Communism will win.

>>132609100
Your iPhone won't break when you're fucking taking care of it. Dumbass streetshitter

>>132609100
Pajeet I thought your job was to fix this shit. DO YOUR JOB.

>>132609100
If you don't like the company's practices don't buy their fucking products you retarded street shitter.

>>132609100
Ya but niggers arabs and gooks aren't human

>>132609100
The retardation of the left everyone

>>132609100
If you're spending 700 dollars on a phone, you can afford the extra 100 for a decent case.

Yeah let's see all the smartphones created via communism.

OH WAIT.

Thats not real capitalism

>>132609100
sure it will, just like economic planning made india such a rich and powerful nation, pajeet.

>>132609100
>an indian communist
i wonder if modi has any helicopter related plans lined up

>>132609100

capitalism if the only avenue that employs your smart people and keeps your country afloat Pajeet

>>132609918
And you're not a real anarchist, you fuckwit ancap go kill yourself

File: kim-jong-un-looking-at-arirang-smartphone-2.jpg (240KB, 720x612px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 720x612px

>>132609797
Not sure they have internet connection but Kim is pleased

>>132609100
Y'all are so triggered lmaooooo the right is so easily offended

>>132609100
Communism:
- Get highly unrealistic production quaota for phones from commisar
- produce to few phones -> get no food
- produce to many phones -> you and your family are arrested on grounds of suspicious political activity and shipped to the gulag never to be heard of again
- Not a single phone actually works

File: this is cnn.jpg (390KB, 1023x759px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 1023x759px

>>132609100

>>132610410
*Cough* Imported Chinese parts, and it's also ironically Android, a product of Capitalism *Cough*

people who actually manage to break iPhone screens should be euthanized for the good of the gene pool. I had an iPod Touch for 5 years and an iPhone for 4, and never put a single scratch in either of them

>>132610105
I hate my country lol we're ruled by right wing cucks. Also, not a Sikh so I don't get the "pajeet"

>>132610410
>"The phone appears to run a derivative of the Android operating system."

That's already enough to disqualify it, but in addition

>"the phone may actually be produced in China, and then inspected or completed in North Korea"

File: fr.jpg (19KB, 408x317px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 408x317px

Why do people think communism works when it has been shown to completely fail in every instance it was used?

>>132609100
oh and by the way:
African countries with slave labour -> mostly communist
Asian sweatshops, -> communist
Middle east-> religion based on the actual principle of slavery fiercely defended by the left

>>132609100
And when it looses will it not have been real communism like all the other times it's been tried?

>>132609100
Hhahahahhaha
>india
> >90 percent have mobiles
> <50 percent with toilets

what flag you beeen hiding behing Pooh

>>132610637
muh not real communism
>someone gives you a recipe that he says will make a cake
>follow the recipe to the letter
>it actually makes burned garbage and a broken oven
>obviously my oven was sabotaged by fascists, real cooking has never been tried

>>132610637
Why do people think capitalism works when it hasn't worked for decades now?

>>132609100
If iphones didn't break, then India doesn't get the jobs to respond to the calls!

>>132609100
Uh huh, where is the U.S.S.R now?

File: Bannon.png (3MB, 2048x1409px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1409px

>>132609100

>>132610587
you had a centrally planned economic for the longest time of your history you dingus. that's why your country is an impoverished shithole without toilets. literally shithole. fucking socialism already fucked you up, and you scream for more? kill yourself. capitalism at least gives your people the chance to strife for being a little more than an animal. not that you brown fuckers succeed, but you have the chance.

>>132610474
>WE GOT DEM NOW
>OH FUCK THEY ARE MAKING US LOOK LIKE RETARDS
>LOL LE TROLL MEME
MEME
A lefty street shitter? Well color me fucked.

>>132610744
The phone industry is a big business in Shitdia.
Companies can get $10 parts, slap android, 2gb ram and a shit display onto it and the Pajeets will trade their toilets for phones in an instant.

>>132609100
If communism wins 90% of the world population will die horrifically, wake up and get on the facism train.

File: More-people-reading-news-on-smartphones.jpg (34KB, 565x292px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 565x292px

>>132609100
Hallo?
ish dis de internet?
ai wandt do bai fod for sacrefise to de doilet witt.

>>132610744
loooooool y'all think I'm gonna get upset, when I hate this shithole country myself. Yeah, half the population shits on streets and tracks and beaches, and the government does jackshit for people's welfare.

>>132609918
How is it not? It's brilliant capitalism.
Under capitalism, the free market decides which is the best product due to consumers actually paying for it. What YOU deem "best" is different from others, though; "best" is subjective.

They convinced an entire generation of people that iProducts are better than all other non-iProducts by simply giving them away for free to mainstream celebrities.

It doesn't matter if Android controls 70%+ of the mobile market if that is split between multiple brands like LG, Samsung, Huawei, HTC, Kyocera, etc. - They're all splitting that market share. Apple is the only one with iOS.

Add to that the idea that when you buy an LG or HTC or whatever, you keep the phone (on average) 18-24 months, but Apple phones need replacing more often, and you see the brilliance. They've designed profit right into their engineering through "planned obsolescence". You'll either shell out another few hundred on a phone, or be reduced to using an android like the common folk.

File: lilcommie.gif (906KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 320x240px

>>132609100
meanwhile, with pajeet communism, you at most can set your poo on fire and send poo smoke signals to communicate

>>132609100
What I get from that picture is that niggers, sand-niggers and chinks are incompetent, evil fucks, while liberals should stop using their phones as buttplugs.

I come here ready to rid my graphic location and and show my solidarity with the ANCAPS and teach these reddit refuges about the real world to
see my brothers already doing gods work. Keep it up lads.

>>132610759

How hasnt it worked? Capitalism has brought more people out of poverty than any other system.

>>132610880
hey you got *starvation* all over that perfectly good ancap flag

>>132610880
lol what you smoking? India was never entirely socialist so your points are invalid
Also, remove the ancom flag if you're so keen on defending capitalism you're a fucking disgrace and you should kill yourself

>>132609100
t. John Smith from Microsoft

fun fact, they hang up if you ask them what the actual microsoft building's zip code is

File: IMG_1733.jpg (37KB, 545x365px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 545x365px

>>132609100
Hahahaha nice try shitskin!

>>132609100
Earth is a mineral?

>>132610939

What toilets?

>>132609100
>Communism is better than capitalism.
Capitalism puts the plastic bread on table that communism will take away

>>132609100
You took a pro globalism meme and put capitalism on it.

>>132610637
My favorite is how they claim to be progressives when they've adopted an ancient political thought that has failed over and over for many years

File: 1377783742237.jpg (102KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 600x600px

>>132609100
>buy jews' overpriced rope that's made in china
>get state mandated free rope from jews

decisions, decisions...

File: IMG_1812.jpg (97KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1024x683px

>>132610474
Hahaha when you leave your home do you have to avoid puddles of piss and shit in your disgusting 3rd world country?

>>132609100

Seems like he Africans should be making them, why don't they?

File: jew-rub-hands.gif (3MB, 419x313px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 419x313px

"That'll show those poor!"

"Why are you cheering Fry? You're not rich."

"True. But someday I might be rich, and people like me better watch their step!"

https://youtu.be/K_LvRPX0rGY

this goes a long way to show how brainwashed you are lol. You're ready to pick a fight with an anon on 4chan to defend an economic system which thrives on exploitation, and governments which don't give a rat shit about their citizens. Thanks for proving my point lmao have a good sheep life y'all

>>132609488

Fourth post best post

>>132611428
>get state mandated free rope from jews
Everyone DESERVES to have rope free of charge!

>>132609100
no

>>132609100
The beauty of Capitalism is that you DON'T have to spend your money on an IPhone. You DON'T have to have an IPhone if you don't want to. Communism wouldn't even have IPhones for you to not buy in the first place. And what they would "have", like slave labor Healthcare or Education, is forced on to you regardless if you wanted it or not.

>>132609100
Commies and Capitalists are literally just two sides of the same shekel. Both of them worship the shekel all the same.

>>132609218
Taking care of it is someone else's responsibility in commieland. From each according to his needs to each according to his ability.

>>132610637
It's because they are kids that want the results of being lazy without thinking about the process.

>>132609100
Aren't sweatshops in Communist China though?

>>132609100
and yet people buy them all the time

>>132611255
>>132611202
meh, list said anarchist. that's what i am.

>>132611255
communism is entirely incompatible with anarchism. it's on polar opposites of the authority-spectrum, mein freund.
this flag represents anti-indian-genocidal-anarchism.

>>132609100

>Chinese slave labor is Capitalism
>Communist government of China

Why are commies so contradicting?

>>132612113
China isn't communist, get your facts right

>>132612094
Man you're really a disgrace. Please do some reading before commenting, thanks

>>132609100
When?

>>132612392
what up? y so many indians on /pol/? sweat shop closed? go back to the factory, my country needs shoes.

>>132609218
Pretty sure you're the type of guy who also thinks climate change is a hoax

>>132612238
China has cities that are designated trade zones and not communist, but outside of those the government owns the businesses and you aren't allowed to even have your own farm, it is illegal to farm because food production belongs to "the people" (government)

>>132612854
>Why should I respond to your argument? You probably think something unrelated so there!

>>132612820
Did your fragile redneck American ego get hurt now? Do you want your mommys milk to make you feel better? Or do you want your sister to blow you?

>>132613025
You're extremely naive if you think capitalism and climate change aren't related lol

Communism

Where no one has a phone and everyone works under unsafe slave conditions, even if you dont want to

>>132609100
Meanwhile, with communism you just don't get a phone.

>>132610759
Capitalism has always worked because of haves vs have nots.
>I have toilet
>You have...
Wait, what good comes from India?

File: homeless1.jpg (230KB, 1484x1112px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1484x1112px

Capitalism has never worked

>>132613080
>Did your fragile redneck American ego get hurt now?

I wish I was american. Greatest country in the world, pajeet. Based on freedom and capitalism. And somehow, for some weird reason, although the US is far younger than india, it's so much more civilised and rich. I wonder y. ... Is it toilets? Or the people? Who knows ...

File: socialist-cycle.jpg (91KB, 500x479px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x479px

>>132609100
so many historic examples of the commie's faggotry & failure, yet they still wana b fags, just like u OP

File: pepperspray.jpg (54KB, 619x386px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 619x386px

>>132613421
Capitalism has never worked

>>132613421
>be homeless in capitalistic society
>find a nice bridge to live under
>Set up tent city at major crossroads
>perfect position to create a marketplace where people traveling on the major byways can buy and sell their goods
>cant because government regulations
>remain poor.

>>132609100
POO

>>132611290
>burger education

>>132613556
>>perfect position to create a marketplace where people traveling on the major byways can buy and sell their goods
>>cant because government regulations
>>remain poor.

>capitalism fails
>"real capitalism has never been tried"

>>132609100
That's just the consumer not giving a shit about the prosess behind the gods he/she consumes.

>>132613491
>communism is always under constant attack from most powerful nation on earth
>it always fails

IT MUST BE THE IDEOLOGY!.

Dont get me wrong, i dont favor communism, but it would work out ok if left alone.

File: 68907869-cityscape-of-warsaw-district-praga.jpg (27KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 450x300px

>>132613421
ignoring all the wealth it takes to create all the things in the background.

Maybe it's just those faggots in the tents never worked.

>"CAPITALISM IS INEFFICIENT"
>still loses

kek, try again faggot, see what happens

File: socialism-equally-poor.jpg (112KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 500x500px

>>132613540
>>132613491
>>132613421
and its not like where in capitalism, theres a minor percentage of the population that r losers; no with communism the entire population consists of fags & losers, all of em

>>132613715
no, it wouldn't. there's a gazillion economists who gave perfect reasons why it can not work.

here's one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

>>132609100
>slave labor
not capitalism.

>Imperialism
not capitalism.

>sweatshops.
Yes! That is capitalism. However, I would argue that sweatshops are a good thing. Imagine if all those sweatshops closed down. Workers would probably be disappointed, right? After all, they voluntarily decided to work there, so it their current situation must be dire enough to warrant it.

>planned obsolescence.
Yes! This is also capitalism, and I would say it is the only good argument against capitalism so far. Planned obsolescence is pretty hard to regulate or guard against.... my only hope is that with the information age consumers will be more informed on the flaws of their devices and that better competitors will emerge.

>>132613755
>Maybe it's just those faggots in the tents never worked.
The natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism.
>>132613804
>>"CAPITALISM IS INEFFICIENT"
Said no one ever.
Capitalism is great at creating lots of wealth.
It is terrible at creating the wellbeing of people.
If the wellbeing of the markets is more important to you than the wellbeing of the people, you have lost sight of any kind of ethics.

>"communism only works in theory, not in practice"
>Capitalism is destroying people's lives which the public isn't aware of and it literally thrives on exploitation of labour to maximise profits of people who aren't even doing the actual work. In addition to that, it's destroying the environment and is not sustainable.
>"BUT THATS NOT REAL CAPITALISM BECAUSE IN A PERFECT CAPITALIST SYSTEM--"
>So you mean capitalism works in theory but isn't really working in practice right now?

>>132614031
>and its not like where in capitalism, theres a minor percentage of the population that r losers;
fascism is the natural conclusion fo capitalsim

>>132609100
>capitalism is inefficient
>communism is so inefficient, it always results in mass famines

>>132614248
The argument is that capitalism isn't perfect and thst in a perfect capitalist society - positive X could happen.

In communism, the theory doesn't even begin to function properly, and always leads to economic collapse and an authoritarian government.

>>132614285
Capitalism is very efficient at creating wealth. It is terrible at creating wellbeing of people.
Is the wellbeing of the markets more important to you than the wellbeing of people?

>>132609100
The energy is NOT acquired through imperialism, the OPEC countries sold concessions to the seven sisters oil companies. Opinion discarded.

File: 1498848275629.png (436KB, 1006x935px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1006x935px

>>132611817
In commie land, the most form of telecommunication you will be allowed to have would be one of those phones the size of your foot.

Get the fuck out of my country you communist shit.

>>132614184
>The natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism
Gee, have you studied history? Every socialist system (or better known as "NOT REAL COMMUNISM") has failed because of the people in power that claim everything is of the state.

>>132609218
the batteries and other components are designed to either die or become obsolete

hence the industry's move to non replaceable components and non expandable memory

File: communism sucks ass.jpg (194KB, 1658x692px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1658x692px

>>132609100
When? Not any time in the last 170 years.

File: 2y7642d8j3014z.jpg (133KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 500x500px

>>132613715
so because commie countries cant compete with a superior ideology(capitalism), somehow makes it the superior ideology's fault that the inferior 1 fails under its own systems because they couldnt be >independent<; post 18th century

>>132614184
fascism is a left wing ideology created by an ex socialist party member and perfected by the national SOCIALISTS. At the end of the war it was very visible that the collectivist thought of 'the economy works for the state' resulted in nationalisation of most companies in both italy and germany.
Fascism is another non-marxian take on socialism and has otherwise nothing to do with being on the right.
It's neither conservative, nor is about individualism, nor traditionalist. And don't tell me nationalism is inherently right-wing. It isn't. You can find nationalist policies easily with even radical leftist ideologues. Fuck off, commie.

>>132614515
I make no excuses for authoritarian communist regimes.
I'm saying that any discussion about capitalism ends with capitalists arguing that certain groups of people deserve to suffer. i.e. fascism.

>>132609100
Darwin Poster Award

>>132613421
From personal experience, being homeless is literally a choice. It shows just how much of a shit human being you are and how cancerous you truly are. You are literally so terrible to other people they won't let you sleep on the couch or camp out in the backyard. Being homeless is a choice.

>Recovered alcoholic and heroin user
>former homeless

>>132614678
see >>132614730

>>132614052
>economists
never listen to an economist.
the economy is based on public psychology, there are no rules that govern the economy beyond what people feel.

This is why hitler turned germany around, he just made them believe it would work, and it did.

File: communism problem.gif (29KB, 468x478px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 468x478px

>>132613715
>it would work out ok if left alone.

You're saying communism would work out ok if we annihilated every alternative ideology so that communism was literally the only option available. Then people wouldn't notice the shortages, mass starvation, rampant corruption or complete failure of central planning.

You are clearly a smart motherfucker whom we should all take very seriously.

>>132614772
>It shows just how much of a shit human being you are and how cancerous you truly are.
the natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism

>>132609100
First, you can't actually make a truly communist state going by the socialism path because the part where the government actually leaves the power will never, ever, EVER happen, even if the government is created with a "time bomb" to dissolve itself in communes after x years.

Secondly, even if that somehow happens and you get your communes and shit, as soon commune A discover they have no water but a lot of coal, and commune B discovers they have a lot of water but no coal, they will do the capitalist thing, and i don't give 30 years to your pretty communes to turn into literal corporations with silly communist names.

Also those are the effects of an non competitive "capitalist" market, where you have the right to buy the death of your competition and/or can crush it with never ending patents and copyrights.
True competitive capitalism would be able to stop most of this shit.

File: 20170704_173343.png (992KB, 1069x1084px) Image search: [Google]

992KB, 1069x1084px

>>132609100
You say that but my new Samsung s8 is pretty great desu

>>132614515
This, so much this.

File: sadfdsfasdf.png (301KB, 570x506px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 570x506px

>>132609100
Use a communist phone instead then:

File: 1498972762384.jpg (57KB, 680x363px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 680x363px

>>132610526

>>132609100
Don't you have a loo to poo in or a street to shit on, Pajeet?

>>132609100
that image represent both capitalism and communsim.

>>132609100
>denying the involvement of chinese communists is this meme
>being this gay
we're gonna need a bigger helicopter

File: iu121.jpg (23KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 569x428px

>>132614482
your arguments are not against capitalism it is against corporations, ban soulless monstress corporations and the central banks. Do not mistake corpratisuim and capitalism.

Remember the cooperation was a solution of the nobles to maintain power after the labor shortage as a result of the black plagues. They are nation states without boarders or loyalty to nations or peoples, modeled on English and Dutch monarchy of rule by consent, consent of the barons.

>>132612854
I've had an iPhone 6 since around when it was released. Overall, it was a good investment. Because I'm not a stupid ape the phone is still in perfect condition. I could sell it as new and no one would know any better.

Fuck off phone-breaking monkey.

File: socialists-socialist-countries.jpg (73KB, 500x479px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x479px

>>132614908
in capitalism evry1 can b King if u truly r 1, we have no need for fascism; however in commie countries only the 'elite' get 2 b King

>the natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism
dont accuse me of the sin u commit to, its the other way around, brother

>>132613196
Shit ton of natural resources were used in the former Soviet Union, the only thing that can stop it is Nuclear energy.
Also it's rich to hear about the environment from an indian when you dump all your fecal matter in the oceans and are trying your best to destroy them.

>>132614184
>The natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism.

Can you cite a single example if this happening anywhere?

>>132614649
>cant compete

>first man in space
>probes on fucking venus
>the only people ever to make nuclear submarines that were on par with the US'
>biggest bombs ever made
>revolutionize bacteriophage treatment in the fucking 60s while we are now dooming ourselves by our reliance on antibiotics
>domesticate cute foxes
>invent the best video game ever made

the USSR was working amazingly well. The thing you have to understand is that they were russians. Do you realize how fucking good a system has to be to make russia a competent global power?

I mean look at them, everything they do is a disaster but with communism they were competitive.

>>132615226

Reminder that there are socialist sucessful countries. Healthcare, education, living standards and culture checkmate.

>>132614876
Im saying if we stopped doing things like attacking little countries that asked the USSR for help because the US wouldn't help them, once they started receiving USSR help, causing gigantic fucking wars.

If the US, the UK, or any proper country tried communism it would have worked just as well.

The issue with the USSR was non anglos were in charge, not the system. Any system can be made to work with the right people working on it.

>>132615226
>>132615246
any discussion about capitalism ends with capitalists arguing that certain groups of people deserve to suffer. i.e. fascism.
>>132615201
I have no idea what point you are trying to make

File: sykkstktyklk.png (79KB, 899x513px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 899x513px

>>132613196
Climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon. Anthropogenic climate change is a psuedoscientific mythology promoted for political reasons. And blaming capitalism for climate change is propaganda that only works on mentally retarded toddlers.

>>132615370
Name one that isn't white and has a corporate tax higher than 35%

>>132609100

just buy phones less often. I still have a 2012 Samsung and I see no point in changing it.

File: 614ksaj84n26s.jpg (46KB, 500x312px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x312px

>>132615370
a merit-based society also has those successes my dude; & usually @ a higher quality of service

File: 1499330761970.jpg (51KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 420x420px

>>132615615

Tfw you only can critizice skin colour and tax fees for useful welfare

>>132615278
To elaborate on this

Prior to communism: Russian navy sinks itself
After communism: Russian navy is second strongest navy, only occasionally sinks small parts of itself, main issue was common russians not being able to do the same kind of maintenance disciplined anglos are capable of.

Post communism: VISIBLE FROM FUCKING SPACE

You can not refute this evidence.

>>132610637
>>132610753
>>132611408
It's because you're all idiot children on both sides of the spectrum.

Neither you, nor progressives even know what socialism is, thanks to retards like bernie murking the water.

Hint retard, Capitalism is needed for Communism.

No system work without leaving lots of people on the sideway.
Why ?
Because there are too many of us, and we are shitbags.

High level technical society could only exist with selected breeding and a strong limitation of population, around one billion.

>>132615587
Dude. Anthropogenic climate change has been talked about for 50+ years. The science is older than the politics surrounding it.

>>132609100
Isn't this mostly free trade not capitalism specifically?

>>132615278
>the only people ever to make nuclear submarines that were on par with the US'

Are you a fucking moron or what? The USSR stole everything but their rocket program (which they stole from the germans) from the United States.

They didn't even have indoor plumbing before WWII and you think they developed all that shit because muh communism?

That's fucking delusional.

File: klgsq64Fjij.jpg (117KB, 500x381px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 500x381px

>>132615488
>any discussion about capitalism ends with capitalists arguing that certain groups of people deserve to suffer
yes, i call them transgressors: ppl who think they can trample upon my rights 2 b left alone without it being mutually understood; those ppl usually die or go 2 prison

>>132615715

Higher quality of services.. I agree, but always for those who can pay it. Enjoy the six digit bills.

>>132615876
>selected breeding and a strong limitation of population
the natural conclusion of capitalism is fascism

>>132613333
Woo, quads

>>132609218
>it's always someone else's fault when something bad happens to them

>>132615278
Have you read the GULAG archipelago? Please don't advocate for the worst system on earth. It was only semi successful because of slavery.

File: 1499326833233.jpg (3KB, 111x105px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 111x105px

>>132609100
fuck off, poo
here's a new vid from Killian reking a fag like you, poo
https://youtu.be/3ol_r8ROxR4

>>132615917
Talking about something is not scientific evidence of something.

>>132615488
So, you don't know what facism even is?

Why do leftist always use catchy buzzwords they do not understand?

>>132614496
>i-it's true because I said so
why don't you go suck some more rich dick, cuck?

>>132614811
>capitalists arguing that certain groups of people deserve to suffer. i.e. fascism.

if that's your metric for fascism, may I remind you that you're representing an ideology that demands for a whole class of people to be expropriated, suffer (the bourgeoisie) . and be murdered?

what is this, a confession for you being a fascist or just the admission that you're using the word fascism synonymous for "things I don't like"?

>>132615953
>ppl who think they can trample upon my rights 2 b left alone without it being mutually understood; those ppl usually die or go 2 prison
does this mean I get to kill the heads of giant corporations surveiling my every move and trying to manipulate me with "advertisments" at all times?

>>132609100
Maybe in your backward country, but it feels amazing on this side.

>>132609488
Mein Gott, pure ideology!
>>132609550
A lot of poor people save up for years to buy a phone, but I doubt you'd know that, much less be a man enough to care.

>>132615488
it is not the government's job to make everything fair for everyone.

it is the governments job to reign in the wild of unorganized life
it is the governments job to protect the people from the chaos of wild humans

read leviathan

>>132615201
>guys it's not real capitalism

>>132616175
I don't demand for anyone to be murdered. I demand that the people who make other people suffer for the sake of profit they don't need, stop doing so.

>>132609100
You fuckin rakshas I'll find you out and skin you on the road

>>132614836
>This is why hitler turned germany around

he really didn't. his currency was inflationary beyond belief and could only ever be held on a stable level through the influx of stolen wealth from other nations.

the war just hid the usual consequences of stark system change and socialism. there would have been massive starvation if it wasn't for the war - like in any other socialist country ever.

also what you believe is why economists are wrong is literally the basis of several economic schools of thought.

>>132610708
>every tyrannical country is communist or leftist
*tips revisionism*

>>132609218
It's designed to last a year or 2 so it can be replaced in time for the upgrade.

>>132611178
Further evidence that the left can't meme

>>132616421
Explain me how the currency in nazi germany Mr (((economist)))

>>132615421
>Any system can be made to work with the right people working on it.
nope

>>132614730
>I make no excuses for authoritarian communist regimes.
But other can't exist. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom

>>132615830
>Hint retard, Capitalism is needed for Communism

My god, this person is hopless. They don't even know what they're talking about.

File: productivity-and-real-wages.jpg (295KB, 2400x1536px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 2400x1536px

>>132616591
>feudalism existed before communism
>somehow communism is actually feudalism guys

>>132615783
so you cannot name one

>>132616667
he is clearly just a menshevik

>>132616695
Before answer read the fucking book first.

commies need to look into the pareto distribution and then tell me how communism will work

>>132616798
communism =/= centralized planning
why don't you read any fucking book first?

>>132616529
Hard to have humor when the irony of everything is a play on yourself.

>>132616816
what? 20% of the people own 80% of the land. So what?

>>132610753
>use a recipe for a cake
>fungal spores drift in the window and ruin the batter by chance
>a lot of people make the same mistake of leaving their windows open, so their cakes get spoiled too
>"Cake is the definition of Satan on Earth and anyone who tries to make it wants to poison us all"
>"But why don't we just find what's spoiling the cake and stop it"
>"Cake baker! Cake baker! Attempted poisoning!"

>>132610996
Weird. It's like nobody should rely on the government and instead come together as a community.

>>132616186
of course it does; if u can feel justified in God's court 4 that act, than feel free 2 do so, his ppl will agree with u brother; however, u should testify against ur brother, to see if he will restore 'it' 2 u; if he doesn't, enjoy ur justified ire

>>132616404
Based Curry. Now this is why the Caste system works. The untouchables, like OP, need to be put in their place.

File: dead che faggot.jpg (43KB, 500x499px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x499px

>>132613421
>>132613540
>t. dies of starvation

>>132616398
sure you do. it's a cornerstone of your retarded ideology. revolution? ever heard that word? guess what it meas? murder and suffering on a large scale. (although funnily enough on a 20 years time scale after a succesful revolution it's the revolutionaries themselves who got murdered the most by the forces of the revolution).
fucking classwar means you're demanding the murder of people, you dimwhit. and even worse, it's not just some people, no, it's the smartest and most capable in society.

guess where all the famines come from in the history of real-world-socialism. right: idiots get to rule and hate birds.

>>132615944
>they stole it!

Most of china doesnt have indoor plumbing yet either.

Thats because of preexisting poverty not because the current system

>>132616421
>he really didn't.
Yes ye did

>his currency was
Stop. You are thinking with economics. (((economics))) is a trick. It doesn't matter what the currency is, currency is just a transient facilitator, it never holds its value, the way it loses it causes things to happen.

There would have been massive starvation if not for the war EVERYWHERE, and guess what, there was massive starvation in russia. The world was facing a global food shortage, someone was going to eat it and someone was going to starve, that had nothing to do with the illusionary economic system, that had to do with the inability to physically grow enough food with the current technology.

>>132616335
>read leviathan
>>132616591
>read the road to serfdom

How about you make your own damn arguments and don't demand others to refute a whole book in a single post on an image board.
I'm not constantly telling people to read all of Das Kapital everytime someone misrepresents Communism and criticism of Capitalism either.

File: download.jpg (5KB, 182x277px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 182x277px

>It's another commie doesn't understand the basic fundamentals of economics episode

Read this pooboy

File: heee.jpg (29KB, 325x265px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 325x265px

>>132616932
[pic-related]^
(((trial by jury/peers)))

>>132616866
>communism =/= centralized planning
This is delusion. Read the book first.

>>132616543
you, sweat shop, now!

>>132616964
>calls himself an anarchist
>against classwar
wewlad.jpg

>>132616866
>muh state will wither away
this is where you become a laughing stock

>>132613715
>communism is always under constant attack from most powerful nation on earth
>WAAH big evil imperialist Amerikkka won't trade with *insert communist despotic nation* even though they are big meany evil capitalists

File: 1493663188551.jpg (5KB, 126x122px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 126x122px

>>132609100
there is no perfect system and believe it or not, it's very subjective to which is better. all sides have flaws.

>capitalism is barbaric yet just
capitalism simulates nature. the fittest will survive and the unfit will die. it's a just system as everyone who loses gets eliminated. just like in nature. it's a wild and barbaric system that's not afraid of destroying the lives of the weak. you can be rich as fuck and have a real good thing going on. you will be a very rich man soon, but what do you know, a bus smashes into you one day to work and you are paralysed for life. you can't work and have to live off of welfare all your life. in worst case scenario you'll die of poverty. maybe you won't get any welfare at all. it's up to how extreme the system in that country is.

>socialism is unjust yet civilised
everyone is treated the same. you can never be special, you can never be anything more than what you always have been. no matter what you do you will always be a Bob. no matter how smart you are, how hard you work and how strong you are, you will never be anything other than everyone else, even a weak lazy dumbass is equal to you and you can't do anything about it. your dreams will never be fulfilled and you will always be exactly like everyone else. you are an ant and your country is an ant nest.

capitalism is not one philosophy, its a mix of many philosophies that are similar. same with socialism. you can, for example, disagre with communism but agree with democratic socialism. you can also be anti anarco capitalism but be a proud state capitalist. there simply is no perfect system as every system has flaws and perks. it's simply stupid to claim that any of these systems will win. they are all pretty gay in some way or another. that's why it's fucking gay to be extreme. just look at those gay fucking pro trump nerds. trump changed sides and they are still sucking his dick. neither communism or capitalism will win. the fight is eternal.

>>132616912
a pareto distribution exists at all levels of literally everything, you can't escape it. now, how will communism work if this is the case?

>>132617071
>Strawman

>>132616562
Yep.

Focusing on idealized systems is stupid because in reality the system is never idealized.

you impliment a system and it goes along untill it ienvitably starts to run into problems then one of two things work

You have good people around and they make the required sacrifices and do the required things to make it continue functioning

You dont and it colapses.

America itself would not exist if not for on numerous occasion very wealthy people bankrupting themselves to try and keep it going. These people believed in the system, they basically 100% taxed themselves to keep it going.

Now today with everyone being so selfish and thinking globally they will just move to argentina or something rather than give up 'their' money.

No system will work with out belief in that system.
Any system can work with belief in that system.

>>132616964
I'm not demanding for them to be murdered. I'm demanding for them to be stopped. If their continued insistence of making people suffer leads to those who suffer to act in self-defence in the form of a violent revolution, it is them who campained for it, not me.

>>132616398
that's all fair and dandy until someone like stalin comes along and hijacks your revolution

>>132617118
>>132617054
>Their success will depend on the extent to which
they achieve such power. Democracy is an obstacle to this suppression
of freedom which the centralized direction of economic
activity requires. Hence arises the clash between planning and
democracy
so then you support democracy, yes? I'm directly quoting the book. Answer my question and I will show how Socialism is the logical result of Democracy.

>>132616968
>How about you make your own damn arguments
I can't put into English words better than Hayek did. I admit his superiority as economist and philosopher.

>>132617090
because anarchy is the enforcement of your groups believes onto others with threats of violence . what next? is it also forced labour for the benefit of the group? woo, what a free society this has to be.

>>132616966
Had nothing to do with poverty in the USSR you fucking moron.

You just keep confirming that you flunked history.

>>132617131
The problem is america does trade, lead for oil :^)

>>132617054
>thinking that you can reason with someone who is unironically a communist
critical thinking is an alien concept to them

>>132609100
>have my iphone 4 for half a decade
>still works fine

you niggers are just dumb with all honesty, I've plenty of you fucking dumb niggers who can't use it properly and take care of it like any sane human do, you fuckings probably buy new cellphones every year.

>>132617322
you are just a really shitty anarchist. with a ruling class there will always be government.

>>132617415
>you niggers are just dumb
>said the guy who bought an iphone

>>132617394
ok, and this has to do with communist shitholes failing how excatly?
>we literally can survive unless we are trading with the ebil capitalists
once a parasite always a parasite

>>132617371
The USSR has always been poor as dirt thats why the communists took over to start with. Prosperous nations dont have civil unrest (unless they have huge wealth inequality)

>>132617090
also nice try not admitting that you're a bloodthirsty 'fascist' eager to murder children.

File: 1496262371028.jpg (53KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 540x960px

>>132609100
>no smartphone/compooter, no compooter malfunctions
>no compooter malfunctions, no "hello, this is pajeet from tech support, have you tried turning it off and on again?"
>no pajeet from tech support, no money to feed 12 little houdini pajeets that somehow got through birth control
>no money to feed little pajeets, no food go into little pajeets
>no food go in, no poo go out
>tfw can't teach little pajeets to poo in loo because lack of poo
>tfw no superpower by 2020

>>132609100
Ha! Hahaha! How can anyone be that ignorant?

>>132617264
>so then you support democracy, yes?
i support the original democracy of the american constitution
a democracy of families, headed by land owning white men.

>>132617252
I agree. There is nothing redeemable about Stalin and I would never defend his brutal regime.
>>132617265
OK, then I get to do this and not adress your arguments further. Fair is fair.

Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital%3A_Critique_of_Political_Economy

>>132617264
The difficulty is well known to socialists. It will soon be half a century since the Webbs began to complain of “the increased incapacity of the House of Commons to cope with its work.”3 More recently, Professor Laski has elaborated the argument:
“It is common ground that the present parliamentary machine is quite unsuited to pass rapidly a great body of complicated legislation. The National Government, indeed, has in substance admitted this by implementing its economy and tariff measures not by detailed debate in the House of Commons but by a wholesale system of delegated legislation. A Labour Government would, I presume, build upon the amplitude of this precedent. It would confine the House of Commons to the two functions it can properly perform: the ventilation of grievances and the discussion of general principles of its measures. Its Bills would take the form of general formulae conferring wide powers on the appropriate government departments; and those powers would be exercised by Order in Council which could, if desired, be attacked in the House by means of a vote of no confidence. The necessity an alue of delegated legislation has recently been strongly reaffirmed by the Donoughmore Committee; and its extension is inevitable if the process of socialisation is not to be wrecked by the normal methods of obstruction which existing parliamentary procedure sanctions.”

>>132609218
Fragile design and estimated income from repairs and replacements is a thing, they make money from it and it's intentional. Same with battery replacements, there's no reason you should have to take it to them to replace a battery.

A bigger thing is planned obsolescence, Apple intentionally stops supporting their older phones so you are forced to buy new ones. It's a fucking machine I use to talk to people and shitpost.

>>132617054
>>132617118
>Many socialists have the tragic illusion that by depriving
> private individuals of the power they possess in an individualist
>system, and transferring this power to society, they thereby extinguish
power.
do you also support an individualist society?

>>132617570
you are a cuck. enjoy being coerced by the rich in your "utopia".

>>132617639
And to make it quite clear that a socialist government must not allow itself to be too much fettered by democratic procedure, Professor Laski at the end of the same article raised the question “whether in a period of transition to Socialism, a Labour Government can risk the overthrow of its measures as a result of the next general election”—and left it significantly unanswered.4
It is important clearly to see the causes of this admitted ineffectiveness of parliaments when it comes to a detailed administration of the economic affairs of a nation. The fault is neither with the individual representatives nor with parliamentary institutions as such but with the contradictions inherent in the task with which they are charged. They are not asked to act where they can agree, but to produce agreement on everything—the whole direction of the resources of the nation. For such a task the system of majority decision is, however, not suited. Majorities will be found where it is a choice between limited alternatives; but it is a superstition to believe that there must be a majority view on everything. There is no reason why there should be a majority in favor of any one of the different possible courses of positive action if their number is legion. Every member of the legislative assembly might prefer some particular plan for the direction of economic activity to no plan, yet no one plan may appear preferable to a majority to no plan at all.

>>132617692
Nor can a coherent plan be achieved by breaking it up into parts and voting on particular issues. A democratic assembly voting and amending a comprehensive economic plan clause by clause, as it deliberates on an ordinary bill, makes nonsense. An economic plan, to deserve the name, must have a unitary conception. Even if a parliament could, proceeding step by step, agree on some scheme, it would certainly in the end satisfy nobody. A complex whole in which all the parts must be most carefully adjusted to each other cannot be achieved through a compromise between conflicting views. To draw up an economic plan in this fashion is even less possible than, for example, successfully to plan a military campaign by democratic procedure. As in strategy it would become inevitable to delegate the task to the experts.
Yet the difference is that, while the general who is put in charge of a campaign is given a single end to which, for the duration of the campaign, all the means under his control have to be exclusively devoted, there can be no such single goal given to the economic planner, and no similar limitation of the means imposed upon him. The general has not got to balance different independent aims against each other; there is for him only one supreme goal. But the ends of an economic plan, or of any part of it, cannot be defined apart from the particular plan. It is the essence of the economic problem that the making of an economic plan involves the choice between conflicting or competing ends—different needs of different people. But which ends do so conflict, which will have to be sacrificed if we want to achieve certain others, in short, which are the alternatives between which we must choose, can only be known to those who know all the facts; and only they, the experts, are in a position to decide which of the different ends are to be given preference. It is inevitable that they should impose their scale of preferences on the communityfor which they plan.

>>132617666
>do you also support an individualist society?
see
>>132617590
No.

>>132617554
Everyone trades with everyone, except people the US tells people not to trade with, those people only trade with the other blacklisted people who aremostly already poor countries

This creates a widening gap untill eventually the US proxy wars it into oblivion.

ho chi minh literally asked the president of the united states, in person, to help impliment capitalism in vietnam and got told to piss off. Only then did he ask the soviets, and as soon as they agreed "oh no communism is spreading better go to war! :^)"

>>132617745
This is not always clearly recognized, and delegation is usually justified by the technical character of the task. But this does not mean that only the technical detail is delegated, or even that the inability of parliaments to understand the technical detail is the root of the difficulty.5 Alterations in the structure of civil law are no less technical and no more difficult to appreciate in all their implications; yet nobody has yet seriously suggested that legislation there should be delegated to a body of experts. The fact is that in these fields legislation does not go beyond general rules on which true majority agreement can be achieved, while in the direction of economic activity the interests to be reconciled are so divergent that no true agreement is likely to be reached in a democratic assembly.
It should be recognized, however, that it is not the delegation of law-making power as such which is so objectionable. To oppose delegation as such is to oppose a symptom instead of the cause and, as it may be a necessary result of other causes, to weaken the case. So long as the power that is delegated is merely the power to make general rules, there may be very good reasons why such rules should be laid down by local rather than by the central authority. The objectionable feature is that delegation is so often resorted to because the matter in hand cannot be regulated by general rules but only by the exercise of discretion in the decision of particular cases. In these instances delegation means that some authority is given power to make with the force of law what to all intents and purposes are arbitrary decisions (usually described as “judging the case on its merits”).

>>132616591
>literal slippery slope
I'm sure he's right. Norway, Sweden, Cuba, France, and countless other countries will surely turn into North Korea any day now...

>>132617745
The delegation of particular technical tasks to separate bodies, while a regular feature, is yet only the first step in the process whereby a democracy which embarks on planning progressively relinquishes its powers. The expedient of delegation cannot really remove the causes which make all the advocates of comprehensive planning so impatient with the impotence of democracy. The delegation of particular powers to separate agencies creates a new obstacle to the achievement of a single coordinated plan. Even if, by this expedient, a democracy should succeed in planning every sector of economic activity, it would still have to face the problem of integrating these separate plans into a unitary whole. Many separate plans do not make a planned whole—in fact, as the planners ought to be the first to admit, they may be worse than no plan. But the democratic legislature will long hesitate to relinquish the decisions on really vital issues, and so long as it does so it makes it impossible for anyone else to provide the comprehensive plan. Yet agreement that planning is necessary, together with the inability of democratic assemblies to produce a plan, will evoke stronger and stronger demands that the government or some single individual should be given powers to act on their own responsibility. The belief is becoming more and more widespread that, if things are to get done, the responsible authorities must be freed from the fetters of democratic procedure.

>>132617666
>commie calling some one else a cuck
What is this bizarro /pol/?

>>132617839
The cry for an economic dictator is a characteristic stage in the movement toward planning. It is now several years since one of the most acute of foreign students of England, the late Élie Halévy, suggested that, “if you take a composite photograph of Lord Eustace Percy,..., I think you would find this common feature—you would find them all agreeing to say: ‘We are living in economic chaos and we cannot get out of it except under some kind of dictatorial leadership.’”6 The number of influential public men whose inclusion would not materially alter the features of the “composite photograph” has since grown considerably.
In Germany, even before Hitler came into power, the movement had already progressed much further. It is important to remember that, for some time before 1933, Germany had reached a stage in which it had, in effect, had to be governed dictatorially. Nobody could then doubt that for the time being democracy had broken down and that sincere democrats like Brüning were no more able to govern democratically than Schleicher or von Papen.7 Hitler did not have to destroy democracy; he merely took advantage of the decay of democracy and at the critical moment obtained the support of many to whom, though they detested Hitler, he yet seemed the only man strong enough to get things done.
The argument by which the planners usually try to reconcile us with this development is that, so long as democracy retains ultimate control, the essentials of democracy are not affected. Thus Karl Mannheim writes:
“The only [sic] way in which a planned society differs from that of the nineteenth century is that more and more spheres of social life, and ultimately each and all of them, are subjected to state control. But if a few controls can be held in check by parliamentary sovereignty, so can many. . . . In a democratic state sovereignty can be boundlessly strengthened by plenary powers without renouncing democratic control.”8

>>132617963
This belief overlooks a vital distinction. Parliament can, of course, control the execution of tasks where it can give definite directions, where it has first agreed on the aim and merely delegates the working-out of the detail. The situation is entirely different when the reason for the delegation is that there is no real agreement on the ends, when the body charged with the planning has to choose between ends of whose conflict parliament is not even aware, and when the most that can be done is to present to it a plan which has to be accepted or rejected as a whole. There may and probably will be criticism; but as no majority can agree on an alternative plan, and the parts objected to can almost always be represented as essential parts of the whole, it will remain quite ineffective. Parliamentary discussion may be retained as a useful safety valve and even more as a convenient medium through which the official answers to complaints are disseminated. It may even prevent some flagrant abuses and successfully insist on particular shortcomings being remedied. But it cannot direct. It will at best be reduced to choosing the persons who are to have practically absolute power. The whole system will tend toward that plebiscitarian dictatorship in which the head of the government is from time to time confirmed in his position by popular vote, but where he has all the powers at his command to make certain that the vote will go in the direction he desires.

>>132618001
We have no intention, however, of making a fetish of democracy. It may well be true that our generation talks and thinks too much of democracy and too little of the values which it serves. It cannot be said of democracy, as Lord Acton truly said of liberty, that it “is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It is not for the sake of a good public administration that it is required, but for the security in the pursuit of the highest objects of civil society, and of private life.”9 Democracy is essentially a means, a utilitarian device for safeguarding internal peace and individual freedom. As such it is by no means infallible or certain. Nor must we forget that there has often been much more cultural and spiritual freedom under an autocratic rule than under some democracies—and it is at least conceivable that under the government of a very homogeneous and doctrinaire majority democratic government might be as oppressive as the worst dictatorship. Our point, however, is not that dictatorship must inevitably extirpate freedom but rather that planning leads to dictatorship because dictatorship is the most effective instrument of coercion and the enforcement of ideals and, as such, essential if central planning on a large scale is to be possible. The clash between planning and democracy arises simply from the fact that the latter is an obstacle to the suppression of freedom which the direction of economic activity requires. But in so far as democracy ceases to be a guaranty of individual freedom, it may well persist in some form under a totalitarian regime. A true “dictatorship of the proletariat,” even if democratic in form, if it undertook centrally to direct the economic system, would probably destroy personal freedom as completely as any autocracy has ever done.

>>132617140
I appreciate your post pirate guy

>>132618025
The fashionable concentration on democracy as the main value threatened is not without danger. It is largely responsible for the misleading and unfounded belief that, so long as the ultimate source of power is the will of the majority, the power cannot be arbitrary. The false assurance which many people derive from this belief is an important cause of the general unawareness of the dangers which we face. There is no justification for the belief that, so long as power is conferred by democratic procedure, it cannot be arbitrary; the contrast suggested by this statement is altogether false: it is not the source but the limitation of power which prevents it from being arbitrary. Democratic control may prevent power from becoming arbitrary, but it does not do so by its mere existence. If democracy resolves on a task which necessarily involves the use of power which cannot be guided by fixed rules, it must become arbitrary power.

File: Unknown.png (9KB, 207x243px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 207x243px

>>132617241
really? look at that pic. that's the shit you demand. that's the kind of message you broadcast. and history has shown, that this is what socialists do: murder. you use that disgusting symbol as a flag. you know what it means. millions upon millions murdered, and yet you present it proudly to the world.
I MEAN cmon IT'S THE COMMUNIST DOGMA! I THOUGHT YOU'RE COMMIE? C'MON ADMIT IT. YOU LIKE TO MURDER EVERYONE WHO'S BETTER THAN YOU.

File: 052dca30650dfd0c6c5ce45fefb1891fd88729-v5-wm.jpg (155KB, 640x920px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 640x920px

>>132617264
>Socialism is the logical result of Democracy
>hey i gib you all gibs that this guy made if you agree to take gibs from him
>democratic vote to take gibs from the guy who make gibs
>guy who make gibs no longer want to make gibs because demoralized and shit
>make gibs or else
>guy who make gibs ellects else and dies from unrelated cause
>waaaaah no more gibs, gib us gibs
that about sums it up you lazy fucking commie, get the fuck off your ass and contribute something to the world even if all that you achieve in life is a bullet hole in your own skull

File: E499BA90-AA82-4EF8-A833-A7927756CCF9-1478-000001B683EF78D4_tmp.jpg (32KB, 233x316px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 233x316px

>>132609100
It already lost

File: 1337667471586.jpg (159KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 960x960px

>>132617666
even in socialist communities/societies/countries, there will also be an instigator/individual/ruler/leader, it's an inevitability; curiosity & convenience r powerful motivators

>>132617241
also discussion leading to demand for people suffering:

> If their continued insistence of making people suffer leads to those who suffer to act in self-defence in the form of a violent revolution, it is them who campained for it, not me.

>>132609100
Stay mad poo nigger

File: D65QBMN.png (66KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x280px

>>132617590
>>132617775
so a democracy ruled by bourgeoisie? How convenient.
Thomas Jefferson is rolling over in his grave.

>>132617639
pic related

>>132618025
for the last time socialism =/= dictatorship. Why can't you understand this? This entire pasta is constructed upon the distracting assumption that communism is some sort of imperial dictatorship, which it's just not.
I'll ask you again: are you for or against democracy?

Sorry for the wall of text. but commies are reluctant to read science (who would have thooght this about followers of science based ''"movement''")

>>132609100
>>132610399
>>132610474
>>132610587
>>132610759
>>132610996
>>132611255
>>132611620
>>132612238
>>132612392
>>132612854
>>132613080
>>132613196
>>132614248
>>132617180
A fucking mallu nigger communist.
We will lynch your dalit ass

>>132616929
Stop trying to experiment with cake in MY oven.

File: 2017-07-06 09_59_06-_pol_ - Politically Incorrect - 4chan.png (124KB, 243x255px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 243x255px

>>132609100
Where does one acquire these rare, tumultuous square phones?

>>132618093
you're totally right. poor people are definitely the thieves, not the rich people who CONTROL WAGES or anything. kys class traitor cuck.
>>132618154
explain how

>>132617776
>US tells people not to trade with, those people only trade with the other blacklisted people who aremostly already poor countries
>"dude the US interfering with other nations affairs is bad"

>ho chi minh literally asked the president of the united states, in person, to help impliment capitalism in vietnam and got told to piss off. Only then did he ask the soviets, and as soon as they agreed "oh no communism is spreading better go to war! :^)"
>"dude the US not interfering with other nations is bad wtf, Soviets doing it was good though, wait the US went to war because vietnam became communist? dude the US interfering with other nations affairs is bad"

phenomenal reasoning right here

your argument still relies on the "communist nations literally need to trade with the evil capitalists fascist to survive"

>>132618197
The control of the production of wealth is the control of human life itself.
—Hilaire Belloc1
Most planners who have seriously considered the practical aspects of their task have little doubt that a directed economy must be run on more or less dictatorial lines. That the complex system of interrelated activities, if it is to be consciously directed at all, must be directed by a single staff of experts, and that ultimate responsibility and power must rest in the hands of a commander-in-chief whose actions must not be fettered by democratic procedure, is too obvious a consequence of underlying ideas of central planning not to command fairly general assent. The consolation our planners offer us is that this authoritarian direction will apply “only” to economic matters. One of the most prominent economic planners, Stuart Chase, assures us, for instance, that in a planned society “political democracy can remain if it confines itself to all but economic matters.”2 Such assurances are usually accompanied by the suggestion that, by giving up freedom in what are, or ought to be, the less important aspects of our lives, we shall obtain greater freedom in the pursuit of higher values. On this ground people who abhor the idea of a political dictatorship often clamor for a dictator in the economic field.

>>132618197
bourgeoisie is a made up commie word whose only use is to foster class hate, i reject the foundations upon which the word rests

also not all landowners are 'rich' but they all at least have a real stake in the future of the country and will tend to be educated enough to see to the maintenance of property.

>>132618498
The arguments used appeal to our best instincts and often attract the finest minds. If planning really did free us from the less important cares and so made it easier to render our existence one of plain living and high thinking, who would wish to belittle such an ideal? If our economic activities really concerned only the inferior or even more sordid sides of life, of course we ought to endeavor by all means to find a way to relieve ourselves from the excessive care for material ends and, leaving them to be cared for by some piece of utilitarian machinery, set our minds free for the higher things of life.
Unfortunately, the assurance people derive from this belief that the power which is exercised over economic life is a power over matters of secondary importance only, and which makes them take lightly the threat to the freedom of our economic pursuits, is altogether unwarranted. It is largely a consequence of the erroneous belief that there are purely economic ends separate from the other ends of life. Yet, apart from the pathological case of the miser, there is no such thing. The ultimate ends of the activities of reasonable beings are never economic. Strictly speaking, there is no “economic motive” but only economic factors conditioning our striving for other ends. .

File: Obey.jpg (44KB, 300x399px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 300x399px

>>132618197
here, this shouldn't b hard:

in capitalism, politicians r = 2 citizens

in commieism 'politicians' = Gods

there's a vast, vast difference, & its hidden very cleverly in semantics

>>132609100

And dumb young communists posts that shit from their Iphones. Communists are sheep

>>132618578
What in ordinary language is misleadingly called the “economic motive” means merely the desire for general opportunity, the desire for power to achieve unspecified ends.3 If we strive for money, it is because it offers us the widest choice in enjoying the fruits of our efforts. Because in modern society it is through the limitation of our money incomes that we are made to feel the restrictions which our relative poverty still imposes upon us, many have come to hate money as the symbol of these restrictions. But this is to mistake for the cause the medium through which a force makes itself felt. It would be much truer to say that money is one of the greatest instruments of freedom ever invented by man. It is money which in existing society opens an astounding range of choice to the poor man—a range greater than that which not many generations ago was open to the wealthy. We shall better understand the significance of this service of money if we consider what it would really mean if, as so many socialists characteristically propose, the “pecuniary motive” were largely displaced by “noneconomic incentives.” If all rewards, instead of being offered in money, were offered in the form of public distinctions or privileges, positions of power over other men, or better housing or better food, opportunities for travel or education, this would merely mean that the recipient would no longer be allowed to choose and that whoever fixed the reward determined not only its size but also the particular form in which it should be enjoyed.

>>132618604
Once we realize that there is no separate economic motive and that an economic gain or economic loss is merely a gain or a loss where it is still in our power to decide which of our needs or desires shall be affected, it is also easier to see the important kernel of truth in the general belief that economic matters affect only the less important ends of life and to understand the contempt in which “merely” economic considerations are often held. In a sense this is quite justified in a market economy—but only in such a free economy. So long as we can freely dispose over our income and all our possessions, economic loss will always deprive us only of what we regard as the least important of the desires we were able to satisfy. A “merely” economic loss is thus one whose effect we can still make fall on our less important needs, while when we say that the value of something we have lost is much greater than its economic value, or that it cannot even be estimated in economic terms, this means that we must bear the loss where it falls. And similarly with an economic gain. Economic changes, in other words, usually affect only the fringe, the “margin,” of our needs. There are many things which are more important than anything which economic gains or losses are likely to affect, which for us stand high above the amenities and even above many of the necessities of life which are affected by the economic ups and downs. Compared with them, the “filthy lucre,” the question whether we are economically somewhat worse or better off, seems of little importance. This makes many people believe that anything which, like economic planning, affects only our economic interests cannot seriously interfere with the more basic values of life.

>>132618498
>>132618578
communism is not a directed economy. I'm not responding to your shitposts anymore. You're not even reading what you're pasting.

File: tmp_17696-It's not funny… I've got cramp in my flipper - Julie Hunt_edited-31073793008.jpg (40KB, 620x455px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 620x455px

Lithuania
>Rolandas Paksas, the former president of Lithuania and now the European Parliament deputy, summed up the results of the post-Soviet period in the history of the republic in March. In his opinion, nothing has been done in the past twenty-seven years of independence nor has anything been built. Therefore, as Paksas points out, every year there are fewer and fewer people in Lithuania, and the life of those who remain is only becoming more difficult.
Capitalism BTFO
>Rolandas Paksas, the former president of Lithuania and now the European Parliament deputy, summed up the results of the post-Soviet period in the history of the republic in March. In his opinion, nothing has been done in the past twenty-seven years of independence nor has anything been built. Therefore, as Paksas points out, every year there are fewer and fewer people in Lithuania, and the life of those who remain is only becoming more difficult.
BTFO
And here's the icing in the cake….
>The terrible conditions that people live in in this Baltic country include the fact that out of all migrants who arrived in Latvia in accordance with the European refugee transfer program, only five people decided to stay in that country, with the remaining refugees fleeing Latvia immediately upon their arrival. Among those who remained there was one family of three people and two more refugees, one of whom would still leave Latvia eventually.

>>132618647
This, however, is an erroneous conclusion. Economic values are less important to us than many things precisely because in economic matters we are free to decide what to us is more, and what less, important. Or, as we might say, because in the present society it is we who have to solve the economic problems of our lives. To be controlled in our economic pursuits means to be always controlled unless we declare our specific purpose. Or, since when we declare our specific purpose we shall also have to get it approved, we should really be controlled in everything.
The question raised by economic planning is, therefore, not merely whether we shall be able to satisfy what we regard as our more or less important needs in the way we prefer. It is whether it shall be we who decide what is more, and what is less, important for us, or whether this is to be decided by the planner. Economic planning would not affect merely those of our marginal needs that we have in mind when we speak contemptuously about the merely economic. It would, in effect, mean that we as individuals should no longer be allowed to decide what we regard as marginal.

>>132618589
>I make shit up and use them as arguments
okay. Not responding to it though

>>132618707
The authority directing all economic activity would control not merely the part of our lives which is concerned with inferior things; it would control the allocation of the limited means for all our ends. And whoever controls all economic activity controls the means for all our ends and must therefore decide which are to be satisfied and which not. This is really the crux of the matter. Economic control is not merely control of a sector of human life which can be separated from the rest; it is the control of the means for all our ends. And whoever has sole control of the means must also determine which ends are to be served, which values are to be rated higher and which lower—in short, what men should believe and strive for. Central planning means that the economic problem is to be solved by the community instead of by the individual; but this involves that it must also be the community, or rather its representatives, who must decide the relative importance of the different needs.
The so-called economic freedom which the planners promise us means precisely that we are to be relieved of the necessity of solving our own economic problems and that the bitter choices which this often involves are to be made for us. Since under modern conditions we are for almost everything dependent on means which our fellow-men provide, economic planning would involve direction of almost the whole of our life. There is hardly an aspect of it, from our primary needs to our relations with our family and friends, from the nature of our work to the use of our leisure, over which the planner would not exercise his “conscious control.”4

>>132618653
>muh stateless communism
HAHAHAHAHA

>>132618743
The power of the planner over our private lives would be no less complete if he chose not to exercise it by direct control of our consumption. Although a planned society would probably to some extent employ rationing and similar devices, the power of the planner over our private lives does not depend on this and would be hardly less effective if the consumer were nominally free to spend his income as he pleased. The source of this power over all consumption which in a planned society the authority would possess would be its control over production.
Our freedom of choice in a competitive society rests on the fact that, if one person refuses to satisfy our wishes, we can turn to another. But if we face a monopolist we are at his mercy. And an authority directing the whole economic system would be the most powerful monopolist conceivable. While we need probably not be afraid that such an authority would exploit this power in the manner in which a private monopolist would do so, while its purpose would presumably not be the extortion of maximum financial gain, it would have complete power to decide what we are to be given and on what terms. It would not only decide what commodities and services were to be available and in what quantities; it would be able to direct their distribution between districts and groups and could, if it wished, discriminate between persons to any degree it liked. If we remember why planning is advocated by most people, can there be much doubt that this power would be used for the ends of which the authority approves and to prevent the pursuits of ends which it disapproves?

>>132618765
The power conferred by the control of production and prices is almost unlimited. In a competitive society the prices we have to pay for a thing, the rate at which we can get one thing for another, depend on the quantities of other things of which by taking one, we deprive the other members of society. This price is not determined by the conscious will of anybody. And if one way of achieving our ends proves too expensive for us, we are free to try other ways. The obstacles in our path are not due to someone’s disapproving of our ends but to the fact that the same means are also wanted elsewhere. In a directed economy, where the authority watches over the ends pursued, it is certain that it would use its powers to assist some ends and to prevent the realization of others. Not our own view, but somebody else’s, of what we ought to like or dislike would determine what we should get. And since the authority would have the power to thwart any efforts to elude its guidance, it would control what we consume almost as effectively as if it directly told us how to spend our income.
Not only in our capacity as consumers, however, and not even mainly in that capacity, would the will of the authority shape and “guide” our daily lives. It would do so even more in our position as producers. These two aspects of our lives cannot be separated; and as for most of us the time we spend at our work is a large part of our whole lives, and as our job usually also determines the place where and the people among whom we live, some freedom in choosing our work is, probably, even more important for our happiness than freedom to spend our income during the hours of leisure.

>>132618525
I never said all land owners are rich. They are simply controllers of the distribution of wealth so there's a huge conflict of interest when voting.

>>132618745
didn't say this either

>>132618794
No doubt it is true that even in the best of worlds this freedom will be very limited. Few people ever have an abundance of choice of occupation. But what matters is that we have some choice, that we are not absolutely tied to a particular job which has been chosen for us, or which we may have chosen in the past, and that if one position becomes quite intolerable, or if we set our heart on another, there is almost always a way for the able, some sacrifice at the price of which he may achieve his goal. Nothing makes conditions more unbearable than the knowledge that no effort of ours can change them; and even if we should never have the strength of mind to make the necessary sacrifice, the knowledge that we could escape if we only strove hard enough makes many otherwise intolerable positions bearable.
This is not to say that in this respect all is for the best in our present world, or has been so in the most liberal past, and that there is not much that could be done to improve the opportunities of choice open to the people. Here as elsewhere the state can do a great deal to help the spreading of knowledge and information and to assist mobility. But the point is that the kind of state action which really would increase opportunity is almost precisely the opposite of the “planning” which is now generally advocated and practiced. Most planners, it is true, promise that in the new planned world free choice of occupation will be scrupulously preserved or even increased.

>>132617474
are you really too stupid to see that the instatement of socialist policies in whatever group is the creation of a ruling body that completely mirrors most peoples understanding of the word government - including the bureaucratic apparatus (in case of enough members).

you'd be a bad anarchist if you demand for others to forcefully serve the will of a group or a person. The upper class is there because in one way or another they are capable. If their ability is still valuable in another system they stay there, if not they fall.

on the other hand this also applies to the working class who's mainly made up by the most uncivilised and stupid people in society. there's a reason why you work a hard physical job instead of being some banker or professor. and it's not because you're a victim of exploitation.

>>132618819
But there they promise more than they can possibly fulfill. If they want to plan, they must control the entry into the different trades and occupations, or the terms of remuneration, or both. In almost all known instances of planning, the establishment of such controls and restrictions was among the first measures taken. If such control were universally practiced and exercised by a single planning authority, one needs little imagination to see what would become of the “free choice of occupation” promised. The “freedom of choice” would be purely fictitious, a mere promise to practice no discrimination where in the nature of the case discrimination must be practiced, and where all one could hope would be that the selection would be made on what the authority believed to be objective grounds.
There would be little difference if the planning authority confined itself to fixing the terms of employment and tried to regulate numbers by adjusting these terms. By prescribing the remuneration, it would no less

>>132618458
>your argument still relies on the "communist nations literally need to trade with the evil capitalists fascist to survive"

No my argument is that communist nations need to globally trade to compete with capitalist nations who are globally trading

If nobody else was trading outside their nation then there wouldnt be a problem

The issue is that communists got isolated off and suffered not because of 'no trade' but because of 'less trade relevent to everyone else', this weakened their military and resulted in the US then wrecking them. If they were able to trade like everyone else, OR not ultimately militarily attacked, they would have continued on just fine.

>>132618871
effectively bar groups of people from entering many trades than by specifically excluding them. A rather plain girl who badly wants to become a saleswoman, a weakly boy who has set his heart on a job where his weakness handicaps him, as well as in general the apparently less able or less suitable are not necessarily excluded in a competitive society; if they value the position sufficiently they will frequently be able to get a start by a financial sacrifice and will later make good through qualities which at first are not so obvious. But when the authority fixes the remunerations for a whole category and the selection among the candidates is made by an objective test, the strength of their desire for the job will count for very little. The person whose qualifications are not of the standard type, or whose temperament is not of the ordinary kind, will no longer be able to come to special arrangements with an employer whose dispositions will fit in with his special needs: the person who prefers irregular hours or even a happy-go-lucky existence with a small and perhaps uncertain income to a regular routine will no longer have the choice. Conditions will be without exception what in some measure they inevitably are in a large organization—or rather worse, because there will be no possibility of escape. We shall no longer be free to be rational or efficient only when and where we think it worth while; we shall all have to conform to the standards which the planning authority must fix in order to simplify its task. To make this immense task manageable, it will have to reduce the diversity of human capacities and inclinations to a few categories of readily interchangeable units and deliberately to disregard minor personal differences.

File: 1491089707722.jpg (70KB, 564x630px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 564x630px

>>132618715
>fuck history, its dumb

:D. honestly, manipulation is very ez 2 do

test

>>132618918
Although the professed aim of planning would be that man should cease to be a mere means, in fact—since it would be impossible to take account in the plan of individual likes and dislikes—the individual would more than ever become a mere means, to be used by the authority in the service of such abstractions as the “social welfare” or the “good of the community.”
That in a competitive society most things can be had at a price—though it is often a cruelly high price we have to pay—is a fact the importance of which can hardly be overrated. The alternative is not, however, complete freedom of choice, but orders and prohibitions which must be obeyed and, in the last resort, the favor of the mighty.
It is significant of the confusion prevailing on all these subjects that it should have become a cause for reproach that in a competitive society almost everything can be had at a price. If the people who protest against having the higher values of life brought into the “cash nexus” really mean that we should not be allowed to sacrifice our lesser needs in order to preserve the higher values, and that the choice should be made for us, this demand must be regarded as rather peculiar and scarcely testifies to great respect for the dignity of the individual. That life and health, beauty and virtue, honor and peace of mind, can often be preserved only at considerable material cost, and that somebody must make the choice, is as undeniable as that we all are sometimes not prepared to make the material sacrifices necessary to protect those higher values against all injury.

>>132618653
Commie, BTFO. Faggot.

>>132618807
>They are simply controllers of the distribution of wealth
wrong
>>132618818
>that's not what i'm talking about but I won't tell you what I'm talking about read a book even though i just bitched you out for telling me to read a book instead of expounding the entire argument within the book instead of the short summary you presented
nigger

>>132618965
To take only one example: We could, of course, reduce casualties by automobile accidents to zero if we were willing to bear the cost—if in no other way—by abolishing automobiles. And the same is true of thousands of other instances in which we are constantly risking life and health and all the fine values of the spirit, of ourselves and of our fellow-men, to further what we at the same time contemptuously describe as our material comfort. Nor can it be otherwise, since all our ends compete for the same means; and we could not strive for anything but these absolute values if they were on no account to be endangered.
That people should wish to be relieved of the bitter choice which hard facts often impose upon them is not surprising. But few want to be relieved through having the choice made for them by others. People just wish that the choice should not be necessary at all. And they are only too ready to believe that the choice is not really necessary, that it is imposed upon them merely by the particular economic system under which we live. What they resent is, in truth, that there is an economic problem.
In their wishful belief that there is really no longer an economic problem people have been confirmed by irresponsible talk about “potential plenty”— which, if it were a fact, would indeed mean that there is no economic problem which makes the choice inevitable. But although this snare has served socialist propaganda under various names as long as socialism has existed, it is still as palpably untrue as it was when it was first used over a hundred years ago. In all this time not one of the many people who have used it has produced a workable plan of how production could be increased so as to abolish even in western Europe what we regard as poverty—not to speak of the world as a whole. ...5 Yet it is this false hope as much as anything which drives us along the road to planning.

>>132618958
why are the other boards offline what the fuck

>>132618692
Shut up nigger

>>132609100

the efficiency of communism:

everyone starves.

>>132619036
While the popular movement still profits by this false belief, the claim that a planned economy would produce a substantially larger output than the competitive system is being progressively abandoned by most students of the problem. Even a good many economists with socialist views who have seriously studied the problems of central planning are now content to hope that a planned society will equal the efficiency of a competitive system; they advocate planning no longer because of its superior productivity but because it will enable us to secure a more just and equitable distribution of wealth. This is, indeed, the only argument for planning which can be seriously pressed. It is indisputable that if we want to secure a distribution of wealth which conforms to some predetermined standard, if we want consciously to decide who is to have what, we must plan the whole economic system. But the question remains whether the price we should have to pay for the realization of somebody’s ideal of justice is not bound to be more discontent and more oppression than was ever caused by the much-abused free play of economic forces.
We should be seriously deceiving ourselves if for these apprehensions we sought comfort in the consideration that the adoption of central planning would merely mean a return, after a brief spell of a free economy, to the ties and regulations which have governed economic activity through most ages, and that therefore the infringements of personal liberty need not be greater than they were before the age of laissez faire. This is a dangerous illusion.

>>132618715
>I'm not going to answer you, but I'm going to let you know that.
No wonder commies always fail, they are intellectually retarded.

File: Screen-Shot-2015-08-17-at-11.25.33-AM-1024x553.jpg (140KB, 1024x553px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1024x553px

>>132618952
>>132618715

Very. Fucking. Easy.
i sad now

File: stirner.jpg (37KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x281px

>>132618868
pic related makes for a better anarchist than you

>>132619036
his is a dangerous illusion. Even during the periods of European history when the regimentation of economic life went furthest, it amounted to little more than the creation of a general and semipermanent framework of rules within which the individual preserved a wide free sphere. The apparatus of control then available would not have been adequate to impose more than very general directions. And even where the control was most complete it extended only to those activities of a person through which he took part in the social division of labor. In the much wider sphere in which he then still lived on his own products, he was free to act as he chose.
The situation is now entirely different. During the liberal era the progressive division of labor has created a situation where almost every one of our activities is part of a social process. This is a development which we cannot reverse, since it is only because of it that we can maintain the vastly increased population at anything like present standards. But, in consequence, the substitution of central planning for competition would require central direction of a much greater part of our lives than was ever attempted before. It could not stop at what we regard as our economic activities, because we are now for almost every part of our lives dependent on somebody else’s economic activities.6

>>132619155
The passion for the “collective satisfaction of our needs,” with which our socialists have so well prepared the way for totalitarianism, and which wants us to take our pleasures as well as our necessities at the appointed time and in the prescribed form, is, of course, partly intended as a means of political education. But it is also the result of the exigencies of planning, which consists essentially in depriving us of choice, in order to give us whatever fits best into the plan and that at a time determined by the plan.
It is often said that political freedom is meaningless without economic freedom. This is true enough, but in a sense almost opposite from that in which the phrase is used by our planners. The economic freedom which is the prerequisite of any other freedom cannot be the freedom from economic care which the socialists promise us and which can be obtained only by relieving the individual at the same time of the necessity and of the power of choice; it must be the freedom of our economic activity which, with the right of choice, inevitably also carries the risk and the responsibility of that right.

File: read motherfucker.png (17KB, 1090x83px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 1090x83px

>>132618745 (You)

>>132618952
>>132619137
nationalism is communism now? what point are you trying to make here?
>>132619133
summarize what he typed and I'll take you seriously. But I'm fairly convinced you didn't bother reading. If you read anything at all you wouldn't be capitalist.

>>132615784
>After communism: Russian navy is second strongest navy

That's a hilarious joke if I've ever seen one. Russia's navy never managed to reach the level of the UK, let alone surpassing it, and there's a very serious argument to be had regarding other Western nations in comparison to it.

Second strongest isn't anywhere close to where it managed to reach at its peak.

They could literally just stop buying overprized phones.. literally.

>>132616695
>Opening the floodgates to mass immigration makes wages stagnant

Who could have figured that out?

>>132619290
How do you warrant absence of social classes money and state?

Communism is for poor fucking niggahs communism won't last like in the country doing really bad

>>132619443
oh, and that's why Europe isn't suffering from stagnant wages at all?

>>132618075
I'm a pacifist and even Marx saw the burgoisie as a victim of capitalism, just as much as the working class. But I will feel no sympathy who make people suffer when the suffering people defend themselves.
You are starting to sound a little unhinged.
>>132618181
I don't demand for people to suffer. People are already suffering at the hands of the rich and it will lead to more suffering in the other direction. I hope to stop the suffering.

>>132619290
the entire """"philosophy"""" is structured on a contradiction in terms and you expect me to react with anything other than hilarity?

AHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA

>>132617666
hasn't it been the other way around a few minutes ago? I am evil because supposedly I want people to suffer?
now I am a cuck because I do not want the slaughter of millions of innocent people?
do you have any ability for self-reflection?

File: 1485484397723.jpg (98KB, 537x536px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 537x536px

>>132619571
what exactly are you responding to?

>>132609100
All those invilved with the supply and production chain will eat tonight, what is on Venezuelas menu tonight ?

File: communism.jpg (89KB, 500x746px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 500x746px

>>132610637
Capitalism goes into austerity mode, culling the herd slowly and miserably.
Communism culls the herd rapidly during shortages, proving communism to be more efficient, since human depopulation seems to be the goal of each cruel plutocrat controlled system.

File: china.jpg (113KB, 723x372px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 723x372px

>>132619297
ur trying to convince me that shit is desirable..., over and over like a broken record; i tell u shit is shit, and u pretend 2 tell me why it isnt; that is manipulation, denial and pathetic; there's a vast difference between the system i live under, & the system u choose 2 live under

File: TDSPIiS.png (575KB, 1016x776px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 1016x776px

>>132619522
maybe you should read up on marx. that racist mofo was not the vanilla good guy, you believe him to be.

>>132616352
did I say that it was not real capitalism no I did not in fact it is. My argument was against extremes if anything, an argument for a regulated capitalist market. Your commie shit has not and will never work.

>>132616398
and the further centralization of power and wealth achieves this how?

>>132616695
Gee wealth and power controlled by the few, kind of+ sounds like every economic and governmental system that has come before with few exceptions.

>>132616866
And yet every attempt ends up with the very few controlling everything. Put absolute power to the state what can go wrong with that.

>>132616968
there is a world of difference between theory and the real world. Things might look good on paper, but it does not matter until you get the lab and hook it up.

>>132617264
America is a constitutional republic not a democracy.

>>132619739
you told me nothing. you posted nothing but quotes about black people and political manipulation tactics....

>>132609100
Behold the efficiency of communism create a system of equality and you succeed because everyone is starving and thats the improvement of communism.

File: original.jpg (6KB, 160x120px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 160x120px

>>132619739
o w8, im sry, 'choose'

>>132619763
I'm not a marxist, I'm a communist. I'm well aware of the flaws of the person Karl Marx.

Try to argue against my arguments. Not the character of people I don't even claim alliegiance to.

>>132619327
>Russia's navy never managed to reach the level of the UK

Surface ships are obsolete in superpower conflicts

Russia had good subs, and lots of them. They were kind of rattly but they worked very well.

>>132609100
> capitalism is shit
Sometimes.
> communism will win
What a strange conclusion.

>>132619763
marx was a fiscal retard who at one point got in so deep with moneylenders that he had to sell all of his family's clothes so that he was the only one able to go outside because he had the only pair of pants

this is the man who communists idolize

>>132609100
When automation properly arrives, communism will be inevitable. Capitalism wouldn't be able to survive in a system where most jobs are done by machines rather than human workers

File: quote-but-let-me-offer-you-my-definition-of-social-justice-i-keep-what-i-earn-and-you-keep-walter-e-williams-50-2-0241.jpg (67KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 850x400px

>>132619921
u keep posting without exemplifying. its boring; and u wonder y i am too? this is always 'mutual'

>>132620096
It easily could with UBI

All capitalism needs to work is for wealth to be distributed enough that people keep being able to buy things

>>132609100
>not realizing that Fascism would stop all these things because it tries to acheive economic self reliance

>>132609100
You could have chosen any flag why did you go with your own

>>132618909
>No my argument is that communist nations need to globally trade to compete with capitalist nations who are globally trading
Whoa, hold on there comrade are you actually suggesting fraternization with the fascists capitalist pigs? Don't let the commissar hear that kind of talk.

I know this may be hard for you to comprehend but the US isn't the entire fucking world and there a plenty of other nation to trade with.
>oh boo hoo this nation that constantly antagonizes the US is failing because the US won't trade with it

> The issue is that communists got isolated off and suffered
>"GLORIOUS COMMUNIST REVOLUTION!! Bread lines for all! Smash property rights! fuck you imperialist!"
>"w...why a I being isolated? fucking amrikkka's fault!"

>If they were able to trade like everyone else, OR not ultimately militarily attacked, they would have continued on just fine.
>Soviets spread communism and fund revolutions around the world
>Complain when the US push back against it
>"if only you would feed this cancerous aggressive ideology instead of trying to contain it, it would prosper!"
yeah no

>>132619835
>and the further centralization of power and wealth achieves this how?
>>132619835
>and the further centralization of power and wealth achieves this how?
communism is the decentralization of power to the workers
I understand that communists in the past have tried to achieve that through centralization of power in authoritarian regimes and I don't defend those actions.
>>132619835
>there is a world of difference between theory and the real world. Things might look good on paper, but it does not matter until you get the lab and hook it up.
I don't understand how this relates to people telling me to read entire books in order to be allowed to continue arguing on this image board

>>132619835
>did I say that it was not real capitalism no I did not in fact it is. My argument was against extremes if anything, an argument for a regulated capitalist market. Your commie shit has not and will never work.
>soviet union "fell" because states seceded and gorbachev reverted to capitalism
>paris commune "collapsed" because the french and germans kept attacking it.
>GUYS LOOK IT DOESNT WORK
don't make me laugh

>Gee wealth and power controlled by the few, kind of+ sounds like every economic and governmental system that has come before with few exceptions.
you're right. dictatorships are very upsetting

>And yet every attempt ends up with the very few controlling everything. Put absolute power to the state what can go wrong with that.
this is not exclusive to socialism

>America is a constitutional republic not a democracy.
never said it was. Never said it should be either.

>>132620254
you're not posting anything related to socialism. you could just stop posting in this thread if you want to discuss something else

>>132620337
>the US isn't the entire fucking world
Yes it is.

>yeah no
dont do that