result?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

If Stalin fucking believed in Communism, he'd have worked toward dismantling the Soviet state and creating a stateless society run by the people. Same with Mao. Same with the rest.

Maybe read a book on the subject sometime. It's pretty clear that Stalin et al believed in creating a Communist society. Ideologically, they only differed in the means by which they sought to achieve this.

Regardless, you haven't answered my question.

[Australias (Ancient)]

It seems to be providing a majority of the people in the world with jobs, food, electricity, water etc. It seems to be doing better than what communism ever has done. I mean I can't watch wrestling and read my Spiderman comics in North Korea.

Having a job doesn't mean jack diddly squat when 99% of the jobs around the world don't even provide a living wage.

Sales taxes are jumping up the cost of living. You should be shouting at your local member to decrease sales taxes not being angry at capitalism.

[Collatis]

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.

I was just being facetious, is all

Obviously insults are not a valid tactic and should be avoided.

Criticism =/= support of abolition. No system of economics or politics is perfect, and to illegalize criticism of...well, just about anything... is dictatorial.

Dictatorship and capitalism are not related at all!!

[Torrocca]

Having a job doesn't mean jack diddly squat when 99% of the jobs around the world don't even provide a living wage.

Sales taxes are jumping up the cost of living. You should be shouting at your local member to decrease sales taxes not being angry at capitalism.

Did the "around the world" part fly over your head? The poverty of billions is literally a capitalist problem.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

If Stalin fucking believed in Communism, he'd have worked toward dismantling the Soviet state and creating a stateless society run by the people. Same with Mao. Same with the rest.

Maybe read a book on the subject sometime. It's pretty clear that Stalin et al believed in creating a Communist society. Ideologically, they only differed in the means by which they sought to achieve this.

Regardless, you haven't answered my question.

Again, if he believed in doing that, he wouldn't have A) seized power for himself, B) murdered millions, C) not dismantled the state despite communism calling for the dismantling of the state and D) left the classes in the Soviet Union standing.

As for the shortcomings, there's a wide variety of reasons unique to each situation that'd be too long to go into vast detail for.

[Australias (Ancient)]

There's mockery, and there's ad hominem. One is valid and humorous criticism, the other is being a jerk that contributes nothing to a conversation. Not accusing you of either, just putting it out there.

I was just being facetious, is all

Obviously insults are not a valid tactic and should be avoided.

Criticism =/= support of abolition. No system of economics or politics is perfect, and to illegalize criticism of...well, just about anything... is dictatorial.

Dictatorship and capitalism are not related at all!!

Nobody would support democracy without capitalism existing.

[Collatis]

Most criticisers of capitalism want to overthrow it and from history it can be shown those systems literally collapse

That's an extremely dubious statement. I think it's safe to say that most critics of capitalism still support it. And a majority of those who oppose it are reformists, not revolutionaries.

[Torrocca]

I was just being facetious, is all

Obviously insults are not a valid tactic and should be avoided.


Dictatorship and capitalism are not related at all!!

Nobody would support democracy without capitalism existing.

Holy moley.

Democracy was a thing before capitalism even existed!

[Valgora]

I was just being facetious, is all

Obviously insults are not a valid tactic and should be avoided.


Dictatorship and capitalism are not related at all!!

Nobody would support democracy without capitalism existing.

"There is no democracy without socialism, and no socialism without democracy."
- Rosa Luxemburg

[Australias (Ancient)]

Sales taxes are jumping up the cost of living. You should be shouting at your local member to decrease sales taxes not being angry at capitalism.

Did the "around the world" part fly over your head? The poverty of billions is literally a capitalist problem.

Maybe read a book on the subject sometime. It's pretty clear that Stalin et al believed in creating a Communist society. Ideologically, they only differed in the means by which they sought to achieve this.

Regardless, you haven't answered my question.

Again, if he believed in doing that, he wouldn't have A) seized power for himself, B) murdered millions, C) not dismantled the state despite communism calling for the dismantling of the state and D) left the classes in the Soviet Union standing.

As for the shortcomings, there's a wide variety of reasons unique to each situation that'd be too long to go into vast detail for.

That's the countries fault for not having enough freedom in the market. Much of the developing world is mixed economics. Wipe off the debts for those countries that were inherited when colonialism ended and free the markets. Boom markets will thrive.

[Collatis]

Dictatorship and capitalism are not related at all!!

Nobody would support democracy without capitalism existing.

What is it about a hierarchical and dictatorial economic structure that encourages support for democracy?

[Australias (Ancient)]

Nobody would support democracy without capitalism existing.

"There is no democracy without socialism, and no socialism without democracy."
- Rosa Luxemburg

How successful was Luxemburg?

[Torrocca]

Did the "around the world" part fly over your head? The poverty of billions is literally a capitalist problem.



Again, if he believed in doing that, he wouldn't have A) seized power for himself, B) murdered millions, C) not dismantled the state despite communism calling for the dismantling of the state and D) left the classes in the Soviet Union standing.

As for the shortcomings, there's a wide variety of reasons unique to each situation that'd be too long to go into vast detail for.

That's the countries fault for not having enough freedom in the market. Much of the developing world is mixed economics. Wipe off the debts for those countries that were inherited when colonialism ended and free the markets. Boom markets will thrive.

The last time there was almost absolute freedom in the market (in America) there was slavery galore.

Free markets aren't free.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

"There is no democracy without socialism, and no socialism without democracy."
- Rosa Luxemburg

>Rosa Luxembourg

[Sanctissima]

Maybe read a book on the subject sometime. It's pretty clear that Stalin et al believed in creating a Communist society. Ideologically, they only differed in the means by which they sought to achieve this.

Regardless, you haven't answered my question.

Again, if he believed in doing that, he wouldn't have A) seized power for himself, B) murdered millions, C) not dismantled the state despite communism calling for the dismantling of the state and D) left the classes in the Soviet Union standing.

As for the shortcomings, there's a wide variety of reasons unique to each situation that'd be too long to go into vast detail for.

He was power-hungry, sure, as were Mao and others, but that doesn't negate the fact they genuinely believed in creating Communist societies. Stalin didn't just embark on a program of rapid industrialization because he liked working people to death.

As for your answer, that's rather unsatisfactory. Socialism has clearly shown that it cannot produce a stable system, and the few times it does, you don't believe it's truly Socialism. Hence, why is this ideology not inherently bankrupt and unachievable?

[Australias (Ancient)]

That's the countries fault for not having enough freedom in the market. Much of the developing world is mixed economics. Wipe off the debts for those countries that were inherited when colonialism ended and free the markets. Boom markets will thrive.

The last time there was almost absolute freedom in the market (in America) there was slavery galore.

Free markets aren't free.

Slavery goes against free market ideals. Using that as a historical backdrop does not discredit the idea that the free market can lift millions out of poverty like in South Korea and Singapore.