Communism

>>2865028
>Why do people say it doesn't work?

Because every time it's been tried, it has failed completely not only in absolute terms but by its own standards.

>What's wrong with it?

Ignores human nature and throws out the one proven method for alleviating poverty, that is, the price mechanism.

I will list all the countries where communism has worked
>.

>>2865028
Failed in Europe, on life support in East Asia

>>2865080

Communism has been dead in China since the 70's.

>>2865028

Marx's biggest flaw was not outlining an axiological framework through which the means of production could follow and appropriately allocate resources toward. Capitalism already does this and it isn't particularly good, but it is functional. A million Marxists (including Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and so on) have proposed (and in the names referenced previously, implemented) solutions to this problem which I won't go into, but, in my view, this is probably Communism's fatal flaw. Without this fact, most socio-economic systems crumble, not just Communism.

>>2865028
It combines paradoxes, it's hyper-egalitarian and romantic.

>>2865099
>Marx's biggest flaw was not outlining an axiological framework through which the means of production could follow and appropriately allocate resources toward.

No, that was one of Marx's lesser mistakes. The ignoring of human nature was his biggest failure.

>Capitalism already does this and it isn't particularly good

Are you on drugs? This is what capitalism does best, so well in fact that even modern computers can't match the efficiency with which capitalism distributes resources, hell the USSR used American market data to plan their economy because it was so much more efficient than anything they could come up with.

>>2865113
>muh human nature
Yeah because capitalism is intrinsically compatible to human nature as opposed to thousands of years of slavery and feudalism.
Read more Marx, pleb.

Have you ever read the, animal farm, the first thing the pigs make after the revolution was a law that you can't sleep in a bed, but the first thing the pigs do was to sleep in a bed.

I don't wanna make arguments about a children book but really in comunism, it exists those politician that gain a lot of money, while the people was starving, see how north korea is the politicians live as kings and the people are starving and dyng in the streets. That's why comunism is a crap the politicians live as kings and the people die starving.

>>2865028
Cum ta Burlinn

File: BerlinWall-58a5f8bd3df78c345b549131.jpg (261KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1500x1000px

>>2865028

The Berlin Wall is the ultimate proof of Communism's failure. No proper country would ever build a double wall with snipers, barbed wire, and machine gun turrets just to stop their own citizens from leaving.

>>2865274
The U.S. is probably in the process of doing that now instead of to keep people out.

>>2865199

Capitalism IS compatible with human nature. Marxists simply deny there is such a thing and imagine they can perfect humans thru education, everything we have learned about humans since Marx's time suggests this is nonsense, and the total failure of any communist regime to achieve ANY of their stated goals is testament to this.

>>2865262

Animal Farm is not about communism, it's about totalitarianism in all its forms.

>>2865274
The situation on the German frontier was volatile an the Soviets were truly concerned about aggression from ex Nazis. Just look at this propaganda piece.
https://youtu.be/CdxqJ4P39hY

>>2865289

What are you babbling about? No-one is forced to stay in America, on the contrary millions of people actively seek to move TO America. Meanwhile the Commies "perfect" system required them to quite literally murder their own people for the "crime" of wanting to leave.

>>2865311

Animal Farm is very clearly a metaphor for the Russian Revolution and its aftermath. 1984 is a much better example of a general criticism of totalitarianism in all its forms.

File: marxism btfo.jpg (170KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 640x427px

>>2865034

fpbp /thread

>>2865099
>>2865199
>>2865289
>>2865314

Rethink you are lives.

>>2865334
I'm no fan of Marx, but that image is incorrect. Marx did hold jobs. He was a working journalist.

>>2865326

That's nice, but Orwell himself was very clear about what his work was about, and it was about totalitarianism of all stripes, not just gommunism.

>>2865334
Get a life and a better job rightshit shill.

>>2865348
>being this buttblasted

Your messiah was a crank and his crackpot theories lead to countless millions dying and suffering.

>>2865334
nice ad homined image, now where's the argument?

>>2865365
Your life is meaningless and you'll never amount to anything more than being an unconvincing shill.

>>2865028
it doesn't work due to human nature

we find it hard to do things when we can't see the immediate results

you work in communism but don't see the fruits of your labour, it gets stolen from you and given to other people

you have no say

>>2865345

>What is death of the author?

>>2865373

Whatever you say cretin.

File: gobekli.jpg (103KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 600x450px

Communism can never work because it is based on false premises. Marx's entire work is based on his theory of alienation, according to which, the worst aspects of human society (according to him), such as violence and religion, were the results of class polarization, which communism would then solve through the common ownership of the means of production.

Archeology has shown, though, that violence and religion predate class polarization, it exists even in primitive communist societies of hunter-gatherers.

Few have noted how this completely destroys Marxism. If alienation is false, then there is no reason to believe that even if True Communism™ was achieved and the means of production were in the hands of worker's councils, it wouldn't quickly degenerate into warfare between different councils and hierarchization within.

Basically, human nature.

>>2865028
Communism goes against the grain of human selfishness, whereas capitalism goes with it. Communism demands people to be nicer, more altruistic than the average person actually is.
Free markets do a better job of allocating resources than central planning does.
Investors and financiers, the much-maligned rentier class of bankers and speculators, actually serve an important role in society. The economy benefits when there are big concentrations of wealth that the holders of the wealth can insert into the economy based on their own judgment, at times of their own choosing. It benefits for a similar reason as why an army functions better when there are reserves behind the front line than when all personnel are equally divided along the front line with nothing behind them. Sometimes a big task or opportunity arises that can be really accelerated by investment. Capitalism is good at this. Of course government can also serve the role of the deployer of reserve wealth, but history shows that things work best when there is a mixed system - both private investors and the state capable of directing massed wealth as needed.
That said, Marxism is sometimes attacked for things that Marx himself didn't support. From what I understand, Marx himself viewed communism as a potential next stage after capitalism, that would potentially be enabled by technological advancement. He didn't think it was something that would necessarily work if deployed in agricultural nations like early 20th century Russia and China. And perhaps, if technological change leads to a post-scarcity state, communism will become a realistic political system. But in the current reality, with current levels of scarcity, it just doesn't work well enough.

>>2865393
Well you know lots of things are human nature but are regulated in civilized societies like violence. What's proposed is that the regulating be applied on labor and financing as well.

File: 1468438674490.png (147KB, 793x4926px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 793x4926px

>>2865396

>Implying

>>2865307
The very fact that humans were able to live under both feudalism and capitalism essentially precludes the type of "human nature" capitalists claim humans posses.

>>2865422

No it doesn't you stupid assclown. This kind of moronic "opinion" is why you "people" are such absolute simpletons, and why your woowoo political ideas are so utterly laughable.

>>2865418
>posts a bunch of losers

Hhahaha, is this supposed to be pro commie? Because it just makes you look like the incompetent losers you are.

>>2865028
>both my Grandparents were tortured trying to come here from Cuba, grandpa was beaten to shit, grandmother was raped numerous times by guards
>Finally made it here in 77, leaving their children behind, not knowing if they will ever have the chance to see them again
>Mom comes during the Mariel boatlift
>Boat nearly capsized on the way here
>One of her cousins was on another boat which did capsized, while her cousin survived her 3 month old baby was swept out into the ocean
>After the Mariel her cousins and other brothers and sisters tried hard to make it to the states
>Some made it, most failed and we're imprisoned in Cuba and she hasn't heard from one brother who was caught 4 fucking times trying to leave Cuba since the last time he left
>EVERYONE was miserable in Cuba and risked life and limb trying to get to Miami.
>Was grateful for every opportunity she had to work
>Worked her ass off, learned the language to the point that she lost her accent since she moved to Massachusetts and they weren't as friendly to Cubans.
>Started teaching in colleges
>First thing shes is some thick rimmied douche bag wearing a Che Guevara shirt with a set a BMW keys
>All this faggots presentations were about the glory of Communism
>Last presentation of the semester was about how much better life is in Cuba than here
>She says fuck college and starts teaching in elementary school.
Fuck 1st world communistas. I hope you guys do get to live in a communist society one day and get sodomized when you try to escape.

>>2865274
They built the wall in order to prevent the west and the CIA from "buying" the east's high-skilled workers such as doctors, you historically illiterate dildo.

At the time the Berlin Wall was constructed, East Germany's income per capita was 2/5 that of the west because the east was forced to pay much more in World War II reparations than West Germany. Hindering it's economic growth.

By the time the wall came down, eastern workers were making 2/3 that of a westerner's salary.

>>2865418
This is a thread about communism retard.

>>2865448
If you understood absolutely anything about the social structure of feudalism you would realize how stupid you sound. There is no possible coherent definition of human nature that can reconcile humans adapting to both feudalism and capitalism. The truth is that humans can more or less adapt themselves to any social structure that can provide them the basic necessities of life.

File: 1495744208022.jpg (165KB, 816x1088px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 816x1088px

>>2865477
A communist society has never been achieved. The USSR, Maoist China, Cuba, etc. are all socialist states. You must one of those guys that thinks Bernie Sanders and Hitler are socialists.

>>2865471
>They built the wall in order to prevent the west and the CIA from "buying" the east's high-skilled workers such as doctors, you historically illiterate dildo.

So they built the wall because their doctors wanted to get paid more out west? Sounds alot like what he said, they were keeping them in.

>>2865493
>Yugoslav wars
>Spanish civil war
>Capitalism
Kill yourself.

>>2865493
That image is ridiculous.

>>2865493
This infographics is terrible bait. I have a half asses knowledge of history and know this is complete and utter dog shit.

>>2865498
Of course they were keeping them in. How is it unjustified to protect extremely vital workers such as doctors from being bought off by the west?

>>2865525
Compensate them properly? Don't pay them in dogfood?

>>2865028
On the off chance you actually want serious replies, I'll give you one from the perspective of someone who has read virtually the entirety of Marx's writings on political economy.

There is a bit of a latent contradiction between Marx's work as a political economist and his work as a social revolutionary. A historical materialist analysis of human history makes clear that new modes of production virtually always arose as an accidental, unplanned and unintended by-product of people trying to reproduce themselves as they were. In reality, no widespread mode of production in human history was enacted as a result of coordinated conscious deliberate action by humans.

The unsettling implication of this is that it is extremely difficult--if at all possible--to impose a new mode of production on the real underlying economic circumstances of human existence. This has been made starkly clear in all the cases where "communist" revolutions occured in largely pre-capitalist societies which had nothing like the productivity necessary to make a communist mode of production really feasible, and which then had to resort to totalitarianism to try and force the kind of labour productivity improvements that the capitalist mode of production intrinsically generates, and to force people to accept the relatively low living standards associated with that limited labour productivity.

Ultimately, in order to paper over the significant difficulties of implementing a mode of production by collective fiat and the necessary inefficiency of a mode of production that has the satisfaction of human needs as its main focus rather than the absolute maximization of labour productivity you need to have a high enough level of labour productivity to be able to ensure a minimal drop in standard of living for most people, which is likely to only be practically achievable once automation has reached a sufficiently advanced stage to severely curtail the amount of socially necessary labour time.

>>2865457
wtf i hate communism now

>>2865464
I bet they were probably gusanos, that's why you didn't write the reason why they were trying to escape. but you are LARPing

>>2865418
I don't recognize all of the people in that picture but I know that the ones I do recognize are anything but successes which in turn makes me think that the whole picture is bogus.

>>2865028
Communism needs capitalism when it's at its zenith. Problem is capitalism keeps evolving into something better and strnonger. 20th century movements should have stopped at Democratic socialism. Communism will win in the end. The people will no longer need to slave for a minuscule existence while the elites profit from our sweat in labor and our blood from war. Just how the kings lost their power, the elites will lose their

>>2865901
Eat a back of dicks, you can find Cubans in the entire world that had to make miracles to escape the island. Literally millions of them all over the world.

Life in the island was and is still a miserable unlivable shithole. Even for people who you'd think would have higher standards of life like judges.

>>2865952
Leaders will always be needed. And if leaders are needed, social classes will inevitably continue to exists.

Money is not the only way in which you can create social classes, Power and authority are ultimately what people seek, money is just a way to gain power in the age of capitalism, and when it ends, people will find other ways to attain power.

>>2865962
Literally dozens of reports from the UN, UNICEF, and other observers confirm that it's better off in many ways than most other Latin American countries.

>>2866020
being slightly better than completely shit isnt saying much

It doesn’t value creativity, forced collectivization, absence of citizens’ rights, reduced incentives to work hard, militant opposition to imperialism,
indifference towards the environment, economic calculation problem, class struggle’s going nowhere, mass murders, Karl Marx was wrong, etc.

>>2865399
I'm confused, how does the free market necessarily equate to what is right?

You think conflict is always necessary?

I am of the opinion the free market is like an option from a menu at a restaurant, not the basis for which the restaurant exists, but just a choice. In other words, I think it is human nature to adopt and conform to the bounds of society's mandates and obligations, depending on what they are.

I'm not saying capitalism or communism is the answer, but we do NOT currently live under a completely free market anyway, let's be honest there is a sufficient amount of mandated pricing.

The supply demand curve is more complicated than people give it credit for anyway, Léon Walrus has illustrated an example of the supply demand curve, and the psychological profiles of the consumers actually causes the supply and demand lines to intersect twice, causing two equilibrium points.

>>2865901
>Hit with the truth
>Oh you must be LARPing

Kill yourself you LARPing commie scum. You wouldn't last a fucking day in Cuba. My grandfather fought for the revolution and NOPED the second he could. "Hurr Durr you guys are counter revolutionary" fuck you and your fantasy world you live in. I bet you own a fucking iphone you faggot.
>>2866020
Latin America sucks dick in general you fucking twat. Sure it's not Venezuela now or Columbia in the 90s. Congrats. You still have millions of people trying to leave the country and millions who have left.

File: Communism Victim Memorial.jpg (1MB, 3456x2304px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3456x2304px

>>2865028

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_to_the_Victims_of_Communism

>>2865480
>The truth is that humans can more or less adapt themselves to any social structure that can provide them the basic necessities of life.

So not Communism, then?

Also you're understanding of human nature is as pathetic as your understanding of economics.

>>2865525

Because they're not slaves? You don't own their talents any more than you own their bodies.

>>2866215

Your literally retarded.

>>2865804
Sounds like me when I graduated high school and actually got a job.

>>2866020
I literally don't give a shit. I know first hand Cuba is among the worst.

If you have countries like Venezuela, Haiti and the entirety of central america muddying the statistics then of course Cuba looks slightly decent.

File: lenintoppling.gif (2MB, 420x236px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 420x236px

lmao

File: 3449339.gif (2MB, 500x283px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x283px

lol

File: 527.jpg (124KB, 690x388px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 690x388px

lel

File: 325.jpg (61KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1024x576px

lmfao

>>2866277
>>2866279
>>2866285
>>2866286
Seriously though, destroying statues is a shitty thing to do. I hate communism but this just makes me sad.

File: 1438773948944.jpg (247KB, 1224x1445px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1224x1445px

>>2865493
>that image
hard to tell if this is bait or some sod from /leftypol/ genuinely believes this

>>2865034
>Muh human nature

Human nature is flexible.

>>2866481

To a certain very limited degree perhaps, but nowhere near enough to make gommunism possible.

File: 1495498291079.png (795KB, 938x1010px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 938x1010px

>>2865113
>human nature
this shit meme seriously needs to stop

Is communism a slave morality?

>>2865262
>animal farm
>children book

what? animal farm is not a children book lad

>>2866576
why?

because it doesn't fit your naive worldview?

>>2865080
Deng powered the entire Chinese economy with the force produced by Mao rolling in his grave.

File: 1473969073175.jpg (34KB, 480x354px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 480x354px

>>2866625
Fucking ironic.

Human nature is determined by the environment. Actually, what do you even mean by "human nature"? If you mean "everyone has same pay", that's never even been the idea in communism.

Really shows how leash-led some people are when the message "destroy hierarchies, replace egalitarianism" gets twisted into "garbage collector and rocket scientist receive the same benefits lul" tier of garbage.

>>2866692
Correction:
*replace with egalitarianism

File: 1475474048292.jpg (34KB, 480x720px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 480x720px

>>2865262
North Korea is much more fascist than socialist, which you would know if you knew what you what you were talking about in the least.

>>2865028
He (and all of his followers) disregarded the market. Communists said that value=labour*material. This isn't true. Value is what you can sell your goods for. This is why every comunist state (except Romania) went into the debt spiral. They gave more to the workers than they produced.

Also, since ordinary people didn't own their land and tool, they didn't care enough to maintain them. State monopoly guaranteed comfy jobs, and lack of competition resulted in lack of achievement in everywhere except the military/space exploration. State grants made people lazy, there was a saying: "they pretend to pay us, we pretend to work". They didn't want to work and had to be forced to do it. You would be thrown into jail if you were unemployed.

Then again, communism was a ruse to rile up the proletariat, so the urnite intelligentsia could overthrow the aristocracy and take their wealth.

t. someone who lives in a former communist country

>inb4 some community college retard says it hasn't been tried

>>2865028
why would anything designed by a fat NEET who never bathed and leeched off of his bourgeoisie friend for his entire life work?

>>2865448
Attack the argument, not the person. By doing that you lose by default, proving yourself a barbarian amongst civilized men.

>>2866692
>Human nature is determined by the environment.

No. It was shaped by the environment during our evolution but to say it "depends on" the environment displays a total ignorance of 100+ years of scientific study since Darwin. This infantile equation that our nature is determined by our circumstance is precisely why communism has and always will fail so terribly.

File: IMG_0067.jpg (4MB, 6880x2880px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 6880x2880px

>2017
>communism
Look at this fucking picture. This level of development could only be achieved under a capitalist system.

>>2866743

What argument? He didn't make one, he just stated his moronic opinion, proving as he did so that he knows nothing at all about feudalism, capitalism, OR human nature.

> By doing that you lose by default

OH NO a literal halfwit on the internet thinks I've "lost"! How will I ever recover from the shame of knowing that you, a cretinous spastic, think poorly of me? Oh woe is me!

>>2866770
What I meant is that you made yourself look like a retard. Bawl though you might, expect no further (You)s.

>>2865418
HAHAHA you're using bishop as an example of a good leader, thats retarded.

>>2865493
This picture is confussing captialism with imperisalism. Also, the first one is absolutley ridiculous. No marxist government has ever produced new forms of medicine that actually worked, so no we could not have saved them with socialism, more would have died.

File: venezuela not socialist.png (2MB, 2441x2362px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2441x2362px

RRREEEEE VENEZUELA IS NOT SOCIALIST YOU RACIST WIENIESSSS!!!!!

Because you live in a bourgeois democracy (probably) and there's a huge material interest in shitting all over it. You know how monarchists lost their shit over the rise of Napoleon? It wasn't because he was an absolute dictator (god knows there wasn't a shortage at the time), but because he had the good sense to fuck over the aristocracy and promote competence. Stalin will come to be understood as a hero on par with Napoleon. Tldr read Hoxha and fuck to the eurocommunists

>>2865034

> the price mechanism

This. Instead of letting prices set themselves, communists want to work out all prices of everything with a pen and paper, or later with a computer, and then pass laws fixing those prices. If you charge differently you get sent to Siberia.

I'm not making this up. This is what the field of linear optimisation and programming was invented for.

>>2865382

Something that can be arranged very easily in Soviet Russia.

File: leftypol shills 7.jpg (89KB, 700x566px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 700x566px

>>2866923
*tips fedora*

>>2865464
What did your parents do for a living in Cuba?

>>2866207
There is no such thing as a fixed and unchangeable human nature. Humans have lived and do live in social forms with wildly different and totally opposite norms, values and expected behaviors.

>>2866718
I love it when people who don't even understand neoclassical economics, much less Marxian economics, vomit forth their totally uninformed drivel like it contributes anything to the discussion.

>>2866747
Nice word salad.

>>2866290
While preserving history is important I don't think we should keep for instance, each and every nazi uniform and ensigns.

>>2865525

>We have to build a literally fucking double wall with barbed wire and machine guns to prevent doctors from leaving

>>2865549
>>2866212
>>2867342

Way to completely ignore his posts. The Eastern Bloc and the DDR had a far, far worse starting point than the West, who possessed effectively all the world's wealth. Yet you're implying communism is somehow at fault for an already-existing wealth disparity in spite of the fact that the DDR partially caught up on their average incomes.

>>2867360
That disparity didn't improve post WW2. Eastern bloc stayed poor, barely developing at all outside of the USSR while the west went from moderately wealthy to super wealthy.

Why do communists, whenever they are proven wrong by empirical evidence, start sperging out about dialectics?
How do dialectics "prove" communism works? Shouldn't dialectics prove centrism?

>>2865028
Marx envisioned a penultimate stage of economic and societal development, socialism, that would precede communism and be ruled by a "dictatorship of the proletariat". There is a distinct dichotomy between the era of socialism and that of communism. In the socialist phase, repression of bourgeoisie elements and other authoritarian maneuvers would be seen as desirable, necessary even, to allow for the fruition of communism. The communist stage, however, was to be an era of unprecedented freedom and autonomy, wherein the state and all its organs of power would have "withered away". Marx never explicitly mentioned the transition from socialism to communism would occur.

The problem with communism, as Marx envisioned it, was that the preceding stage, socialism, was obtained by several countries in the 20th century, like the USSR, Cuba, China and North Korea. Yet instead of socialism being a temporary, ephemeral change it ossified the creation of a new, authoritarian elite, because without checks on the power of this new "dictatorship of the proletariat", nothing could stop them from exercising full control over the rest of society. Once this new bureaucracy has established itself, why would it willingly dissolve? Even some of the most idealist Marxist leaders, like Castro, never went far enough to actually dissolve the state. Marx believed in a communist society of freedom and equality, yet "communist" countries were ones of unparalleled tyranny and inequality.

Secondly, although Marx claimed to be basing his theory on sound scientific research, his predictions have gone badly wrong and undermined his claim to have found an overarching historical pattern. Marx believed that capitalism would be dislodged by workers in the Western industrialized world, yet all the "communist" revolutions took place in countries with little industry or modernization.

>>2866481
With communism you want to replace the underlying motivation for people right? Make them work for the collective rather than themselves? Restructure their value system?

Take a fat guy. He wants to hit the gym; Why the fuck is it so difficult?

b/c you can't just restructure your value systems at will! obviously..

>>2865028
Marxism replaces "democratic ownership of the means of production" with "socialist state ownership", suggesting that a "proletarian dictatorship" can successfully represent the proletariat and its needs while not succumbing to the usual issues of states and power.

Then there's the issue of combating an entire world order that is against you unless you somehow have a revolution that is global in scale.

>>2867379
Yay more word salad.

>>2867481
I used the words dialectic and empirical, that's hardly a salad.
And my question can be simplified to mean: "Why do commies drop a word salad on you with no actual explanation"

>>2865028
i think the nature of man cant fit with communism, as simple as that

>>2867491
You used the words without any relationship to their actual meanings. And the answer to your second question is that there is no point in wasting your time explaining the nuances of political economic theory to people arguing entirely in bad faith.

>>2867398
>Marx never explicitly mentioned the transition from socialism to communism would occur.
But wasn't that the central point? As far as I know, he said: Look, here is this eutopian idea of communism. But nobody knows how to get there. Here is my answer: Via socialism and all the aspects of social and economic revolution that it implies. Communism is the final goal of it all.
>his predictions have gone badly wrong
They were very inaccurate, I'll give you that. He underestimated the time period and important role that capitalism played will continue to play in world history. The more basic needs are covered, the more access to information and time to muse on it there is for the average person alive in the world, the more likely an evolution or revolution towards a communist society becomes. Of course, capitalism motivates its profiteurs to maintain the status quo and keep the plebs uninformed and running after a styrofoam carrot.

>>2865028
Communism is dumb and impossible.
The only system fair to the worker is syndicalism

>>2865418
Hey, the nationalists were syndicalist until the fag franco came

>>2866692
muh blank slate

>>2865028
Oldfag easteuro fag who's been to Cuba and most of the Bapпaкт here. I'll skip any theoretical wankery as it is pointless. It doesn't work because socialism, which is its nesessary precursor, doesn't work. And socialism (the real deal, not skandinavian """capitalism with kind of faint, barely noticable socialist characteristics""") doesn't work because:

>a form of hierarchy always forms (even perfect collectives have some "worker appointed" commisar or something) >this leads to eventual shift of privileges and resource distribution upwards (>inb4 "muh human nature". It literally always happens for one reason or another, most often because of resource/service scarcity)

>classes form anew (non-party members/party members/politcoms/party officials)

>physical and intellectual inequality leads to the formation of various social cliques and subclasses, which inevitably crash on different issues, leading to destabilisation and loss of social coherention (party officials and low-IQ post-agrarian lumpens wanting industrialization at all cost/engineers and intellectuals telling them quality needs time etc etc)

>a planned economy (at least pre-digital) cannot account for the needs of the populace. (example: you'd have quadrillion steel mills producing copious amounts of various metals-because the local workers agreed to produece this or because the party hasn't tought through its plans and you'll have a single factory producing TVs that covers a miniscule % of the demand) That, combined with the relatively low intellectual prowess of the average worker, who is now responsible for the formation and maintenance of a more complex system than he can handle, makes for enormous waste of resources by inefficiency and illogicality.
cont.

>>2865028 (OP)
>>2867813

And lastly
>the state of full employment and complete lack of competition lead to increasingly lower motivation to excel at your work. Why upgrade that carbamide factory when you're the undisputed monopolist? Why work hard when someone doing less work (which you can do too) than you gets paid the same? Why improve efficiency when the market remains static? That's why soc economies become uncompetitive and "freeze in time".
And sooner or later, the waste or resources and manpower becomes unsustainable and the meme crashes. Every-single-time. Western an-com 20yo """"intellectuals"""" can wank themselves with raw theory all they want, but at the end of the day, human vices will destroy it. That's the essence of all utopic ideologies- they are memes.

So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, "It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. (Acts 6:2)

>>2866481
>Adopt communist values or get sent to Gulag.

Human nature sure is flexible.

File: 1493344980753.jpg (49KB, 583x438px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 583x438px

>>2867867
>jeebusfaggotry
I know this is 100% bait, but it gave me a laff

>>2866481
>Human nature is flexible.
In the long term, it isn't really. Look at the former soviet bloc and how/why it fell apart.

The religious world is but the reflex of the real world. And for a society based upon the production of commodities, in which the producers in general enter into social relations with one another by treating their products as commodities and values, whereby they reduce their individual private labour to the standard of homogeneous human labour – for such a society, Christianity with its cultus of abstract man, more especially in its bourgeois developments, Protestantism, Deism, &c., is the most fitting form of religion. In the ancient Asiatic and other ancient modes of production, we find that the conversion of products into commodities, and therefore the conversion of men into producers of commodities, holds a subordinate place, which, however, increases in importance as the primitive communities approach nearer and nearer to their dissolution. Trading nations, properly so called, exist in the ancient world only in its interstices, like the gods of Epicurus in the Intermundia, or like Jews in the pores of Polish society. Those ancient social organisms of production are, as compared with bourgeois society, extremely simple and transparent. But they are founded either on the immature development of man individually, who has not yet severed the umbilical cord that unites him with his fellowmen in a primitive tribal community, or upon direct relations of subjection.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#219

>>2867895
> how/why it fell apart
Because their central economy was a failure? This is less human nature problem and more math one.

>>2867360

I'm implying that if you have to build a double-wall with barbed wire and machine guns to prevent people from leaving, you're pretty much a complete shit-hole.

>>2867932
>This is less human nature problem and more math one.
>another quintessentially western "I've read some Marx-gommunism nao" post
The inefficiency was caused by societal and economical stagnation. Which itself was caused by the lack of any meaningful reward for applying yourself. Literally everybody tried to "enrich" himself in some additional ways- from outright stealing and black-marketeering to nepotism. You have no idea how soulcrushing is to work a decade to become an engineer or a surgeon, only to see some rabfak pleb "workers'" appointee that took 2 year halfassed courses outrank you scientifically or some half-retarded agroworker outearn you. The average joe isn't some slogan-spouting fanatic and propaganda can work only so long on him.
>they pretend to pay us, we pretend to work

>>2868033

And yet the post-Soviet economy was even worse; perestroika was a disaster, life expectancy plummeted under Yeltsin. It's not as simple as "communism doesn't work".

It's possible to learn from the USSR's mistakes regarding over-centralized control and lack of meaningful democratic input instead of throwing your hands up in defeat, and letting billionaires own everything.

>>2865028
Isn't it enough to see the bodies of hundreds of millions of people murdered by communists in their own countries?

Do you really need the "why"?

>>2868071
Those bodies are piled up because nobody was allowed to ask "why" you fucking mong. Your mindset of outcome=cause is a part of the authoritarian mindset that puts the bodies there in the first place.

They were murdered by a bunch of larpers who claimed to be communist, but who were power-hungry authoritarian lunatics first and foremost. Starting with Lenin, all 20th century practical applications of communism were so far removed from its initial ideas that it is laughable to call them anything but bureaucratic dictatorships whose propagators had once read the blurb of a Marx fanfic.

File: Famines.png (328KB, 675x960px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 675x960px

>>2868071

>murdered

More like starved to death. I'm glad capitalism solved that problem; it's made amazing strides in eradicating world hunger!

>>2867852
>>2867813
Thus without taking in account that the ideology can be reformed

>>2868081
Don't forget the millions of people that were worked to death or executed in gulags and other labor camps.

File: 8df36b74e928836d8263936e9602fae6aeac16920e6297ffad7a2299e6956057.png (9KB, 800x382px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 800x382px

>>2868061
>perestroika was a disaster
Easteuro never had a chance. It's not about the perestroika. Socialism-to-capitalism transition is a disaster in itself. A transitioning country has no capital accumulation, uncopetitive industries, no service sector and no normal working institutions. Normal countries build these for centuries and they are still shit.

>mistakes regarding over-centralized control and lack of meaningful democratic input
That's actually the main problem. The more decentralized soc/com industry is, the more chaotic it becomes. Since the workers will decide what to build (in a theory) and you can't really force them to do something else (in theory), the inefficiencies and lack of coordiantion will become even more crippling than normal. Capitalism fixes this by depriving these industries from money, thus bankruting them and restoring the equilibrium. How can you convince someone with 20-year experience in metallurgy that he needs to change profession overnight because his "means of production" are overproducing, without using force or depriving him of access to shared resources? Socialism can only work with computer-aided technocratic in-depth strategic planning and absolute centralization.

>>2867249
Well at least you proved him right

>>2868081
>pre WWII
>African countries

No count.

>>2868093
>can be reformed
If I had a cent every time I've heard this, I'd be a porkie...

>>2865262
>Decent allegory for communism
>Meant for children
Sure buddy

File: C_AoOPWUwAAu7UH.jpg (56KB, 749x724px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 749x724px

Commieboos are the most annoying, fagiest,softest pieces of shit on 4chan. They are somehow more annoying and delusional than stormfaggots. None of then would last a day in a communist country and I bet most of them own iPhones and other great pieces of bullshit that much evil capitalism brought them. The majority of them are just brainwashed suburban children who have been mentally sodomized by college professors.

It never worked. It won't work now. Your arguments that it has never 'been truly accomplished' or that all those piece of shit 3rd world countries weren't 'Like communism' is further proof of it's failure. Off yourselves you fools.

>>2868226
Communism is for children.

>>2868233
>children
*low IQ blue collar cityfolk and rural retards

>>2868281
Workers and farmers have stopped being communist half a century ago, m8

>>2868308
Obviously. But gommunism is still most suitable(created) for them. Modern university lumpens wouldn't last a day.

>>2868316
>Modern university lumpens wouldn't last a day.
WROOOONG

File: 1489893709110.jpg (8KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x200px

>>2868319
>effeminate malnourished vegan 120lb uni faggots will be able to mine coal or weld steel for 12h per day

>>2868330
>implying all available work in a communist society have to do with mining coal, welding steel, or with other physically exhausting activities
>implying there is no service, research, transportation or really anything but breaking off chunks of uranium with your bare hands

>>2865028
Because you need a country with a very large middleclass to flip to a proliteriat dictatorship, then for a mass totalitarian state to then dissolve itself and invalidate money with no one being greedy

>>2868341
>service

Enjoy working the communist fast food sector.

>research

You're too much of a brainlet and stuck on 4chan to boot.

>transporation

implying twig arms

You think you'll be ushered into a high society of PHD wielding engineers and physicists. Instead, you'll be working the dregs like the rest. Enjoy the dregs.

>>2868341
>no service, research, transportation
>implying services will stay at 70% of employment like now and not plummet to 30-40%
>implying your underwater basket waving degree is useful for research
>implying a effeminate malnourished vegan 120lb uni faggot can be a trucker

>>2865099
>Marx's biggest flaw was not outlining an axiological framework through which the means of production could follow and appropriately allocate resources toward.

Marx's greatest flaw was being an academic hack who critiqued the plight of the working class and formulated economic theory whilst having never worked or participated in any economic risk taking in his life.

>>2865199
>Yeah because capitalism is intrinsically compatible to human nature as opposed to thousands of years of slavery and feudalism.

>Feudalism is diametrically opposed to capitalism.
The last time I checked people were still allowed to buy and sell goods in a feudal society. In fact after the black death a certain class of people became so proficient and buying and selling goods they managed to accumulate enough wealth to buy their own plots of land and bypass the feudal system all together and simply swear direct fealty to the king. Also merchants have always been a thing.

>>2868552

This. Generally I would say a person's arguments should be considered regardless of who proposes them, but in this case its just too fucking bad.

>muh plight of the worker
>hey can I crash at your place work is too hard lol

>>2865028

It works, but you need an extremely technologicaly advanced society with complete automation and Universal Constructor (hi-tech nano-assembler that can also self-replicate).

You also need humans to be virtuous and highly intelligent so as to make a single human being, via knowledge and information, nearly autonomous. Social interraction is necessary to continue/maintain virtuous nature and share information.

Human mind in such case becomes "the means of production" - programming, operation, utilisation of automatons and UC in order to produce goods/materials, assist in scientific/exploratory work or maintenance of habitat, along with knowledge of assembly of most basic form of UC.

The issue with communism is that it cannot be applied in modern times, since we have no UC, no efficient energy sources to power it, Universal Knowledge Database is in its most primitive form (wikipedia), and as humanity, we are lacking severely in virtues.

We can strive towards it, but its nearly damn impossible.

I know that people will disagree with this, but fuck them, this is my take on Marxism.

>>2868552

Marx was a journalist and author who struggled financially. He didn't work in a factory but he was no stranger to the wage system.

>>2865493

>socialist states

Never achieved either. Just like communism.

Mostly because both are used as a veil and paint-spray by authoritatian or totalitarian regimes, especially in the beginning, so as to give themselves legitimacy.

Autoritarian regime is just that - authoritarian regime.

>>2866481
no it isn't. A few decades of social engineering can't remake a billion years of evolutionary programming.

>>2865052
*coughs* China?

>>2865099
Can you elaborate on this and explain how the different brands of Marxism (maoism, leninism, titoism, etc) addressed it?

>>2869076
it sounds like he wants a blueprint plan on how to run a communistic government because daddy marx didnt leave one because marxy baby didnt know how the economy works.

>>2868678
>Marx was a journalist and author who struggled financially.
Yes, being a journalist partially funded by his friend Engels family business earnings is exactly the same as being a factory worker.

>>2867360
>Way to completely ignore his posts
And you ignore there's. If communism was feasible it shouldn't matter what the doctors were being paid, because they should have been happy to help out their fellow men sharing their resources and receiving what they needed. But they didn't want to do that. They wanted money. They chased the profit motive.

>>2867895
I would disagree, over the long term it can be changed through (voluntary) eugenics and freedom, but communist want to change Man over one's lifetime, that's just impossible. You need to change biology (IQ) first to change human nature.

>>2868081
>Can't even post a bait image properly
Also,
>it's made amazing strides in eradicating world hunger!

It unironically has. The modern system of agriculture allows unprecedented global food out, which is only able to be done based on innovation driven by Capitalism.

>>2868572
>Generally I would say a person's arguments should be considered regardless of who proposes them
No, that's a stupidest thing to do ever, and is a lie perpetrated by elites with inflated egos who think their opinion is automatically correct even when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about.

File: communist_microsoft.jpg (36KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 200x200px

>>2865028
Mostly people having no idea what communism is.

Most people think of the USSR, or Cuba, or China when they think """communism""".

They were all nationalist totalitarian states.

And the worst part of it is, despite being evil as fuck - they all worked really well. The USSR was the only other superpower, with the most powerful military the world has ever seen outside of the US, and kept that status for a about a half century, despite the entire world working against it. Cuba's kept one of the highest standards of living in the region, despite being in much the same basket and under embargo the whole time. China has remained the most powerful nation in Asia, even before it started opening its markets.

Further, none of them claimed to be communist, they claimed to be working towards said, saying that their centralizing all industry were merely the first step towards "true communism".

Which is where you get the "true communism has never been tried" from the other side.

But that's also a lie.

Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and pretty much every other IT startup out there has started under a communist model, where the workers directly owned the business and decided exactly how that business would operate. Those coops are pretty much the only instances of the workers owning the means of production.

But "true communism" doesn't work either - as after a certain scale, you can't have every worker having a say in every business decision. You can't have warehouse workers making software design decisions.

No economy so fragmented can compete with one so centralized. So all those startups abandon that model when they reach a certain size, and go the more traditional top-down hierarchal corporate model. Suffice to say, for an economy the size of an entire nation, it's straight out from the get go.

So no, communism doesn't work on such scales, and no nation has been stupid enough to try it.

The evil of nations like the USSR, on the other hand, sadly, quite effective.

>>2865034
>Ignores human nature
Stalinism, evil as it was, took human nature into account quite thoroughly, which is one of the reasons it lasted so long, despite all the efforts to destroy it.

People seem to think there was no competitive mechanism in the USSR - but indeed there was, and it was the same one the Capitalists claim to have, but don't: "Work hard, and you'll make money."

Under Stalinism, workers were paid piecemeal. So, literally, the harder you worked, the more money you made. Yes, you were provided with a minimum standard of living (provided you were employed), but that "minimum standard" was pretty abysmal, so people were left with more than enough motivation to work harder to fill the gaps.

Part of the problem, however, is that motivation was too effective - is they worked too hard. Everyone was overfilling quotas creating undesirable surpluses.

This started coming to a head after Stalin died, and various reformers in the 70's tried to mitigate the problem by removing various motives for overfilling quotas. This meant, however, people would effectively be paid less, and there was a sort of internal rebellion in management, causing all sorts of artificial shortages so folks could "storm" quotas, and make more money that way.

Suffice to say, the workers didn't have dick, when it came to control of the means of production. That's the core problem with calling such a system "communism". One could work up that same flawed system, and just not call it such, and folks would never know, since it shares none of the core tenets of either socialism nor communism.

Somehow communism has been re-written to mean "anything the government does on behalf of the people", which makes it sound like totalitarianism is all fine and dandy, so long as it doesn't provide anything - which seems a quick path to the worst of both worlds.

File: rightsduties.jpg (46KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 620x349px

The human nature meme is true but it isnt that people are greedy, its that they are stupid.

soviet structure = good, very efficient
assuming a high mental standard of the populace and giving them reign to rule themselves = not good

>>2868570
>The last time I checked people were still allowed to buy and sell goods in a feudal society.
I'm pretty sure in feudal societies most people were not able to buy anything, they would be stuck providing for themselves and their families and their lords and kings and so on in a very direct way

>>2869520
first of all that principle is very important, it's a major reason people are anonymous by default here, second of all if you'd read the rest of the fucking post he said it doesn't always apply
please get the fuck out of /his/ if you're going to approach things with an ad hominem mindset

>>2868231
>None of then would last a day in a communist country and I bet most of them own iPhones and other great pieces of bullshit that much evil capitalism brought them.
but iphones are made in china

>>2868570

Life in medieval europe was one of subsistence farming, they weren't "going to the shops" or any other what have you. "buying" and "selling" would be more along the lines of "oh this harvest has completely spoiled so i will exchange skins for enough grain to survive

>>2869787
There was still a defined merchant class, especially after 1000 AD when Europe started to rebound strongly.

Where do you think the Hanseatic League and the Italian merchant states came from?

>>2865034
"Oh shit guys, I forgot about human nature" - Karl Marx

File: 1494594644648.jpg (73KB, 644x598px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 644x598px

>>2869682

>soviet structure = good, very efficient

>>2869809

rebuke me then: what was wrong with the soviets?

>>2869815

Well, for starters, they sent 6000 people to an island with no food and they had to eat each other to survive. That's pretty messed up. The USSR was so shitty they had to build a double-wall with barbed wire, landmines, and machine gun turrets just to stop people from moving somewhere else.

File: 4f83cde90bd51e0c197758cbf470790e30d3fae0.jpg (91KB, 610x584px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 610x584px

>>2865028

Depends on the extent on HOW it works and what type of communism is being practiced. Communism has many interpretations, from anarcho-communism, Marxist-Leninist, Luxemburgism, Stalinism etc.

People say it may not work due to the fact that it didn't achieve the goals set out by Karl Marx, though most communist movements during the 20th century were Marxist- Leninist, as opposed to being Marxist.

Others would say it's due to the death toll caused by Marxist-Leninism, and that centralised planning caused faults in the economy and allowed corrupt leaders to rule over their territories with an iron fist. Combine that with fear of punishment (due to people fearing their leaders and lying to them), and Cults of personality, as seen in cases like Mao's china, centralised planning and the state controlling the means of production as opposed to the workers, can lead to the people suffering en masse.

However, if we were to look at places like Tito's Yugoslavia, you would see that there was an element of progress, albeit they fell for the Neo-Liberalism meme, and after Tito died, ethnic tensions rose and people started killing eachother.

As much as I view the USSR with disgust, it didn't suffer from the great depression as heavily.

Anarchist- Catalonia could (to some) be considered an anarcho-communist territory, albeit each anarchist territory had their own forms of function, and while it could be argued that health care, education, and production improved under catalonia, it didn't entirely achieve the communism that Marx envisioned. Socialism, yes, but not communism.

I could argue that Thomas Sankara did some pretty amazing shit for his country, but one of the main criticisms of his brand of communism is that he too was a bit too authoritarian, and gave into show trials etc.

I wouldn't say that communism has ALWAYS been a failure, but it is highly volatile, especially given the types of communism which people embrace.

>>2865262
Animal Farm is a direct allegory of the Bolshevik Revolution.

>>2869787
>oh this harvest has completely spoiled so i will exchange skins for enough grain to survive
There was always a merchant and city class, and even so this low level bartering is still a capitalistic system. So long as a person has goods and exchanges those goods for other goods and services, whether it be through the intermediary of money or directly through barter, a transaction has taken place under capitalistic principles.