Why do people mention the Soviet Union in order to point that

NOT

>>2741931

REAL

Because all attempts to implement real communism ends up in soviet union communism. Reality is in the way.

>>2741932
COMMUNISM

>>2741946
CYKA BLYAT

>>2741941
What attempt to implement real communism ended up like the soviet union? As far as I know every attempt that ended like the soviet union was explicitly soviet inspired.

>>2741950

>What attempt to implement real communism ended up like the soviet union?

The Soviet Union.

File: 1481860475959.png (103KB, 763x768px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 763x768px

>>2741927
Because Tankie retards want to jerk off Stalin and how great the USSR was. So when people point out how obviously not great it was, and how Stalin did all the stuff lefties hate like imperialism, They can just claim "not real communism" and go back to circlejerking.

>>2741960
>the soviet union ended like the soviet union
Thanks for the history lesson.

Although it is a simplistic example, it does point to the fact that the communist system (and here i am using the term system in a manner that is comparable to a physical or mathematical usage of the term) appears to be inherently unstable when you plug in the variables of how humans behave either through biological incentives or within the frameworks of societies that tried to prop up communism. In fact, id argue that it's an inherently unstable system, but i wont becaise i am phone.

Also jews

>>2741958
define capitalism

File: 1493245407563.jpg (136KB, 546x700px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 546x700px

>>2741965

If a necessary condition for some end is impossible then that end is impossible.

>>2741965
I think it's two different groups of people.

>>2741979
There's nothing /pol/tard about his post.

>>2741975

An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are primarily controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

>>2741998
Most forms of historical feudalism (especially pre-17th century) are capitalistic under this definition.

>>2741958
capitalists btfo

>>2741927
What's wrong with the Soviet Union?

>>2742030

>Have a garage sale to get rid of extra stuff
>Get gulag'd for engaging in profit seeking activity

>>2742006

'No'.

>>2741950
>>2741927
"Real" Communism is sort of like a distant utopia state that humans will someday achieve. But first, you need a totalitarian dictatorship to completely destroy feudalism, capitalism, sell-out socialism, oligarchic "democracy", etc., and all of these's vestiges. Bombined with permanent world revolution (centred from Moscow, natch)... this will one result in a state of humanity where people are finally read for "real" communism.

The Soviet Union did not pretend that it was the theoretical idealization of Marx and Co.

>>2741979
Spotted the actual reddit user, go back to r/stalinsasshole and stay there.

>>2741975
Not the same guy. Capitalism by itself is not necessarily terrible. It's the current state of vampiric hyper-capitalism, hijacked by self-serving oligarchs that's the problem. The American state let itself be bought and sold, largely by its own internal fatcats.

Not even a tinfoil hat guy, much less a commie, but it's plain to see.

>>2741974
It probably works fine enough on small-scale autonomous (not co-dependent) city-state or agricultural community levels.

>>2741950
Cuba almost made it as an actual communist country, but American economic sanctions forced them to buckle to Soviet demands or face starvation.

>>2742064
Probably not, but its a moot point anyway, isolated autonomous groups are just that... Isolated from the reality of the global society.

I hear Yugoslavia was pretty cool compared to other communist countries

>>2742064

I don't think that's true. At the end of the day, people will always work harder and be more creative and innovative if they are going to personally profit from the results of that increased efficiency. Private ownership is simply more efficient than central planning, even on a small scale. Keep in mind that this doesn't preclude government regulations.

>>2741927
Revolutionary Catalonia is a much better example of real, functioning communism/anarchism.

>>2742058
>It's the current state of vampiric hyper-capitalism, hijacked by self-serving oligarchs that's the problem
That's the only possible form of capitalism. Either you have regulations in place to protect the freeness of the market, and open the door to lobbyists, or you don't, and the free market destroys itself. There is no financial incentive to compete in an efficient market when inefficient markets exist or can be created.

>>2742090
You realize that that's exactly the point of communism, right? Capitalism is the system where businesses are run by oligarchs, not communism.

>>2741927
>>2741931
>>2741932
>>2741946
>>2741948

Ideologically, they are correct.
The Soviet state aimed to reach 'true' communism, and was authoritarian socialism.

The issue is that it's near impossible to achieve communism unless you controlled the entire planet, and I doubt anyone that did would let their power/state melt away.

File: napalm in the morning.gif (2MB, 659x609px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 659x609px

>>2741927
Capitalism is like a beast. Chain it and you can put it to good use. If it breaks lose however it will pray and feed upon the weak and poor.

>commies in the 1950s
>"the Soviet Union proves that communism is the way of the future, WE WILL BURY YOU"
>commies in the 2010s
>"the Soviet Union wasn't real communism"

>>2742099
You only say that because it didn't last more than a few months. Had it prevailed and the CNT/FAI fucked up (commies always do), you would also say it wasn't "real communism".

Had Kornilov crushed the Soviets in 1917, you would also think they would have developed into real, functioning communism/anarchism. Since the Soviets won and did what they did, you dismiss them (but only now, of course)

>>2742058
Learn to dialectics son. The Roosevelts crushed the bullshit of the Glided Age and yet here we are again in a 2.0 version of it. The only solution to the contradictions and problem of capitalism is socialism

>>2742123
Communism hasn't been tried. That's the thing. It's near impossible to reach. Plenty of states have tried, but they haven't reached what Communism actually is.

The problem is, people from outside look in and say 'Well, they're communists, aiming to make communism, so their state must be communist'. When in reality it's a socialist state attemping to eventually reach communism, but being waylaid by dictators and outside influence.

>>2742088
Except for the part that it wasnt really communist, had worse living conditions than its democratic neighbors and was under gmthe rule of an autocratic party that persecuted dissent.

>>2742129
The bury you was a mistranslations.

In the original russian, it means more that they're going to surpass you, not kill and bury you.

>>2742087
Indeed, which is why I doubt "real" communism can work today. If shit hits the fan and we go full apocalypse, you might find some survivor communities that adopt communistic styles of living. That's about the only future I see for communism though...

>>2742090
Of course people are motivated by rewards, that's basic psychology. It's no surprise that every communist system is corrupt as fuck.

>>2742103
I think it's rather fatalistic to state it's an either-or black-white scenario. The free market is not really 'free' anyhow. Strict separation of powers (civil and market) should ensure that government cannot be corrupted by profiteers. America has become a prime example of a plutocracy (not quite an oligarchy yet, but perhaps that will happen), yet there are plenty of other Western liberal states that more or less successfully limit the role money's influence on government.

It depends what your goal is. In America, quite a lot of the time, it's obviously profits above all else.

Capitalism is sweet and delicious, but insidious too. It's like societal diabetes.

File: gramsci.jpg (94KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 501x585px

Communism is the only ideology people analyze according to the discourse of communist themselves.

People don't say Louis XIV didn't represent "real divine rights of kings" because God doesn't exist and couldn't possibly bestow divine rule on a French nobleman, but people seriously discuss communism according to the tenets of communist theory instead of as an historical phenomenom.

Sweet cultural hegemony.

>>2742146
Yes, that doesn't disprove the point though.
Namely that communist is great and it never fails, and when it inevitably fails then it wasn't real communism.

>>2742037
>having "extra" stuff in the first place

Stop exploiting surplus labor

>>2742136
Well I don't live in America, and my country is already more or less 'socialist'.

>>2742129
The communist forces in the Spanish civil war were heavily heavily influenced by Soviet machinations. The Soviet/Russian system of communism was by then already very much of centralized authoritarianism. These forces did not want free-thinking isolated hippie farmers getting any bright ideas. Idealistic theoretical communists who didn't tow the Soviet line were frequent targets of assassination.

>>2742165
Well, both sides are stupid.
The left for saying 'YEP THIS IS COMMUNISM IT WORKS' when it's socialism in transition.
And the right for seeing any socialist measures as 'lel it's communist'

It's like if you announced you were going to make some chocolate, and had made the best chocolate ever, when you'd not finished making it. Then the faulty oven that you refused to let anyone else clean ruins the dish, and someone else takes this as proof that chocolate is impossible.

File: 1491104125015.png (171KB, 443x485px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 443x485px

>>2742163
>born too early to see the new glorious world
>born too late to suffer under the old world
>born just in time to see monsters
>mfw

File: 1491122571075.png (766KB, 843x1034px) Image search: [Google]

766KB, 843x1034px

>>2742175
>my country is already more or less 'socialist'.
Bitch please if your country is one of the Nordics, you best shut the fuck up

File: 1493398087450.png (216KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 600x620px

>>2742122

Communism is a system where the entire economy is centrally planned by bureaucrats working under the authority of a single-party non-democratic state.

>BUT THAT'S NOT REAL COMMUNISM

That's the system that the Communist Party implemented.in every single country they managed to acquire power in. If it doesn't match the rhetoric then that's their own damn fault.

>>2742179
>And the right for seeing any socialist measures as 'lel it's communist'
Well that happens a lot nowadays. For some right wingers, public healthcare is commie. For some lefties, low taxes is fascistic.
As long as you don't exaggerate it's not a problem I think. The problem comes when, for example, for some people everyone right of them is an unabashed Nazi, no nuance in between.

>>2742195
What's the difference between liberal (in the classical sense, not how Americans use it) and neoliberal?

>>2742195
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
Holy shit nigger, at best you are describing Marx-Leninism, at worst you are outright lying

>>2742195
It's because...well.
The issue is, communist revolutions tend to occur in backwaters.

They often have to stuff everything into a central state authority to smash the old and rebuild from the ground up.

Issue is that once people get that power, you get those who don't wanna give it up.

>>2742197
>left/right dichotomy

Pure ideological disease and so on

File: pinochet-gramsci.jpg (128KB, 599x714px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 599x714px

>>2742179
The fact that a political group can fuck up entire societies several times and still claim to not be guilty because the perfect utopia they were trying to achieve still exist inside their minds, and that another attempt is justified, is reason enough to completely exclude this group from the political arena, if not for physically removing them from society.

If you were not a communist, you would realize how disgusting how that discourse actually is. "We will rob you, control you, kill you, in the name of an imaginary future that exists only in our minds, and if we don't achieve this future, that is no fault of ours, it's the fault of society that wasn't ready".

That's why so many countries banned communist parties and killed communist activists. This kind of mentality is simply incompatible with democratic society. It's psychothic madness.

>>2742195
>If it doesn't match the rhetoric then that's their own damn fault.
Yes, but it still doesn't make it communism. Most of the communist regimes acknowledge that and call their systems socialism, or stop associating with Marx althogether.

Sorry that the "real communism has never been tried" meme triggers you, but it's factually correct.

>>2742215
Elaborate?

File: b6zrzwj52ily.jpg (21KB, 554x380px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 554x380px

>>2742195
This

>tfw to intelligent to not be a centrist neoliberal

>>2742220
It the application of communism in the real world always ends up the same way, then yes, technically it's a fact to say that communism has never been tried, but it's intellectually dishonest.

>>2742146
I was under the impression it was a literal translation that meant something along the lines of "I'll say something nice at your funeral when you finally manage to kill yourself" figuratively.

>>2742154
How do you propose to isolate regulators from corporate interests in such a way that their regulations are still relevant?

>>2742216
>be anarcho syndicalist
>get killed in the kronstadt by soviets
>get killed in ukraine by soviets
>get killed in spain by soviets
>get killed in every soviet satellite
>decades later all the soviet crimes are your fault
:^)

>>2741965
Stalin was based though.

>>2742233
No it is not an application of a stateless, classless and moneyless society. It is an acceleration of the process to reach such a society, literally bypassing socialism and in almost all cases capitalism.

That is why communism in >>2742211 occurs, coz Lenin had a brilliant idea that socialism can be bypassed. And also why there is a difference between communist parties and socialist parties

>>2742222
I really dont understand how so many people buy into the idea that you can simplify a socio-political-economic problem of possibly thousands of dimensions into a 1D problem. Well, i can, but its a stupid solution made by stupid brains.

>>2742242
>be anarcho syndicalist
>set up worker's councils in Petrograd
>"oh no, the councils became a tyrannical government"

>be anarcho syndicalist
>set up worker's councils in Guangzhou
>"oh no, the party that controlled the council estabished a tyrannical government"

>be anarcho syndicalist
>set up peasant communes in the jungles of Cambodia
>"oh no, the peasants took the cities and slaughtered everyone"

>be anarcho syndicalist
>cooperate with the government of Venezuela and set up rural and industrial communes
>"oh no, the communes became organs of political and military support to an authoritarian government"

The difference between Kronstadt and the Petrograd Soviet, between the Makhnovites and the Red Army, between the CNT/FAI and the Bolsheviks, is that the later won.

>>2741927
>Communism
>state

>>2742251
That's because communism is only desirable in backwaters. When people are fed and comfortable (or complacent if you prefer the term), why should they want to shake everything up?

>>2742216
Eh, the kill/control for an ideal future is similar to the Italian fascists and German national socialism, amusingly enough.

Not communist, btw. Democratic socialist personally. Trying to build a utopia will never work. Might as well just fix up what we have

>>2742256
What are some other dimensions for example?
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just not knowledgeable.

>>2742220
I mean, to be fair, German national socialism isn't fascist either once we get down to it. (e.g. Italian style)
>>2742233
I'd say it's more reasonable to say that the States were attempts at communism, and that every state that has attempted to transition to Communism has failed.

>>2742195
Communism is a system where businesses have no hierarchy. You have a guy whose job it is to make widgets, a guy whose job it is to make sure all the widgets work, a guy whose job it is to make sure everyone gets along, a guy whose job it is to handle all the paperwork to make sure the widgets get where they belong, etc, and they all come to work and do their job because it's what they're passionate about, or at least because they enjoy the workplace environment, not because some corporate overlord threatens them with being fired (read: potential homelessness and starvation). That's really all there is to it.

The Soviet Union was never that. It never claimed to be that. It did make lofty claims to be a step on the way to that, although it ended up being the polar opposite in many ways.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: judging communism by the USSR is the equivalent of judging democracy by the DPRK.

>>2742256

In the beginning, "left" meant that you were anti-monarchist whereas "right" meant that you were pro-monarchist. The definitions have shifted since then.

>>2742279
Capitalists kill/control all the time, they just do it indirectly by exploiting cheap third world laborers. They're simply more effective at keeping their atrocities hidden from the public eye.

>>2742277
>That's because communism is only desirable in backwaters
More like the captialists' grip on the masses is less strong in backwatered third world countries. See Cultural Hegemony on the first world, means>>2742163

But that is not necessary the case anymore, as more and more problems are arising in first world country, with shit like inequality, social ills and consumerism. Sooner or later either capitalism is saved from itself ala New Deal or transits to socialism

But enough of what ifs. As long as that anon i responded to acknowledges that communist parties aren't necessarily implementing communism but rather an accelerated process to reach communism, I am content

>>2742267
Nice revisionism m8, link to anarcho syndicalists in cambodia or venezuela supporting the government? Councils with no power and party organs are as anarcho syndicalist as soviet elections are a proof of democracy.

>>2742283
No no, imagine it in the sense that every issue is a dimension with discreet states in the more complex example (abortion yes/no) or continuous, but simplified (yes, but only to a certain extent depending on other issues etc., which by the merit of constraining this dimension are already constraining the system to be simplified). Now thats just one issue out of thousands. How the fuck do you come to a situation, where you simplify all of these issues into a left-right 1 dimensional problem? It seems like madness (well really its a simplificatory function of our brain, but imo its a useless evolutionary vestige when it comes to designing a socio-political-economic system).

>>2742297
Eh, I don't think you understand. It's not about killing, it's about the inverted perception of time.

Normal people see time flowing from the past to the future, they can study the past and learn lessons and prepare for the future, in this way, it's perfectly normal for a person to support socialist policies because they have worked well in the past, or because they solve certain specific problems.

Communists, on the other hand, first view the future, the utopian communist society that is the basis of all their revolutionary activism, and then adjust their behavior in the present and their interpretation of the past with the only purpose of bringing it into the present. I need to study more if this is a result of the Marxist doctrine of historical materialism, according to which history inevitably leads to communism, or if there is another reason for this mentality, but the fact is that communists feel a freedom to act as they want with no regards for morals or the sufferings they cause because their actions are already justified a priori for their part in bringing the utopian future.

You can't compare capitalists hiring hitmen to kill workers in Colombia to this, not only because of the scale, but because the entire mentality is different. The "capitalist" kills for a specific reason, the communist kills in the name of a grand ideological project.

>>2742322
>The "capitalist" kills for a specific reason,
It is profit, it is always profit

>>2742322
>Communists, on the other hand, first view the future, the utopian communist society that is the basis of all their revolutionary activism, and then adjust their behavior in the present and their interpretation of the past with the only purpose of bringing it into the present. I need to study more if this is a result of the Marxist doctrine of historical materialism, according to which history inevitably leads to communism, or if there is another reason for this mentality, but the fact is that communists feel a freedom to act as they want with no regards for morals or the sufferings they cause because their actions are already justified a priori for their part in bringing the utopian future.
This is specifically addressed by popper.

>>2742329

Or Power, Love, Revenge, or Hate.

>>2742300
But if you need a violent revolution and then an oppressive state when trying to accelerate the coming of communism, when you have a large enough amount of people who help you realize this because they want revolution, what then would you need when capitalism as you say is so entrenched that virtually no one wants communism? At most, they want certain reforms to the system, and not necessarily against capitalism itself.
Also, what would be a non accelerated approach to communism in your view?

NOT

>>2742346
I am not defending the accelerated process that Lenin started, only ensuring you don't mix it up with the endgoal that is Communism.

>Also, what would be a non accelerated approach to communism in your view?
How can someone who talk so much communism don't already know the answer? Are you even aware let alone read leftist theory? It is Socialism, it has always been socialism.

If you fail at what you consider the prequisite stages of communism, it doesn't look bright for str8 up communism.

>>2742393
Right, and that doesn't explain what I asked: how would you convince people who lead good lives, materially speaking, that they should strive for revolution?
And again, it's not that I mix it up. I know it's not the same thing, but there's always some caveat excusing that it is not the correct way to implement it, when every single experiment has failed.

>>2741941
Because every time a "communist" state was founded, the USSR was offering military and monetary support if you became their puppet, and the USSR actually appeared to be a functioning model at the time.

File: Commautism.gif (1MB, 800x667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x667px

>>2741927

>>2742058
>Capitalism by itself is not necessarily terrible. It's the current state of vampiric hyper-capitalism, hijacked by self-serving oligarchs that's the problem.
That's what Marx said though. Capitalism is better than feudalism, but as capitalism develops, yes, most everyone is living a better life than before capitalism, but the inequality, conflicts of interest and lack of opportunity get worse.

>>2742421
>how would you convince people who lead good lives, materially speaking, that they should strive for revolution?
Short answer: you don't.
only 2 dominant models ended up in widespread use: the soviet model and the chinese model. Hungarians didn't exactly have the choice in how they wanted to go about communism, there's no hungarian model.

How many of these threads do you really think have to be made a day?

File: C9YzViHXoAA_-rU.jpg (37KB, 640x654px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x654px

>>2742421
>when every single experiment has failed.
More like one experiment repeated over and over has 'failed'.

>how would you convince people who lead good lives, materially speaking, that they should strive for revolution?
>What is Reform or Revolution?
That the good times will not and is not lasting. Also you don't need to have a revolution to implement socialism but also reform capitalism (ie social democracy or democratic socialism). Of coz both methods has critiques and flaws. Literally google "Reform or Revolution?" to see that revolution was and is not the only solution considered among leftists

>>2741958
>comparing slavery to capitalism
In what way does capitalism not benefit you? You are not a slave. In capitalism, everyone is the master.

>>2742472
Not that guy, but just to play devil's advocate, people often benefited from slavery by being slaves, it wasn't all that uncommon historically for people to sell themselves into slavery to escape starvation. Very few people are masters in capitalism, even the bosses are usually just running dogs for their own masters, and the only masters are those in a position to take advantage of the material coercion present in nature and ensure that the only real option of those below them is to work for them.

>>2742472
>In capitalism, everyone is the master.

>>2741927
Because it literally instructed people to overthrow their oppressors yet they went right ahead and allowed a dictator to oppress them. You have to wonder how they made such a giant leap over that gaping goatse chasm in Marxist thought and why dictators loved his ideology so much.

It would be generous to say the central premise of communism, that the "means of production" is the cause of all ills, is insufficient. Communism has a very warped view of the world and the problems that afflict it, more or less ignoring power structures outside his myopic view of capitalism, itself inaccurate, treating everything as a massive conspiracy that always leads back to the capitalist.

>>2742498
It's not that it leads back to the capitalist, or even that it's a conspiracy. It's that society is driven primarily by its material conditions and needs, and thus tends to revolve around the means we alter those conditions and satisfy those needs, so it naturally centers around the major players of industry, which isn't wrong, just overly simplistic.

Communism as a house is a magnificent concept of how a house should look were it be built from the top down - thereby theoretically solving all of the problems of people living in flawed "bottom up houses"

The house itself is flawless and will ultimately be the house everyone will live in. Unfortunately all attempts to suspend a roof in mid air have resulted in calamity, a real top-down house has never been tried

File: d709c95ce058a23eac90978cec6e4ccf2aa7048f60681e6033f84afed0586a60.jpg (14KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x270px

>>2742472
>In capitalism, everyone is the master.

>>2742472
>Work for me for a tiny fraction of the true value of your labor, or starve
>Not slavery
Yeah, no. You can't meaningfully consent to something unless you also have the ability to decline. As long as you can't simply decline to work and have your basic biological needs met, you can't consent to work. The definition of slave is a nonconsenting worker.

File: 1493344017730.jpg (54KB, 856x692px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 856x692px

>>2742472

>In capitalism, everyone is the master.

I've spent the entire thread bashing commies up to this point but man that was cringey.

>>2742498
>treating everything as a massive conspiracy that always leads back to the capitalist
Pretty much the opposite. In marxism the capitalist is as much subject to the economic structure as workers, they're actually powerless in terms of the decisions they can take. For example, a capitalist can't decide to reduce exploitation because he will be out competed by others.

>>2742537
This. I'm not a communist but when I read shit like this I can't avoid taking their side.

>>2742540
>a capitalist can't decide to reduce exploitation because he will be out competed by others
false blanket statements like that are why Communism isn't popular

>>2741927
Every self-defined communist state ever have been a totalitarian shithole so at this point whatever you call communism cant really be called communism unless you want another totalitarian shithole

>>2742600
I'm explaining marxist economic theory, I'm not a marxist. But tbqh this specifically is perfectly reasonable.

>>2742485
>>2742486
>>2742531
>>2742533
>>2742537
None of you kids invest your money? You can buy shares of a corporation. If that sounds like slavery I'd say you're delusional. Furthermore, the consumers as a group are ultimately who dictate everything the corporate and fed does and sells. They need us, they are our bitch. Grow up idealists.

>>2742643
>the capacity to own tiny measures of capital somehow proves that everyone is a master in capitalism

Top fucking kek.

The consumers do not dictate the markets, plenty of the consumer "needs" that have been found under capitalism were entirely manufactured by the capitalists themselves.

File: 62ca9e0dd9e7a6be809c8503009299449329c38b1c3dac7b8ee195d502187a3a.jpg (221KB, 1173x882px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1173x882px

>>2742643
>if you buy 0.01% or even 10% of a corporation, you are your own master!
Not even capitalists are their own masters as they are slaves to the accumulation of more and more capital

>>2742643

Poor people don't have extra money that they can invest. Financial advisors typically won't even talk to you if you're poor because there is no point. You don't have any money that he can work with.

>>2742643
>the consumers as a group are ultimately who dictate everything the corporate and fed does and sells
If you are talking about consumption determining capital movement, it's a terrible argument since a person that has millions times less wealth than another will have millions of times less influence.

>>2742191
Not sure what's triggering you, but I live in Germany. A lot more 'socialist' than most of the planet.

>>2742239
Judges are expected to be fully aware of the political and legal regulations of the jurisdiction they serve, but they themselves do not vote. I'm sure a civil regulatory body can offer an incentive to hire 'long-term' (not strictly for life) policy designers. Similar to judges, but on a council. These can be elected if need be, or by invitation and ratified by an elected assembly, etc. If the status of the job were high enough, as I'm sure it would be, there's no need for salaries competing with hedge fund managers. Of course, such roles could still be open to influence from people with ulterior motives...

Just an idea.

>>2742625
in what sense? according to communism the owners of capitalist enterprises pocket all of the extra value produced by the workers - in theory then if you distribute more of that value back to the workers than the next guy you will be able to get better workers than him and thereby out compete him and increase your profits

>>2742697
So because poor people can't invest it doesn't matter if anybody else can?
What else can communism do for me?

>>2742737
Sure, only in the case in which the increase in productivity more than offsets the increase in costs. In this case every capitalist would be incentivized to do so, and it's ultimately a zero sum game. In the opposite case (which should be more common if we talk about industrial workers), a higher salary would just imply less capital accumulation than the other capitalists. However, in none of the two scenarios does the capitalist have any decision.

>>2742755

I'm not advocating communism at all. Just pointing out that your perception of capitalism is extremely myopic.

>>2742755
>What else can communism do for me?
If you're rich enough that a financial advisor is willing to give you the time of day, it can do nothing for you.

File: 1493294286355.png (431KB, 5343x3663px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 5343x3663px

>>2742690
>>2742697
>>2742702
>>2742835
Great, so we've established the lesson is don't be poor, and if you're poor, work. Capitalism is just opportunity in practice, everyone can get what they want.

>>2742857
>so we've established the lesson is don't be poor, and if you're poor, work.
That folks like you with this attitude, of course, is the appeal of communism.

>>2742857
Great, so we've established that "everyone is a master" is retarded and you're moving goalposts now.

>>2742792
>in none of the two scenarios does the capitalist have any decision
but that's that a false blanket statement...
All business owners aren't completely driven by capital accumulation, there are businesses that aren't competitive with wages in wage competitive industries and vise versa. A lot of the factors governing wages are completely different for different companies within industries and the business owners can definitely make decisions (or not) about wages that will have different outcomes for their businesses


>>2742801
why even bother to reply if you have nothing to reply with?

>>2741979
>opposes communism
>must be a fascist
you people never learn

>>2741927

Stalin and Mao Zedong still killed a lot of people damn.

>>2742873
Not arguing

>>2742877
How have I moved goalposts? I see a system of fairness, where you reap what you sow, and if it's nothing, sorry, but nobody's coming to your rescue. The idea of mastership I was explaining before relates, as no matter what tier of the ladder of wealth you preside in, you still are a consumer, and you dictate the market with what you buy and produce; you are the pawn that keeps it in play. No consumers no market no market no economy. To me that just seems like common sense

>>2742885
>All business owners aren't completely driven by capital accumulation
Really? What are they driven by?

>there are businesses that aren't competitive with wages in wage competitive industries and vise versa. A lot of the factors governing wages are completely different for different companies within industries and the business owners can definitely make decisions (or not) about wages that will have different outcomes for their businesses
I've covered that case in my post. Just to be clear, orthodox economics gives the capitalist as little decision making as marxism does (they are just agents maximizing a profit function), it's not some crazy marxist shit.

Oh and don't come at me with that poor people stay poor nonsense because the number of people in extreme poverty escaping extreme poverty has been increasing stably for decades.

>>2742907
>How have I moved goalposts?
From "everyone is a master" to "don't be poor and if you're are poor just work xD".

>dictate the market with what you buy and produce
>>2742702
>>2742654

File: 2b41934dabcd80e2e4d772b0a62ba3010ca24ff2.png (239KB, 553x369px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 553x369px

>>2742857
>moving the goalpost this hard

>>2742907
>Not arguing
pot meet kettle
>no matter what tier of the ladder of wealth you preside in, you still are a consumer
a roman pleb is a consumer

>>2742523
Basing theories on simplistic views can be irrational, it is like saying "piltdown man was a hoax therefore the theory of evolution is false".

All societies must inevitably place power in the hands of a flawed human, it happens whether they realize it or not. How does a private citizen owning the means of production compare to a bureaucrat or some group with authority? It is not quite some great evil relatively speaking.

If society follows human needs, doesn't that mean capitalism is not the root cause of the problems Marx pins it on? In the real world child labor rates tend to go down after a country implements liberal market reforms, it clearly has nowhere near the effect Marx claimed. Marx confuses cause and effect, in fact it is not even as simple as cause and effect.

>>2742540
How much is due to economic structure and how much is due to economic conditions? You can point to vast profits but most of this will go to the pensions of middle class workers or have to be reinvested and thus in a way are little different from depreciation and amortization, just outside the business in the capital markets. Capital markets that would not exist without a prospect of a return on the investment. The only crime here seems to be the few who can beat the market average and accumulate capital spending their money on top hats and monocles instead of vaccinations in Africa or whatever.

Maybe it isn't utilitarian but it is a small price to pay compared to the blood of a revolution and the corruption of a regime founded on repressing certain freedoms for dubious reasons, freedoms that themselves are arguably innately valuable. It puts communism into question.

>>2742923
>>2742962
>From "everyone is a master" to "don't be poor and if you're are poor just work xD".
Yes motherfucker those ideas can thus coincide in no other system I can imagine but capitalism. You are a master of yourself, your capital, and in part of the economy, so if you're poor IT IS YOUR FAULT.

File: 1490095380554.jpg (57KB, 606x592px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 606x592px

these threads always suck ass

>>2742990
You know why? They're just spouting the same shit every single time, and I bet it's a lot of the same people usually too.

>>2742989

LOL

>>2742989
>you can do anything if you really try! sweatshop workers should just work harder and everything will work out!
Thanks for the motivational philosophy for teenagers, I really see that I am a master thanks to capitalism now.

>>2743005
>sweatshop workers
Every time with this shit. It's so predictable. When there's nothing left to say it's always that tiresome emotional deflection "b-but muh sweatshops."
Also
>strawmanning my point
Fucking vapid

>>2742908
but there are multiple non-binary decisions being made by capitalists in order to drive profits, decisions aren't always clear and have different outcomes. Different people also have different goals and needs for wealth accumulation..

if you're trying to tell me that capitalists have no choice but to have profit driven businesses that's a given but why mask it in rhetoric?

>>2743002
This is why 4chan is a steaming hot pile of shit.
>start shitpost thread
>get shitpost replies
>rinse, wash, repeat

>>2743019
>but there are multiple non-binary decisions being made by capitalists in order to drive profits, decisions aren't always clear and have different outcomes
Irrelevant. Of course, if you are going to make some kind of "microeconomic" model of how capitalists work you will have to make simplifications but the fact that decisions are non-binary really doesn't anything. Something, a combination of factors if you want, will result in a maximization of profits and the capitalist that does not do that will eventually lose to others that do. Yes, it's a simplification of how the world works.

File: Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 4.11.09 PM.png (473KB, 632x1168px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 632x1168px

why don't people ever mention the fact that the majority of the people of the ussr wanted the Soviet Union to keep going ?

>>2743017
>poor people should just work!
>n-n-n-no p-p-p-please don't name THOSE poor people

>>2743005
>Not realizing the entire reason corporate ever went overseas for low cost and possibly inhumane work in the first place was because the 1% were overly regulated and taxed domestically
Look at history.

>>2743025
Haha but that's why it's fun. U new? Not asking hostilely just wondering.

>>2743048
I bet you also think children were abused in factories in the 20s? Did you go to public school?

>>2743061

Yeah those poor rich people are doing so terribly these days with their constantly growing income and tax breaks thanks to Bush Jr. and Trump. Give me a break. The poor and middle class in this country has been shat on consistently since the 70's but richfag bootlickers will always come swarming in acting like they're these poor souls being oppressed by the ebul government.

>>2743061
>Look at history.
Completely inconsequential to my post and a straw man. Good job.

>>2743043
okay so making all decisions is irrelevant in macro for reasons therefore capitalists can not make decisions

thanks for your replies I guess

>>2742207
neoliberal was supposed to mean free market capitalism, so it was a lot like classical liberalism. I've only ever heard it used by Americans because it's supposed to differentiate from the modern American use of liberal. I guess that's just a retarded picture used for bait.

>>2742990
I don't understand why this shit isn't banned and sent to /pol/

>>2743088
>The poor and middle class in this country has been shat on consistently since the 70's
This needs elaboration, not sure what you're considering shat on

>>2743097
>ignoring the first half of the comment
Commies don't only cherrypick what to believe, they cherrypick what to criticize. Sad.

>>2741979
>not liking communism makes you a /pol/tard
/double/cucks pls go

>>2743100
Nice reading comprehension. There's only one decision or combination of decisions that leads to maximizing profit therefore capitalists don't have a choice, neither in marxism nor in neoclassical economics. I don't think I can make it clearer.

>>2741927
Because anticommunists are almost always ignorant of Marxist theory or bourgeois agents acting in bad faith.

>>2743152
The first half has nothing to do with what I was discussing, anon.

File: 0821_biz_prices.jpg (285KB, 633x899px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 633x899px

>>2743140

The fact that their wages, when accounting in inflation, are close to stagnant in terms of growth over that last few decades, and in addition that the cost of necessities has been growing.

>>2741975
Privately held industry bent toward the sale of commodities

>>2741965
No, tankies hate the "not real communism" argument because they themselves are not real communists

>>2743088
If you want a working economy, you need a fully functional economy, not one that needs to jump legal loopholes to supply basic products. Your point can basically be simplified down as "rich people should not be rich and poor people should not be poor"

>>2743169
Hahahaah

>>2743170
What's your solution

File: ee13069f8ccf5290b0e0d1b48f9e6769f06445d2.jpg (81KB, 800x674px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x674px

>>2742989
Such pure uncut ideology.

>>2743160
but anon this is pure rhetoric and all you're saying is you have no choice but to make good decisions to be successful

>>2743198

Can you explain that image to me? I'm confused but intrigued by it.

>>2742195
>Communism is a system where the entire economy is centrally planned by bureaucrats working under the authority of a single-party non-democratic state.
No it isn't.
>That's the system that the Communist Party implemented in every single country they managed to acquire power in.
No it wasn't.

>>2742472
>In capitalism, everyone is the master.
Oh boooiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>2743759
Concrete rebuttal

>>2742232
>MY factory

S P O O K
P
O
O
K

>>2741927
because it didn't.
communism had mere hours of life.
after the 1st day of the revolution it ended and began a new tsarist regime under a new form of justification to the new tsar and his new nobles. God became the "Will of the People" and the Nobles existed to reassure the "Will of the People".
stop romanticizing URSS, fucking westerners always trying to find a god to bow to, get lost.
+the URSS comissariat were not even russians, all were from the academia elite. 80%~95% were jews creating a meatgrinder that even their own kind would go trough

>>2741965
Will the 4th Ice Picks ever recover from this butthurt?

why does the soccies claim to make a revolution by just replacing the old gods with their New Gods, New Men and Woman et cetera