>Capitalism killed more people than Communism What is a good

>>9197244
Do they have any actual information and not just a statement?

File: images.png (3KB, 89x90px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 89x90px

>>9197244

Something like...

>Measuring the efficacy of an economic system based purely on the number of people it has or hasn't killed is idiotic so please stop talking to me.

Or you could always just tell them how communism only works on paper and they'll walk away from you themselves.

>>9197250
A favourite number seems to be 1.5 - 1.6 billion

They'll often add things like Japanese Imperialism, American Imperialism, British Imperialism, Western slave trade, Israelis killing Palestinians, Somalian Capitalism, Russia before Communism, and relevant to the people within my country; Belgian Congo and Dutch East Indies.

https://maoistrebelnews.com/2012/03/16/1-6-billion-killed-by-capitalism/

wut
>Hurricane Katrina (deliberate faulty construction)
>Khmer Rouge (not communist)
>Children Killed by Preventable Diseases
>Children Killed by Hunger

pre-capitalist events (pre ~1830s) that are included under capitalism
>US Revolutionary War
>Native American Genocide
>African Slave Trade

plus a whole bunch of stuff that can't be attributed to capitalist states or wholly to them like WWII

>>9197265
Communism was a definitive ideology that people were following. To compare that with a mystical 'capitalism' boogeyman that can be whatever you want it to be is the height of dishonesty

>National Socialism killed fewer people than Communism and Capitalism

whoa makes me think and blink

>>9197320
It's because a key point of Marxism is the 'primitive accumulation of wealth'. A lot of early wealth was acquired through plunder and exploitation of colonies.

It makes sense to me.

One did nothing but killing.

>>9197320
>Communism was a definitive ideology
>>9193845
Stop being retarded.

>>9197357
You can’t conceive either Capitalism or Communism outside of the historical occurrence of their actual practice in the real world. To conceive political systems as transcendent ideals, like a blueprint for a society just floating around in the ether until someone picks the one over the other, is to conceive nothing but emptiness and useless abstraction. You cannot ontologize political and economic theory, as it exists, it is practiced; it’s not some stable, unified entity but a practice or a process. Hence why we call both 18th century Britain and 20th century America Capitalist systems, despite their vastly different economies, or the Soviet Union and North Korea both Communist. We can clearly claim one of these more preferable to the other without making the ludicrous claim that the other was fake Capitalism, and the same goes for Communism.

That only leaves practice, in which Communism failed so immensely that most non-Soviet countries became Soviet lapdogs waiting for a handout, until even the Soviet Union fell apart.

>>9197357
Your argument is shit. All of those that you mentioned, aside from the last stupid greentext that is irrelevant, are ideologically connected to marxism and the internationals.

"capitalism" as an ideology may apply to some dedicated objectivists in the latter part of the mid 20th century, but just taking any economic activity that isnt collectivism or has free market or mercantilist tinges and calling it "Capitalism" like some overarching conspiracy is retardation itself.

/lit/ is not a homework board, faggot.

>>9197244
Old age killed more than both combined. Obama killed more people than Jeffry Dahmer. The numbers don't matter, intent does.

>>9197381
Most arguments for the number of people killed by communism are nonsense at best anyway.

File: OccupyPhilly4.png (703KB, 475x637px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 475x637px

>>9197403
indeed, the argument is deeply flawed. People, not ideologies commit crimes. I would suggest that utopian communities in the 19th century united states are more marxist than any 20th century grotesque political creation.

But when neo-marxists pic related refer to monolithic capitalism as adversarial to their ideology (as if some successful small business is "the enemy") it rustles my jimmies. Even Lenin had NEP, and it worked.

>>9197244
There is no argument against it, however I still think conscious genocide is worse than structural poverty and class differences.

>>9197413
What the fuck is on that guy's head in the background?

>>9197420
unwashed hair.

typical of marxists

>>9197413
to call them all capitalism is wrong yes but to do so as a response to "hur dur stalin killed all the people in the world" is fine just because you're already wasting your time talking to that person. i'm kinda of joking about that but not entirely

>>9197428
shampoo is bourgeois comrade

>>9197244
Capitalism doesn't kill people, people kill people. My father, I believe, told me this when I was what, 12?

>>9197244
Bullshit statement, they just take everything that isn't communism, brand it capitalism and say that's the reason why all those people died

>>9197244
It's a dumb non-argument anyway.

>>9197265
Okay, but if you compare only the years communism has been around it's totally the opposite.

Look at Mao's regime and also the horrible and barely known monstrosity that Stalin had done to his own people.

If you look at a per capita death toll of communists and capitalists it probably is several hundred% higher on the communist side. Not even to mention that many of their deaths inflicted were tortures and not simply shooting someone.

>>9197264
>Measuring the efficacy of an economic system based purely on the number of people it has or hasn't killed is idiotic so please stop talking to me.

That's a good start, but I would also include how many BILLIONS people have been brought out of poverty as a result of capitalism vs other economic systems.

>>9198608
This. "Capitalism" and "Communism" are ideologies, they don't kill people of their own accord.

>What is a good argument against this
It's incoherent in the first place, "capitalism" is not a thing.

>My specific, perfect entirely infallible brand of Capitalism has never been tried.

>>9198617
>Look at Mao's regime
chinks had already been dying en masse for centuries pre-mao

>>9197265
Haha.
Let's just add up all killed people in all of human history and measure them to a narrow window in time and place claimed by communists. Good riddance.

>>9197244
Capitalism has killed more people in total because it has been used more throughout history. If communism was common in most societies today it would be the other way around.

It's a basically retarded argument because you can't prove that the amount of people dying somehow makes a situation *more* tragic or whatever, as if tragedy and sorrow is some measurable quantity. To say that one ideology is worse than other because it caused more deaths is both 1) an empirical claim about which you'll never be able to accurately measure the data and 2) implying that x amount of deaths is demonstrably worse than y amount. At what point does a number of deaths increase your tragedy quotient? How much "worse" is 101 deaths compared to 100? It's nonsense.

File: 1407119379594.png (129KB, 724x611px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 724x611px

Human nature kills, not economics.