why do people keep running back to arguably the worst system

the only people i see ever talking about this are you polfugies, fresh off the boat with your marching orders in hand

File: lenin.jpg (52KB, 504x361px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 504x361px

>>2407258
Communism/socialism has worked in the past, so it's not as if it's unworkable. They're not perfect examples, but the major ones would be revolutionary Catalonia and modern day Rojava in Syria (though considering they were both caught in wars, it's understandable why they wouldn't be perfect).

If you're talking about the USSR, there's a number of reasons why it failed apart from just purely communism. Like the fact that pre-revolution, Russia had a largely feudal economic structure and was pretty far behind in terms of being industrialised. Without the pre-established infrastructure from industrialisation, it's pretty difficult to start a communist country. There were also a number of other complications that lead to its downfall, so I don't think it's fair to blame it all on communism, though denying that had a part to play in it is also kinda shitty.

Times are also different now. The internet and computer technology + advances in automation are a big game changer compared to previous attempts with communism. These make a massive difference between trying communism now and trying it during wwII ~ cold war.

File: disgusted pepe.jpg (27KB, 508x524px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 508x524px

>>2407288
>Times are also different now. The internet and computer technology + advances in automation are a big game changer compared to previous attempts with communism. These make a massive difference between trying communism now and trying it during wwII ~ cold war.
ah yes communism will now be successful thanks to the fact that capitalist countries invented all these things

>>2407322
Technology doesn't inherently carry ideologies, frogposter.

>>2407322
>capitalist countries invented all these things
And feudal countries laid the foundations for capitalism, I don't see how that matters.

File: 8c3.jpg (146KB, 496x496px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 496x496px

>>2407288
>Implying the Anarcho-Communism of Catalonia is in any way comparable the Authoriarian Communism of every failed Communist state
If you take the supremacy of the state out of the equation they become worlds apart

>>2407354
It's almost as if by definition communism is stateless or something

They aren't....

>>2407288
>Without the pre-established infrastructure from industrialisation, it's pretty difficult to start a communist country.
No nation that went commie had this.

>>2407332
>And feudal countries laid the foundations for capitalism
Actually merchant republics did

>>2407491
Czechoslovakia, East Germany.

>>2407322
Well yes. Communism is supposed to come after capitalism. It's not supposed to be an alternative path to capitalism and more than feudalism is an alternative to capitalism. It's just a later stage of development, like capitalism to feudalism. You think capitalism could have thrived without building on feudalism?

>>2407258
True communism cannot exist. There are only two systems that can even come close and they both suck:

1. State capitalism, where private property is abolished. There is only one political party and it is the party meant to represent the workers, who intend to control the means of production. The state owns everything and distributes according to need. It isn't true communism since the state is present to such a degree that "the workers" have only a partial say, and it is the state, which is essentially a monopolistic corporation, that makes the decisions. This is the typical model that has existed and history will tell you everything that is wrong with it.

2. Democratic anarcho-communism, where the state is intended to be small, and a state of pure Athenian democracy exists. Everyone votes on every issue instead of sending a representative to vote for them. The workers directly control every aspect of production, infrastructure, agriculture, et cetera. The problem with this is that people will vote for their own interests, and the cities, where most of the population and industry (the hammer) is, will dominate rural areas where the agriculture (the sickle) and smaller population is. This isn't unique to communism, it is a flaw of every kind of democracy. The other problem is the same problem that anarchists and libertarians face, and that is the use of force. Not everyone will thinks the same and agrees on everything, and thus people will vote to disestablish the system for something new. How do you deal with this?

>>2407495
East Germany did great when you consider that Russia was literally trying to steal German factories and send them back to Russia piece by piece, and the US was pumping in investment from loans and also encouraging private investment in West Germany and working hard to actively develop it.

Czechs are slavs.

>>2407354
Catalonia was an irrelevant shithole compared to something like the USSR and even more of a failed state.

>>2407549
>Czechs are slavs.
And this is relevant to the topic how? They were industrialized before communism.

>>2407548
> Democratic anarcho-communism, where the state is intended to be small, and a state of pure Athenian democracy exists. Everyone votes on every issue instead of sending a representative to vote for them.
That's not true and you know it. You're allowed to have representation, that's what soviets minus the bolsheviks were meant to be. The idea is that the workers can recall their representative at any time to keep them on a short leash.

>The problem with this is that people will vote for their own interests, and the cities, where most of the population and industry (the hammer) is, will dominate rural areas where the agriculture (the sickle) and smaller population is.
Maybe because industry is more important than agriculture at the state of society, and they're trying to find a new equilibrium that doesn't rely on corn subsidies and overproducing food waste.

>The other problem is the same problem that anarchists and libertarians face, and that is the use of force. Not everyone will thinks the same and agrees on everything, and thus people will vote to disestablish the system for something new. How do you deal with this?
Shall not be infringed.

>>2407588
>russian federation
>real capitalism

>>2407258
>worst system in human history
That's a funny way to spell anarcho-capitalism.

>>2407672
Never even tried because it's complete bullshit.