Why do we champion socialism/communism anyway?

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

Medieval peasant: a system where private businessmen own the means of production instead of the lords and peasant communities? Impossible. It'll never happen.

Name me a communist society that worked

Oh wait, you cant, cause they always fail. That's the difference

"In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal")[1][2] is the philosophical, social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money,[3][4] and the state.[5][6]"
How can something which so far hasn't been achieved "work" or "fail", to be exact? And there are a number of means a communist (As defined by the above segment, not Cold War-era propaganda) society may be achieved in the future, such as cybernetic planning of the economy and the achievement of post-scarcity through nanotechnology, advanced 3D printing, and mass automation of governance and blue collar labour. In fact, there have been several attempts by socialist governments to cybernetize the economy in the 1970s, though they ran into technological hurdles given that this was the 20th century and not even the Internet existed at that point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OGAS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

[Alien Overlord]

Medieval peasant: a system where private businessmen own the means of production instead of the lords and peasant communities? Impossible. It'll never happen.

Name me a communist society that worked

Oh wait, you cant, cause they always fail. That's the difference

Some Native American societies utilized Communism, as did some in Africa and aboriginal Australia. Some still do practice it within the Amazon Rainforest. It's not very successful as there isn't much growth, but it does work for them generally. The Natives lived with it since coming out of Africa originally, so it's a time tested system.

Funnily enough though, the minute you try to implement Communism in a developed society where people have specialized jobs and more complex governments, the system completely falls apart. It's completely nonviable and has typically led to high levels of repression and corruption.

[Washington Resistance Army]

The fact that a hundred fifty years after the ideology was created it has failed to be implemented anywhere once kinda speaks as to its uselessness in the real world tbh

Capitalism took hundreds of years to emerge from feudalism - almost 1000 years, in fact. I suspect the transition to communism will be quicker, but why do we apply a double standard? Why should communism emerge any more quickly than capitalism did?

It wasn't like Adam Smith put his thoughts on paper in the 1300's lol, there's no double standard here.

The fact that a hundred fifty years after the ideology was created it has failed to be implemented anywhere once kinda speaks as to its uselessness in the real world tbh

Indeed self-perpetuation is a key requirement of an ideology.
Where does that leave fascism?

Dead.

[Pannerstone]

The fact that a hundred fifty years after the ideology was created it has failed to be implemented anywhere once kinda speaks as to its uselessness in the real world tbh

Indeed self-perpetuation is a key requirement of an ideology.
Where does that leave fascism?

Fascism never failed on it's own, it was defeated militarily(which required a large amount of the world uniting to stop it)

That is funny actually Fascism has a higher success rate than communism, seeing as it actually existed.

[Alexiandra]

Then stop acting repeatedly like materialism has no relevance to Marxism for fuck's sake.

It has no relevancy to the argument. The argument is that communism doesn't work. When you find a communist country that succeeded in not falling apart/turning full on pol pot mode, let us all know

Ah yes, Pol Pot - the man who was funded by the CIA and deposed by the socialist government of Vietnam. I love it when capitalists bring him up, because it just reveals how little research they've done.

[The New California Republic]

Then stop acting repeatedly like materialism has no relevance to Marxism for fuck's sake.

It has no relevancy to the argument. The argument is that communism doesn't work. When you find a communist country that succeeded in not falling apart/turning full on pol pot mode, let us all know

When you start using the terminology correctly, then let us all know as well.

[Alexiandra]

Capitalism took hundreds of years to emerge from feudalism - almost 1000 years, in fact. I suspect the transition to communism will be quicker, but why do we apply a double standard? Why should communism emerge any more quickly than capitalism did?

It wasn't like Adam Smith put his thoughts on paper in the 1300's lol, there's no double standard here.

Indeed self-perpetuation is a key requirement of an ideology.
Where does that leave fascism?

Dead.

You're thinking idealistically - in actual, material fact, Adam Smith's writings didn't give rise to capitalism, but vice versa.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

It wasn't like Adam Smith put his thoughts on paper in the 1300's lol, there's no double standard here.



Dead.

You're thinking idealistically - in actual, material fact, Adam Smith's writings didn't give rise to capitalism, but vice versa.

https://capx.co/capitalisms-roots-are-i ... dam-smith/
Exactly.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Indeed self-perpetuation is a key requirement of an ideology.
Where does that leave fascism?

Fascism never failed on it's own, it was defeated militarily(which required a large amount of the world uniting to stop it)

That is funny actually Fascism has a higher success rate than communism, seeing as it actually existed.

This actually isn't incorrect imo. Fascism might have been killed but it took most of the world to do it. At least from looking at history it's capable of a great deal more than communism.

[Pannerstone]

Fascism never failed on it's own, it was defeated militarily(which required a large amount of the world uniting to stop it)

That is funny actually Fascism has a higher success rate than communism, seeing as it actually existed.

This actually isn't incorrect imo. Fascism might have been killed but it took most of the world to do it. At least from looking at history it's capable of a great deal more than communism.

Fascism fed more people than Communism ever did

Lulz

[Nakena]

Marxism about developing a gargantuan inescapeable logic thoughtbox system pretty much like Incelism thonk it out on why they will never get laid.

Like I've brought up before, you've never done anything to justify this nonsense reasoning. As far as I know, everytime you encounter it you just engage in a knee-jerk reaction and bring up a certain set of buzzwords with zero elaboration.

I do not have to because the posts of a many adherents to this belief-system are evidence enough in itself. I do not give it the benefit of the doubt, I do not intend to validate their beliefs, I don't go there Into the gutter.

But ill tell you this, and I've realized that all the more as of recently, we come from a very different places and perspective when it comes to those matters. Like I said, I conclude that marxism to be an inherently flawed and reductionist world-explainatory belief-system that works by altering the users perception of the world through application of its own logic, theory and pattern onto the user. Its basically an overwrite. Its how totalitarian ideologies work, and part of the reason why it became in the end totalitarian.

I can understand however the appeal for it, because it offers this false determinist logic that one can use like go down a rabbit hole, and will keep delievering sufficient validations.

Lol I like how as soon as I debunk one criticism you just switch to another without any acknowledgement. First you say it's idealist and I debunk that, now you're saying it 'doesn't work'. There has never been a communist society. Believe it or not, supplanting an entire global socioeconomic system and mode of production takes some time.

The fact that a hundred fifty years after the ideology was created it has failed to be implemented anywhere once kinda speaks as to its uselessness in the real world tbh

As said the communism memeplex has a strong tradition, dedicated followers, is often field for romanticized projections... yeah it keeps going strong.

[Rojava Free State]

It has no relevancy to the argument. The argument is that communism doesn't work. When you find a communist country that succeeded in not falling apart/turning full on pol pot mode, let us all know

Ah yes, Pol Pot - the man who was funded by the CIA and deposed by the socialist government of Vietnam. I love it when capitalists bring him up, because it just reveals how little research they've done.

You know what I love more? Being called a capitalist

[Tokora]

I mostly just champion Titoism and the nordic models since those have been proven to work (though I lean closer to Titoism between the two).

[Torrocca]

This actually isn't incorrect imo. Fascism might have been killed but it took most of the world to do it. At least from looking at history it's capable of a great deal more than communism.

Fascism fed more people than Communism ever did

Lulz

Lead and Zyklon-B aren't food.

[Pannerstone]

Fascism fed more people than Communism ever did

Lulz

Lead and Zyklon-B aren't food.

Idk, your average Italian and German seemed pretty damn well off before the war, can't say the same for communist state or even post-war communist/socialist state.

[Alien Overlord]

The fact that a hundred fifty years after the ideology was created it has failed to be implemented anywhere once kinda speaks as to its uselessness in the real world tbh

Capitalism took hundreds of years to emerge from feudalism - almost 1000 years, in fact. I suspect the transition to communism will be quicker, but why do we apply a double standard? Why should communism emerge any more quickly than capitalism did?

Feudalism wasn't all-encompassing during the Middle Ages. Capitalism still existed within larger towns and cities in the later Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, where business could flourish. Especially in places like Italy (Venice?). I would certainly argue that capitalism and feudalism can coexist within the same society. Additionally we see that life improved as Capitalism flourished, whereas life has only gotten much worse for societies where Communism tried to flourish. It isn't the same thing.

[Nakena]

Ah yes, Pol Pot - the man who was funded by the CIA and deposed by the socialist government of Vietnam. I love it when capitalists bring him up, because it just reveals how little research they've done.

You know what I love more? Being called a capitalist

I still wait until I am called Fascist or Capitalist. Or maybe both. Or something even worse.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

Fascism never failed on it's own, it was defeated militarily(which required a large amount of the world uniting to stop it)

That is funny actually Fascism has a higher success rate than communism, seeing as it actually existed.

This actually isn't incorrect imo. Fascism might have been killed but it took most of the world to do it. At least from looking at history it's capable of a great deal more than communism.

https://archive.org/stream/ToozeAdamThe ... y_djvu.txt
As a matter of fact, had Nazi Germany never declared war on anyone and carried on with their monetary policies, their economy would have collapsed due to their unsustainable hikes in military spending at the expense of the civilian sector, escalating number of debt due to the MEFO bills (Which were an elaborate fraud designed to hide and finance German expenditure on re-armanent), and of course, a decline in trade and failed attempts at complete autarky. Adam Tooze's Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy is a good resource on this topic.

[Torrocca]

Lead and Zyklon-B aren't food.

Idk, your average Italian and German seemed pretty damn well off before the war, can't say the same for communist state or even post-war communist/socialist state.

I guess Jews, Slavs, Romani, the LGBTQ+, the physically and mentally disabled, political dissidents, and colonial subjects don't count under that claim of "average".

[Pannerstone]

Idk, your average Italian and German seemed pretty damn well off before the war, can't say the same for communist state or even post-war communist/socialist state.

I guess Jews, Slavs, Romani, the LGBTQ+, the physically and mentally disabled, political dissidents, and colonial subjects don't count under that claim of "average".

I said average, obviously minorities had it bad

the point is, they were fed and the economies of these nations were doing well

which is more than Communism ever provided.

[Xeng He]

Ah yes, Pol Pot - the man who was funded by the CIA and deposed by the socialist government of Vietnam. I love it when capitalists bring him up, because it just reveals how little research they've done.

You know what I love more? Being called a capitalist

Wait are you an anarchist or is the name a meme?

[Washington Resistance Army]

This actually isn't incorrect imo. Fascism might have been killed but it took most of the world to do it. At least from looking at history it's capable of a great deal more than communism.

https://archive.org/stream/ToozeAdamThe ... y_djvu.txt
As a matter of fact, had Nazi Germany never declared war on anyone and carried on with their monetary policies, their economy would have collapsed due to their unsustainable hikes in military spending at the expense of the civilian sector, escalating number of debt due to the MEFO bills (Which were an elaborate fraud designed to hide and finance German expenditure on re-armanent), and of course, a decline in trade and failed attempts at complete autarky. Adam Tooze's Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy is a good resource on this topic.

I'm well aware of Hitlerian economics. That doesn't change the point at all.

[Alexiandra]

Capitalism took hundreds of years to emerge from feudalism - almost 1000 years, in fact. I suspect the transition to communism will be quicker, but why do we apply a double standard? Why should communism emerge any more quickly than capitalism did?

Feudalism wasn't all-encompassing during the Middle Ages. Capitalism still existed within larger towns and cities in the later Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, where business could flourish. Especially in places like Italy (Venice?). I would certainly argue that capitalism and feudalism can coexist within the same society. Additionally we see that life improved as Capitalism flourished, whereas life has only gotten much worse for societies where Communism tried to flourish. It isn't the same thing.

Modern capitalism, in the proper sense of the word, began to emerge in the 16th and 17th centuries in Northern Europe. Prior to that, there had been at least 600 years of feudal predominance.

[Torrocca]

I guess Jews, Slavs, Romani, the LGBTQ+, the physically and mentally disabled, political dissidents, and colonial subjects don't count under that claim of "average".

I said average, obviously minorities had it bad

the point is, they were fed and the economies of these nations were doing well

It only took the mass-oppression of all the undesirables to ensure everyone else had a full belly and riches to spare.

Doesn't sound like a pleasant system to me.

which is more than Communism ever provided.

What do you think Communism even is?

[Alexiandra]

You know what I love more? Being called a capitalist

Wait are you an anarchist or is the name a meme?

He's just avoiding the points I raised.