Capitalism breeds communism

Yup, capitalism is totally fucked. Ever go on chaturbate or MFC and see how much those girls make? Go on right now and I guarantee there are several girls making at least the equivalent of 2k USD tonight. There are a bunch of girls on MFC that make close to a million USD per year.

A lot of these girls live in Colombia or Russia too, so the beta men that subsidize these whores are making them mini-oligarchs in their own countries.

There is one girl in Mexico that makes about ~800k USD a year and has a burgeoning real estate empire. She is 21 years old and shows her pussy on cam a few hours a day a few days a week.

The rest of us will be wage slaves the rest of our lives.

Only under capitalism would such a ridiculous allocation of resources occur.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZdhfVDqJnE

File: textgram_1392062780.png (298KB, 612x612px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 612x612px

>>129524256

>>129525499
True, but why isn't anyone working to stop it? I think we can all agree that capitalism brings top degeneracy, so why doesn't /pol/ support comunist or socialist candidates and policy?

>>129525623
Not gonna watch all that shit by you, but Hitler is a good example of what capitalism breeds. What truly irked Hitler was the fact that so many jews got so rich by financially exploiting the german workers. Those big bank jews were actual fucking degenerates who had not even a cubic milimetre of goodness in their rotten little hearts, and nothing was lost when they were gassed. I mean, even the now revered Anne Frank hid in a fucking factory her Burgeoise dad fucking owned.

That said, Hitler completely fuck up by targetting even common jews. While it is arguable if common jews also lack souls, I think that leaving common jews alive would not cause trouble. You only had to get rid of the Burgeoise jews who fucked the economy.

>>129524256
I do agree that there should be an inheritance tax, especially for the super-rich. However, I would not take away all inheritances, as passing on your wealth to your loved ones is one incentive to work. It's a tradeoff- the more inheritance you tax, the more you reduce the incentive to work.

>>129526100
It would be an interesting discussion to have how can we eliminate other unearned advantages besides being born in a wealthy family.

For example, how do we elimate the unearned advantages of being a female or being sexually attractive? Being an attractive female is basically a license to print money. How do we eliminate that?

>>129526384
Well, I don't think a tax is the best solution. The only way we can get rid of communism's appeal is by making sure that even poor people be able to achieve the highest ranks at more consistent rates.

The main problem we have is that 99.9% of people who are born with rich parents, end up being rich themselves. Similarly, 99.9% of people who are born with poor parents end up poor themselves.

This has to stop, because poor people see this and think that they only thing they could have done better was being born to richer parents.

We need to create a system in which it is easier for poor people to become rich, and easier for rich people to become literal dirt tier poor.

One way to achieve this is by making laws more strict for rich people. Make it so that if you or your family are worth more than 5 million dollars, every crime you commit costs you 10 years in jail and 3 million dollars (and these last 3 million should scale up with the wealth of the rich person. For example, if the person is worth a billion then this fine should be like 500 million). This way rich peole would have no choice but become the most moral people in society.

>>129526848
>For example, how do we elimate the unearned advantages of being a female or being sexually attractive? Being an attractive female is basically a license to print money. How do we eliminate that?

Similar to what I explained here >>129526997

We make laws that make it easier to succeed if you are male and/or ugly. And harder to succeed if you are family and/or pretty. This can be the same as I described. If you have female privilege or beauty privilege, your crimes cost you more. Here I say that a mandatory minimum of 10 years for ANY crime should do the job. And the government should deduct 50% of your earnings.

>>129525774
Then what alternative exist?

The literal only other system is a mix of communism and capitalism which already exists as democratic socialism.

>>129526100
I'm literally up for NatSoc by a different name. I don't like it being so conservative. In 40's it was revolutionary and modernist. I don't get why we should drift from that. Being socially conservative is great but you still shouldn't be close minded about everything. Hitler was one of a kind person. You would struggle to find someone so dedicated and uncorruptable.

File: 1492226838614.jpg (141KB, 700x679px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 700x679px

>>129526997
getting rid of the privileges of the wealthy would be violating their private property rights something they will never permit.

remember capitalism is a class structure.

Not a structure that has a classes and one can choose their class and move about in it
but
a structure where one class oppresses another the goal of those in power is to shrink and consolidate their class

File: 1497212774945.png (86KB, 800x900px)

86KB, 800x900px

>>129527699
Good goy

>>129526384
I think there should be an inheritance tax of some sort, after all, the wealthy benefit disproportionately from the government. They benefit by having a workforce educated by public schools, their goods transported on public roads, their homes protected by publicly funded police and their wealth protected by the publicly funded SEC, and a publicly funded military that has allowed this country to exist as it does.

When Obama said to rich folks "you didn't build that," he was right.

>>129524256
Communism breeds fascism. Fascism breeds capitalism.

>>129527699
>getting rid of the privileges of the wealthy would be violating their private property rights something they will never permit.

Exactly. That is why we actually need a restart. No one who is rich today would ever allow us to take their wealth. We need a small revolution. One revolution that gets rid of everyone who is wealthy and would have interest in perpetuating the status quo. If they give us their wealth willingly then so be it, but if they resist then we have to kill them. Rich people will never allow us to change the structure of the world, because they are the winners right now.

Then, after we re-start the world, no one would really bother if we make anti-millionaire laws. Because no one would be a millionaire. Everyone would see those laws as beneficial (and they are) and they wouldn't be opposed. Then in the long run we will see that we would live in a society with 10% poor, 80% middle class and 10% upper middle class. And that is how it should be.

At the end of the day, I don't hate rich people. Heck, I think that even millionaires are okay. The problem really comes when a single person, family or group becomes so powerful that they can literally buy politicians. No one should be so rich that they can buy politicians. That is why we have to cap wealth.

Now, capping wealth by saying "you can't have more than this amount" is the wrong way of going about it. We have to design an economic system in which you can work hard and earn a lot of money, but never too much.

This means, no monopolies and primarily that power has to be shared very widely. No one should hold too much power, even in their own private business.

And of course, laws that make it so that most rich people are moral, intelligent and wise. And not corrupt degenerates like we have today.

>>129528172
no it doesn't. Capitalists join communists and together they destroy NatSoc because it actually works.

>>129524256
You're correct which is why in the past there was always religion, telling poorfags they deserve to be where they are.

File: 1483944697573.png (1MB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1500px

>>129524256

>>129528875
Communism is the weak man.

>>129528281
capitalist don't have problems with NatSoc, the let fascist Spain exists forever
nor do they have a problem with theocracies They love Saudi Arabia

Germany was destroyed because Hitler was land greedy

File: 1484436459199.png (225KB, 284x284px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 284x284px

>>129529068
You call this weak

>>129529068
Oh really? I'd like to see you hold Stalingrad against the Nazis. Communism is a highly effective wartime system.

>>129524256
Economics are a 20th century debate, with automation and AI traditional labor will be forever changed soon.

All that is left is social and cultural politics, and of course WW3.

Plebs are pretty much fucked, we are on the dawn of a new feudal dark age where peasants will simply be subject to select few elites who will control all resources.

File: main-qimg-4e1d1e7b2b58712ac5f4431ef9d6e9e1-c.jpg (50KB, 564x423px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 564x423px

>>129527451
National socialism

>>129529774
this was supposed to have happened a century ago but the domino chain of commie revolutions in the East have made the Western 1% actually let up and give great benefits to the lower classes so there wouldn't be a copycat chimpout

File: imperium pigeon.jpg (18KB, 720x272px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 720x272px

>>129529263
Which is why wartime communism under Alexei Rykov depressed heavy+light industry down to 15% of Imperial Russia by 1922. Then the famine of 1921 occurred.

The monarchy was better.

Also, rich people are doing well, so they should be brought down? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't commies try to make everyone richer?

Just envious haters if you ask me.

File: 1497214433947.jpg (66KB, 500x420px)

66KB, 500x420px

>>129524256
capitalism I think you mean corporatism

>>129529263
Yeah right, that's why they had only 2 guns for a dozen guys, one for the lead man, until he got killed. Then the next man picked up the gun, the second gun was held by an officer in the back who shot any soldier that got out of line.

The Commies only beat Hitler and the Nazis because the Jews in America chose to support them and send the supplies that the commies couldn't produce themselves.

>>129530080
Capitalism is a system of cost-profit optimization. No shit the corporations drown out everything else. they're solvent, fast, diversified systems in comparison to small businesses

>>129530061
>Implying a Communist revolution will save us

If people are starved to death then yes, there will be an uprising , but anything short of that I doubt will stir the Normies masses to give a shit. VR and chikin tendies is their future.

File: 1486944127892a.jpg (129KB, 445x489px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 445x489px

>>129524256

>poor people turn to communism because capitalism is unfair
>it's not rich kids turning to communism because they get a shit liberal arts education telling them that capitalism is "unfair"

>>129530699
Also, if the people were starved and forced to rise up, I wouldn't consider that a revolution but merely a primal reaction. Much of communism is primevil, carnal, and uncivilized, take shit from people or die trying to burn it down.

>>129524256

Sitting around in your government produced underpants doing jack shit but not feeling pathetic anymore because it's mandated that everybody sucks as much as you do is not a good system of government. Capitalism isn't perfect but if you think all rich people are corrupt immoral assholes who didn't work for anything then you're mentally retarded and likely have absolutely no experience with the world of business and don't personally know or know anything about the group of people's you're painting in such a way.

Or maybe Panama really sucks cock.

File: Fully Costed Platform.png (26KB, 307x320px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 307x320px

>>129524256
Totalitarian Socialism is NOT Communism, friend.

Communism is a hypothetical concept for a society comprised of independent, self-sufficient workers' communes, which is obviously impossible to implement as a Stateless society is an oxymoron.

Every "Communist" government in history has been a variation of Totalitarian Socialist.

>>129530699
i never said it will. the countries that had successful revolutions were all fucked. it's everyone else who benefitted

>>129524256
Rather than prevent them from inheriting power, why not just overthrow capitalism and prevent communism?

Thousands of years ago, we lived mutually with our environment. If we depopulated our local sources of food, then we would depopulate. To curb depopulation, and keep the local animal and plant populations up, we became sexually repressive. We developed a culture of sexual repression, patriarchy, hierarchy, and so on; but it was a moral society. We trusted one another, and if we wanted something, we took respectfully and gave back generously.

With the agricultural revolution, the people who owned the farms realized they could keep people working if they kept food hostage. Food was stored, and it would parish, leading to a surplus. A sustainable surplus required more workers, and that required more farming. Farming became more advanced, with better tools, because the lords in charge of the farms would make the workers build better tools.

Trade itself isn't an act of trust. Trade is collateral. What do two different groups do? They trade. They don't give and take freely; they trade.

Do you know what politics is?
It's compromise between different groups, like trade. A man owns an apple tree, and gives to his family; but to those in the polity who aren't his family, he's expected to trade and give tax (free apples) to the government (the source of the polity).

Political correctness is just "Compromising morals". We're expected to treat blacks and women like entitled babies, because white people were historically advantaged.

The whole system is connected. Politics and trade go hand-in-hand, and they breed capitalism, communism, social justice, political correctness, then balkanization.

Overthrow it, and the world is fixed.

File: Apply Yourself.jpg (27KB, 620x350px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 620x350px

>>129531120
>Every "Communist" government in history has been a variation of Totalitarian Socialist.

It always goes to shit the moment the "workers councils" find out they can vote to work less, and you have to motivate them with a machine gun.

File: Just as Nature Intended.png (277KB, 728x522px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 728x522px

>>129531480
Any system that fails to recognize that people will only be motivated to work for their own gain will fail, as it fails to harness the predatory acquisitive energy that motivates any living organism that seeks to survive and prosper materially.

File: natsoc in one image.jpg (3MB, 1920x1950px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1950px

>>129529921
>capitalism sux
>so does communism
>HEY I KNOW LET'S TRY THE SYSTEM THAT GOT GERMANY TURNED INTO A PARKING LOT AWW YEEEAAAAHHH

You literally cannot think.

>>129530926
Starved people rarely revolt. It's when people gain a bit of foothold that they revolt. if you look back at history, slave revolts were rare and not sizeable. 1st and 2nd gen freed slaves also tended to be obedient to whatever system they were familiar with. it's the generations that came after, the once who grew up in relative freedom and dignity that started all the major chimpouts

File: 1497210528507.png (305KB, 2550x3300px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 2550x3300px

There's a very well established pattern in these kinds of threads

>OP bitches about capitalism
>anons say "communism a shit"
>some fag asks for a third alternative
>some nazi friend quotes hitler
>the three groups jerky each other off until the thread dies

>>129531322
>Thousands of years ago, we lived mutually with our environment. If we depopulated our local sources of food, then we would depopulate. To curb depopulation, and keep the local animal and plant populations up, we became sexually repressive. We developed a culture of sexual repression, patriarchy, hierarchy, and so on; but it was a moral society. We trusted one another, and if we wanted something, we took respectfully and gave back generously.

It is true that if we did this we would solve all of our current problems, but we would just bring new ones. Living like that is shit. I think that we can all agree that having technology and other resources is good.

We don't need to overthrow capitalism or communism. We need to patch it. We need to find a way for capitalism to be fair, at least at the beginning. I think that if everyone starts equally then no one can complain. I want everyone, both losers and winners, to think that they had a chance of becoming a powerful person. And specially I want losers to see the winners and think "the only reason they won was because they worked harder and are more talented. Now I will support them earnestly, because they work hard to secure the security of our nation".

That is all. I want rich people to be our best people, not our most degenerate people.

File: bs ometer.jpg (14KB, 524x257px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 524x257px

>>129531120
Why do commies keep interpreting "small government" in the original idea of communism. It's right there in the manifesto. Essentially, give all power to the government. In fact, the versions of communism we historically have seen are LESS intrusive than originally designed.

Don't get me started on Marx's view of "racial trash".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueyJlEaYUzU&t=5s&list=WL&index=12

Skip to about 3 min for the juicy part.
>>129531480
And basically this.

File: 1234291_1419972724897096_1684592790_n.jpg (6KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 225x225px

>>129531658
It wasn't even the system, it's the result of going up against the three most powerful countries in the world. I'm not even trying to defend national socialism, but if anything they had an interstate and rapid growth in the middle of a deep depression WHILE in debt to France. FFS, you're the last person that needs to be accusing anyone of not thinking.

>>129531785
having technology is great but we absolutely need to depopulate. automation will supposedly bring "post-scarcity" but natural resources will be depleted at light speed
if there isn't a controlled way to cull and stop breeding, there will be WMD wars

File: 1457240126850.gif (2MB, 1247x760px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1247x760px

>>129531322
>With the agricultural revolution, the people who owned the farms realized they could keep people working if they kept food hostage.
>farmers are the societal "final boss"

When the fuck did this happen, and what other nonsense are they teaching you in Canadian schools?

>>129531658

Pic related. For all intents and purposes, the Chinese successfully pivoted from Maoism to National Socialism, and they're doing quite well...

>>129532053
Automation is a meme though. Mass automation will happen, many workers will be displaced, they will form the next communist revolution and then destroy our modern system of capitalism.

Automation is simply the next trigger that switches from capitalism to communism. We've had those triggers before, and after that we will have a next trigger that switches us back to capitalism.

For political purposes we don't have to worry about automation. Mass automation will last at most for 2 years before it is overthrown by workers. And when capitalism is overthrown, we will switch to communism and as it has been said before, communism is just the other side of the same coin.

In Cuba, while the people starved, Castro was a fucking Bourgeois. So the same problem we are discussing today will remain after the change is triggered. We need a patch.

>>129532332
China does not practice NatSoc, not even remotely. It's a Maoist worshipping capitalist dictatorship. There's "free" medcare (you pay extra for everything if you don't want to get dirty needles etc) but that's about it. There are no gibs. There is also no Nationalism. China is pretty homogeneous but that's because no one wants to live there

>>129532638
How do you "overthrow" technology? Automation is already happening everywhere. It's coming whether one country wants it or not (because others will implement it). And I can guarantee you, us Westerners would rather see a robot take our job then a spic or a chink.

>>129532642
Extreme nationalism, I'd argue. In Hong Kong, the Chinese put a quota up which allows the Han mainlanders to come in and inundate the increasing minority of Hong Kongers. Hong Kongers have to go through a difficult process to settle across China-and intentionally-they can never become a minority in any area.

The only reason why capitalism may lead to communism is how greatly and quickly it generates wealth, which future generations inherit unlike in any other systems. With inherited wealth they cant appreciate work put into it and retarded ideas come to their minds.

Unrestricted Capitalism = Inevitable collapse

Corporations influence the world governments too much and convince politicians we vote in to losen the rules so much that they essentially have free reign to drain the economy dry then move onto another nation to take all its wealth and rape its resources.

Sure they create jobs but don't pay them to do so as they'll just take your money and use it to set up shop in a more profitable country resulting in a net loss of jobs and waste of tax money.

The only way to fix the system is to boot out all lobbyists, support the growth of competing companies, more oversight, closing loopholes which let companies hoard trillions of tax dollars they evade paying, ect.

Basically we need more restrictions not less to keep the global economy from eventually imploding.

>>129524256
>t.pinche puto culero
Sheeeeeiiitttt muhfuckah
>not still living with your parents till 22
While⬇
>working forklift in between those years saving $60k in four years
>becoming a long haul trucker at 23 starting at $48k a year
>doing that shit til 31 (me now) and getting $72k (various endorsements) for just 8 months of work
>being fucking frugal, saving, becoming a direct shareholder in various companies and having a diverse portfolio (including crytpo coins) since 5 years ago
>not also growing 14-20 plants a year since 20 (2006), earning an additional $20-35k a year in profit selling it at a reduced price to my larger competitors (legit [SoCal])
No mames wey...
All commies are either lazy, lack discipline, lack foresight, lack delayed gratification, accucumilate debt like flies on shit and other reasons.
>b-but I want to p-pursue muh passionz N sheeeeiiiit
>b-but I love the c-city life and being a c-cosmopolitan
>b-but muh college d-degree muhfugguh
>b-but the bourgeoise is taking from me!!!
Fuck those dumbfucks
>going to college for a useless degree
>living the easy, slacker life
>living in cities instead of cheaper places
It is absolutely possible to live well off and be financially secured; it's just not easy, might require doing shit that has nothing to do with your passions or talents and ya might need to relocate far from home.
>tfw earned equivalent in financial gains as they did in student debt around the same time period
wew lad, what the fuck is debt? Oh! That shit where I owe just about $200ish dollars that I'll balance in less than a week!?

>>129532862
What does HK have to do with it?
Imagine being Hong Kong.
Imagine have lived in a clean comfy 1st world country all throughout the Cold War.
Imagine the Brits handing you over to a literal shithole, a dictatorial and aggressive one at that in the 90s.

File: IMG_0320.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>129524256
2/3rds of the worlds billionaires grew up poor

>>129533202
It's how the Chinese rule over Hong Kong. It exemplifies Chinese nationalism in two ways:
1) Rather than viewing Hong Kongers as neutral and compatible entities, the Chinese government is pushing it's own people in order to solidify loyalty and blood bonds to the mainland.
2) Conscientiousness of social cohesion-something the left utterly objects to.

They're going full natsoc m8.

>>129526997
That statistic is laughable the picture I showed is from America which isn't even close to the most economically mobile first world country

>>129531658

This was less to do with NatSoc and more to do with the fact the Hitler was a pants on the head retard from a grand strategy standpoint. That's why you don't let artist run things.

>>129533524
You either have an IQ in the double digits or are very drunk. Abusing a colony has nothing to do with NatSoc

>>129533425
Well don't expect that to be possible when the rich wants to drain tax dollars from public education and funnel it into private schools poor families can't afford to send their kids to, to say nothing of college or university afterwards.

People today who are born to poor families will likely die in a poor family unless shit changes, namely accessibility to education.

Free online courses are already available online but some I've tried are ass, they teach you one thing then move on not ever revisiting it which is actually a pretty lousy way to teach anything. Even so its a start.

>>129533765
I literally just showed you that the opposite is true with actual statistics from an actual economics book.

And the reason education is so expensive is because the government subsidizes it

>>129533734
Explain or stfu and gtfo, b/c as far as I can tell the colony is being integrated in a pretty fashy and effective way.

>>129530819
kek, this. Poor people don't hate capitalism, bored, nihilistic middle class white kids "hate" capitalism, the system that allows them to live in peace and comfort, because it works and they're mad at their dads for not being wealthier and so want to be part of le revolution.

>>129524256
No, only the stupid ass totalitarian loving Russians could breed communism.

>>129534128
China has destroyed both the standard of living and the HDI in HK ever since the UK was dumb enough to surrender it. They've integrated them by dragging them down to its own shithole level.

>>129527186
>being this fucking retarded

>>129524256
You are retarded they are both just words.
Sorry but i have to point that out.
It is the first step to the genuine redpill that needs to be taken.

Like an online platform that simply creates the stage, CONTENT is what matters.

America could have spent all of its time going back and forth to the moon and be far more advanced with that if people were incentivised to do so.

What is the product? What mentality do the individuals have to have to achieve that successfully?

>>129532332
>When the fuck did this happen
If you live in an abundant area, you don't need to farm. This is why there are still tribal peoples all over the world today.
If you live in a scarce or seasonal environment, then you may have to rely on farming. When people farmed their own crops, they could eat like kings, provided they knew how to farm. The agricultural revolution is what set tribal farming apart from large-scale farming. Farming was always done in excess after that, giving society a surplus; but people still died of starvation; the surplus wealth went to the capitalists who managed the farms; they could control the prices, the markets, and the population. This is basic history, burger. I learned this in an American school several times. We learned this from Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India, etc.

>>129531785
>I think that we can all agree that having technology and other resources is good
We only want more technology and resources because the system has conditioned us this way.

>We don't need to overthrow capitalism or communism. We need to patch it.
If we have a perfect society like that, and everyone is given everything they need, then their lives have to be controlled.
If we give them nothing, then they will take control of their own lives.

No animal on Earth looks up at the stars. What makes us different?

National socialism basically means socially conservative politics mixed with economically left-wing socialist politics. China is the opposite of that - socially Maoist and economically capitalist.

>>129534463
What separates that from Keynes' digging holes in the morning and filling them in in the afternoon, other than your human colonization cancer?
All you Tories deserve to be chopped up by Islamic death squads.

>>129534619
>economically left wing
Do any of you weebcucks understand the difference between branding and reality?

File: 1397900173713.jpg (6KB, 142x126px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 142x126px

>>129534619
>mixed with economically left-wing socialist politics

Which is why Hitler turned Mercedes, Bayer, Siemens, etc. into state enterprises...

Oh wait, no, he didn't do that at all.

>>129524256
Your issue is with human greed, not capitalism. Communist morons attack the system but not the underlying issue. They fight corporate greed with their own and we end up in a dystopian nightmare like the Soviet Union.

>>129534726
Politics that include an active support net for the citizens you goofy homo (healthcare, education, employment training etc)

>>129524256
it was wonderful before the kikes

whats with the growing capitalism threads on this board? I for one think we should fight this growing communist movement.

>>129534930
Do you also think Ikea is privatized by the Swedish state?

Hitler did provide great support to innovators and entrepreneurs, gave Porsche a German citizenship for example and invested state funds into technological research in collaboration with top engineering companies.

>>129524256
>And that is the real problem. I think if we set up a society in where no one inherits power and everyone has to start at the same level, then no one would complain about capitalism. People would look at the top and see the hardest workers of our society. The most moral, the brightest, the quickest, the wisest.

But the thing is, no one in their sane minds wants to give up their stuff, and in order for that to happen, there needs to be a militant authority to force people to give up their stuff and distribute it.

So that's just gonna create a new class of bureaucrats.

>>129535013
It's not an active support net if it's discriminatory toward or against people. That's liberal, not left.
>>129535196
>corporate welfare
My point exactly.

>>129535196
*nationalized

>>129535280
Liberal isn't really an economic term. Classic liberal is libertarian (anti socialist)

>>129529068
The filthy oppressive capitalists who extort labor are the weak men, ravageding society for personal gain. Communism is just another strong man in hard times. Lenin and Stalin existed as liberators for their people bringing forth economic reform. Hitler was misguided if he was able to realize the issue wasn't with the Just the Jews but the capitalists as a whole he would've been great.

File: 1497232767148.jpg (8KB, 625x625px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 625x625px

>>129535574
>Liberal isn't really an economic term
>anti-socialism isn't economic

Modern liberalism and libertarianism are societal cancers that will lead to their own failure.

File: 1496877080179.png (125KB, 496x468px)

125KB, 496x468px

>>129535889

Big, big, big oversight here is conflating people that get where they are due to merit & voluntarism and those that get there through force & coercion, it needs to be addressed to look at it objectively whether marxists think it's fair or not.

You have a population with workers & producers, entrepreneurs & business owners, investors & thinkers. They get what they have in life through not just hard physical work, but also hard mental work, some work smarter not physically harder, doesn't make it any less effort or an achievement.

On the other side of things you have people that get where they are through leeching off of the productive & moral of society, welfare leeches that refuse to work, corporates that use the state to give them protected monopolies and tax payer funds.

People transferring what they've accomplished to their kids though is literally the biggest reason people created things in the first place, so don't get pissed over your circumstances of birth. Are you going to be a creature of circumstance, complaining that things in life keep happening to you or are you going to be a creator of circumstance & do everything in your power to improve your lot in life, step by step, day by day? Big fuckin difference.

Social mobility from equality of opportunity (equal treatment) has helped far more people than trying to make people equal through unfair treatment. History shows is such a copout but in this case it really does.

>>129535109
Yeah these stupid anti capitalist threads are horrible. If we truly had free market capitalism there would be prosperity as the poor would have equal opportunities to lift themselves up into being well off. The standard of living would improve as things get cheaper overall and new luxury items pop up due to innovation. But we have a welfare state that is crony capitalist and run amok with government interference. Any time the state gets involved there are problems as the wealth of everyone lowers to the poor's instead of lifting up to the rich's. Besides, why is it that on the verge of deprecation of labor due to automation that suddenly retards want to nix the only good economic system that allowed that situation to take place?

>>129524256
Distributism is the answer.

File: 14657785645.jpg (117KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1280x720px

>>129526997
>Punish people more harshly for being successful
that's fucking stupid

File: 1496667167857.jpg (243KB, 730x1290px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 730x1290px

Capitalism leads to communism

>>129524256
Capitalism = chance to improve yourself and climb up the ladder

Communism = someone kicking you off the ladder, killing anyone who even talks about the ladder. Lazy people being rewarded more than hard workers. Nobody wants to work. The state is never abollished, it always ends in corruption or totalitarianism. Stop chasing an idealist pipe dream

>>129543437

Is this a transmission from 1888 or something?

So-called communism only ever happened in backwater countries that had yet to modernize their economies by 1900.

Theory of progression was totally disproven.

Current model that the globalists want is a world market with tons of profit for elite. None of it is anything close to communism.