Why is it that most commies don't actually know shit about communism?

Ah, here comes the retard. Right on schedule.

>Marx's books are not economically or logically thorough, so I don't think you know much about communism either.
That's because like most communists, your reading comprehension is shit tier. I didn't assert Marx's writings were economically or logically thorough. My point was the majority of campus communists treat them as such.

>If you're so glib about your understanding of communism, then summarize it's economic and political philosophy for me without running to Marx, Trotsky, Lenin, or Stalin for help. What is communism in your opinion?

>summarize it's
The retard, again, reveals itself. Here's a hint -- as with most ideologies, there really isn't a single set of beliefs that constitute a unified view of communism. While there are common threads, there are a variety of flavors of communism and no shortage of autistically verbose infighting between them.

>"Everyone gets everything they need and rich people can't take it away from them"
Everyone does get everything they need, but everyone must also work for it. That's the part that most faggots on Cred Forums exclude and sperg out on communism.
>They don't quite grasp that it's not something achievable
Communism in simple economic terms requires one to work towards maximizing group rewards rather than individual rewards. By working towards maximizing group rewards, the individual rewards of all members in a group are higher than if they sought to maximize their individual rewards. This was proved by Bengt Holmstrom in 1982 ("Moral Hazard in Teams").
>and that even the act of pursuing it leads to atrocities against mankind.
Capitalism is holier than thou? I thought we were waging wars in ME just to get their oil. I'm sorry, I never realized that you who just said people don't critically examine their beliefs believes that capitalism does not lead to atrocities. You're no better than the other sheep you judge.

>No, but it is why a bevy of misinformed college age pseudo-moralizers advocate FOR communism.
Oh. Yeah, that is true. Those pseudo-commies are indeed the biggest fags around.

large unaccountable governments lead to the middle east crisis, not capitalism. same reason why communism was so hostile and occupied foreign countries.

Capitalism is an “unfair” system that values someone who has the intelligence, risk taking, willpower, and luck to succeed or lay the groundworks for their kids to succeed.

Communism is very “fair” in that everyone gets a piece of the pie. Community should pull together and take care of every individual. So that guy who is always working real hard and putting his all into something can’t lord it over the lazy sack of shit you are. Both of you get at least the minimum amount of support. Nevermind the eventual outcome that someone who is good at something that especially in need by the community will naturally get preferred treatment or return and we’re fucking back at the very thing commies hate so much.

>real communism hasn't been tried
Every fucking time

>Ah, here comes the retard. Right on schedule.
No need to project. We're not even 10 posts into the thread user.
>My point was the majority of campus communists treat them as such.
Why call the campus wannabes communists when you know Marx's teachings are not true communism? Strawman much?
>summarize it's
>Oooooooh snap. I got user on a typo. This must buuuuuuurn and it'll show everyone how mature I am and how my ideas are superior. It's time to get the aloe vera out.
Kys high school faggot.
>Here's a hint -- as with most ideologies, there really isn't a single set of beliefs that constitute a unified view of communism.
Since you're obviously some high school fag or freshman fag, communism has well defined economic and political interpretations with the field of economics.
Economically, communism requires the control of the means of production to be overseen by the entire community - or all members of an economy - rather than individuals for private profit. The goal of this is to ensure everyone works towards maximizing the group rewards rather than individual rewards. Mathematically, it has been shown that maximizing group rewards leads to higher individual rewards for all members in a group than when they seek to maximize only their individual rewards. Hence, economically and mathematically, it has been shown that centrally planned economies are just as good if not better than capitalistic economies.

Politically, communism is an extreme form of socialism which advocates for a classless society - no discrimination based on race, gender, color, or creed.

>While there are common threads, there are a variety of flavors of communism and no shortage of autistically verbose infighting between them.
Fuck yourself newfag. Get off my board and take your pretentious asshole from where all your ideas come to /r9k/. Fucking half wit.

How can it argue for a classless society when all it does is agitate class warfare?

You seem reasonable enough.

My biggest problem with communism by far is that it seems impossible to actually implement without becoming authoritarian. You end up with a new upper class of the old revolutionary intelligentsia, only now without any institutional checks and balances on the burgeoning upper class power, and more often than not it becomes illegal to even acknowledge the existence of the newly created unbound elite.

The transition to distributed rule away from party rule seems like it would require the entire military and party leadership to be unrealistically benevolent and self sacrificing, which is why things inevitably get stuck at your run of the mill 'not real communists'. All that seems to be achieved in all practical applications of Marxist theory to nations so far is making an entirely new upper class, and unbinding them from traditional checks on power. Fair assessment?

>large unaccountable governments lead to the middle east crisis, not capitalism.
So our capitalist economy had no role in corporatists buying political power by buying candidates? If you had a large accountable government, or for that matter even a small accountable government, the corporatists would never take over the government and the U.S. would never wage wars anywhere?
So I'm guessing wiping out the Indians, Barbary wars, Opium wars, American Civil War, Spanish American War, Central American wars would have never happened?
I don't know what you did in school, but why don't you go read up on the number of wars the U.S has participated in before we had a large unaccountable government and then assert that capitalism doesn't lead to wars?

It's all the Jew bankers you faggot.

Capitalism is fine, I’m happy in my country and I couldn’t give a fuck about poor people if I tried.

>Capitalism is an “unfair” system that values someone who has the intelligence, risk taking, willpower, and luck to succeed or lay the groundworks for their kids to succeed.
What's so fair about a system where 1 billion of the world's population feeds the entire 7.2 billion and is still on an average the poorest section of society?
You're smug about intelligence and risk taking only because some faggot forces farmers to sell their goods at low prices so that you can shit post on Cred Forums about how capitalism rewards faggots with intelligence and risk taking.

You fucking faggot, risk taking inherently implies that there's a huge amount of luck involved. Do you know what fucking luck is? Things that you didn't account for going your way.

Capitalism is not some system which rewards intelligence. Capitalism is a fairly arbitrary system which has a higher probability of rewarding faggots who don't think twice about conning people than people who work hard and are principled.
>Communism is very “fair” in that everyone gets a piece of the pie
Yes. Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin were faggots who never understood communism and only wanted power for themselves.

>Community should pull together and take care of every individual.
No you fucking retard. Everyone should work towards the betterment of the community. You're fucking crippled? Doesn't matter, you still try to be useful in whatever way you can so that the group as a whole benefits from your actions instead of you sitting on a wheelchair and claiming gibs from others.
>So that guy who is always.....
Yeah, I also thought you're a retard who doesn't know jack shit about communism but is shitposting on Cred Forums just to try and appear smart - when all you have is shit for brains.

>>real communism hasn't been tried
>Every fucking time
Capitalism has been around since the discovery of farming - so older than 12,000BC. All non-communist economic systems where capitalist where the means of production was in the hands of a few - private ownership. Communism has been tried since 1917 and still you sperg out on this statement? Fucking moron.

I can understand why poor illiterate Russian peasants with nothing to their name were attracted to communism, but in 1st-world nations, even the poorest nigger lives like a king compared to what those peasants experienced in 1900s Russia.

The only reason to be attracted to communism is because you’re a failure at life, looking for excuses for why you’re not rich and not too bright to begin with. Imagine if all those left-bots put their time and energy into building a career, they’d be far happier people.

>How can it argue for a classless society when all it does is agitate class warfare?
I don't argue for a classless society. I'm explaining what communism is. Now is communism implementable? Not with the current evolution of humans. You need humans who have a genetic trait that fires their dopamine circuits when they help others to have communism. Currently, a large section of the world is primarily self-interested. So no, now is not the time to implement communism. When it is time to implement communism, it will happen naturally - there won't be a need for a political party to usurp power and do shit.

Because Capitalism has failed them. Now they vote for the state to pick up the slack. Don’t want this to happen? Tell companies to pay better wages and I don’t mean these garbage bonuses that come in the form of ass kissing to the president from meme companies like Comshit.

Capitalism in the US definitely values intelligence more than luck. There are different kinds of intelligence, btw. Why do you think Jake Paul is a millionaire? You sound mad bc you’re poor.

I see. So we're still waiting for the workers of the world to unite.

so i get control of a global industry just because i work for one branch of it? also proof for the group rewards lead to higher individual rewards because ceos still make astronomically more money than managers and workers because of their self rewarding nature. how can communism advocate for a classless society when it highlights the greivances between classes like race and wealth so much in the 21st century? america south korea and japan still have the highest income averages of the modern world while being mostly capitalist with few government run industries.
none of those wars you listed are comparable to the nation building of the middle east that has happened for the last 17 years. what about capitalism was the driving factor of these wars by the way? corporatists buying political power? well that sounds like the problem of unaccountable government. over 80% of americans believed that another terrorist attack would follow 9/11 which was the justification for the war, not oil. the indians was british imperialism, not american capitalism. the american civil war was about the legal overstepping of the federal government regarding states rights. once again none of these are comparable to the middle east where given the choice americans would have wanted to pull out. tell me, if a foreign country attacked a building like the world trade center would you just turn the other cheek or would you retaliate? but please tell me how it was the fault of capitalism again.
also please prove to me that the citizens started wars because of capitalism instead of a small group of unaccountable elites who sent their footsoldiers to war.

>What is it about communism that causes this? Why does it attract mostly retards?

It's shit-tier ideology meant to attract disenfranchised young dumbfucks who have no skin in the game of life by convincing them that everything around them is a zero-sum game that's being rigged by everyone who has more than they do, which leads them to think that the only way they can get a "fair shake" is to redistribute everyone else's shit.

Basically, an ideology that's valid to 18-25 year olds, the mentally handicapped, and those who don't want to work for what they have.

Unironically this, the only people I know who desire total socialism are abject failures, and the non-failures who support it are in positions where they can espouse ideals from a position of privilege

Yeah dude, it’ll happen eventually! All the proles will revolt, no political party needed. Lmfao

>My biggest problem with communism by far is that it seems impossible to actually implement without becoming authoritarian.
Yeah, this is true. I don't think humans have genetically evolved for communism to be relevant. In order to seek the maximization of group rewards, you need to have a predisposition towards liking your fellow human beings. Most of us are still self interested and thus now's not the time for communism.
>ou end up with a new upper class of the old revolutionary intelligentsia, only now without any institutional checks and balances on the burgeoning upper class power, and more often than not it becomes illegal to even acknowledge the existence of the newly created unbound elite.
True.
>The transition to distributed rule away from party rule seems like it would require the entire military and party leadership to be unrealistically benevolent and self sacrificing, which is why things inevitably get stuck at your run of the mill 'not real communists'.
True
>All that seems to be achieved in all practical applications of Marxist theory to nations so far is making an entirely new upper class, and unbinding them from traditional checks on power.
True, except Marx didn't really understand what communism entailed economically - most mathematical proofs for communism came in the 20th century.
>Fair assessment?
Except for Marx, yes, everything else was accurate.

If you guys understood communism you'd be communist

Because if you knew anything about communism, you wouldnt be a communist.

>It's all the Jew bankers you faggot.
So communism sucks because of Jews. Capitalism sucks because of Jews. Socialism sucks because of Jews. Do you have anything else faggot?

>Capitalism is fine, I’m happy in my country and I couldn’t give a fuck about poor people if I tried.
>Capitalism is fine, I’m happy in my country and I couldn’t give a fuck about poor people until they came for my head.
FTFY

Communism and capitalism are both Jewish inventions. Care to take another swing at it?

I will be a communist if I am the faceless unelected bureaucrat that makes all the rules that everyone but me has to live under.

The reason is that they haven't watch this video yet
youtube.com/watch?v=glzXtLvloVo

Op is from russian living in the usa with the sole purpose of posting propraganda

They are called "useful idiots" for a reason OP. They don't know shit about communism nor about economics. Once their "dream" happens, they'll get gulag'd anyway.

Because actual Communist literature is long, mostly incorrect, and often self-contradicting. Most Communists really just want to virtue signal. You don't need to read Marx to demand a combination of open borders, UBI, reparations, prison abolition, hate speech laws, nationalization of the entire economy, and gun bans, which are the typical American Communist talking points.

If you understood anything about the USSR or communist history, you'd be a communist

I think people adopt communism because they are indoctrinated to hate the United States, and somehow recognize communism as something opposed by our society. It's not from well thought out reasoning. Smart people can't be communists in the 21st century unless they are also very evil.

>Capitalism in the US definitely values intelligence more than luck.
And you say this because intelligence can be measured objectively?
>Why do you think Jake Paul is a millionaire?
You're definitely trolling at this stage.
>You sound mad bc you’re poor.
Nope, work in a hospital with 140K, wife and two kids.

Faggot.

Communism is about making you feel good about starving to death.

Fact.

No fun in communism, and if you hate capitalism good bye to your starbucks you cunts.

If there needs to be a perfect society with selflessly evolved people why even have communism? A philosopher king would be better.

>I see. So we're still waiting for the workers of the world to unite.
If it happens, then it'll happen organically. I don't know which evolutionary outcome will be true - will all of us evolve to care about each other - or will a section of the population be self interested?
Capitalism is for single cellular life - maximize individual rewards. Communism is for multi-cellular life - maximize individual rewards by maximizing group rewards.
So yeah, it has to happen genetically where we're predisposed to caring for each other.

Communism will fail even if there's a significant number of self-interested individuals in the system - cancerous cells.

They never will. False consciousness is real and powerful and “evolution” will never lead to a revolution that results in communism. It’s not like I’m rich—I’m working class but I’m happy. Self-interest is a permanent human quality.

Retard

>so i get control of a global industry just because i work for one branch of it?
Learn to greentext faggot. I don't know which of your responses correspond to which things I said. Fucking faggot. Learn to present your points properly.

You don't know the first fucking thing about engineering regime change.

>be communist at age 16
>in favor of killing a billion people if necessary in order to establish communism worldwide

>be ancap age 23
>muh nap

I laugh when leftists say right wingers don't care about other people.

I just said there are multiple kinds of intelligence—if harnessed properly they all lead to some form of financial success. You’re too dumb to realize that my Jake Paul example is apt, faggot. Post picture of your wife.

bu-bu-but he surely stayed at a Holiday Inn Express

>Communism and capitalism are both Jewish inventions.
Are you a Jewish creation as well?
>Care to take another swing at it?
No, if you didn't figure out that I was calling you a retard based on what I said, I don't think me saying it again will make a difference.

Cheers. I meant Marxist theory as a broad descriptor of general communist theory rather than referring to the man himself.

I don't really know how anyone could call themselves a follower of a political ideology while acknowledging that the ideology is also totally impossible to implement but hey, at least you're honest about it.

I still wouldn't give a fuck.
I would mow down the poor people with my machine guns for trying to take my stuff.
Fuck them and fuck you.
Without me, I am nothing.

The only way a collectivist society succeeds is if total race homogeneity is present, and even then self interests would get in the way.

So you're out of arguments and now you resort to personal attacks. Nice.

They are weaklings and losers who think they would be empowered in a communist revolution, when really they would be the first sheep to the slaughter. They all think they’ll end up as overseers and on the party committees and can’t envisage themselves ending up in the work camps or out on the fields.

He’s a troll

>If there needs to be a perfect society with selflessly evolved people why even have communism?
Like I said, you can't have communism. It's an economic and political philosophy which will automatically be implemented when it's time.
>A philosopher king would be better.
You didn't understand the point. The point is not who rules, the point is how are the members of the system. Are they predisposed to working for the group? Yes, then the system will naturally implement communism based on multiple optimizing iterations. Are there self interested individuals in the system? Yes, then the system will be stuck with capitalism.

I don't know why a king would make a difference here. He's just one person - what is important is the nature of the remaining people in the system.

I take him for one of those rabbit/leftypol types who actually believes this kind of claptrap.

If you haven't memorized Great Leader Kim's 18-volume analytical presentation of the Juche Idea and discussed it for several decades at nightly worker's criticism/self-criticism struggle sessions, you have no right to comment on any of this.

>False consciousness is real and powerful and “evolution” will never lead to a revolution that results in communism.
I never said evolution will lead to a revolution that results in communism. In fact, I think communism cannot be implemented politically, it has to happen naturally, and if it is indeed implemented politically, then it's just con artists vying for power.

Holy fuck, you’re actually retarded.
>when it’s “””””time”””””” it’ll happen!!!
Yes, Karl Marx correctly predicted the endpoint of humanity’s collective evolution. Do you realize how dumb you sound?

>You don't know the first fucking thing about engineering regime change.
Why would I want to engineer a regime change? I just said that overthrowing a government and implementing communism will not work unless everyone in the system is genetically predisposed to helping each other.

Was my cellular analogy too convoluted for your pea sized brain to understand?

And for it to happen “naturally” as you’ve said multiple times, humans would have to evolve to value group success over individual success. Stop backtracking, nigger.

>and fancy themselves as dissident intellectuals.
A Communist is a bourgeois who is so retarded he thinks he is a prole.

Why is he here?

They imagine themselves in power. It's quite simply a power trip; in their minds, who could deny that forcing everyone to submit to your rule while you have all the shiny things is the best hope for society? No one, because they will either be gulag'd or executed on the spot, that's who.

What they fail to realize is that they'll be executed anyway, either for being disillusioned with the revolution and their role being diminished in it, or simply knowing too much.

suuuuure

If I cared I'd go find out. Apparently there's some increased effort from probably one of the usual gang of suspects to try to establish more of a presence on Cred Forums. They've been getting better in terms of rhetoric.

Except we are all proles DINGUS

>I just said there are multiple kinds of intelligence—if harnessed properly they all lead to some form of financial success.
>If you have some form of intelligence and you harness it then 100% you will succeed.
Hello fellow white man. How goes the evening?

>You’re too dumb to realize that my Jake Paul example is apt, faggot.
>You're too dumb to realize that young whores on YouTube who are successful only because the petrodollar allows Americans to indulge in shit level addictions like YouTube videos are intelligent because they feed off of young moronic minds.
>Sluts like Kardashians are intelligent because they whore themselves out
>Whoring is a form of intelligence
Kys.
>Post picture of your wife.
Why? Isn't your hand and imagination enough for you to jack off tonight?

? Ape?
They’re getting worse in terms of rhetoric if this thread is any indication.

>sent from my iphone

>if harnessed properly
Please read. I’ve never known this to not the case. Or do you think all the low class people in this country are temporarily embarrassed geniuses?

And yes devotion to and manipulation of an audience that results in millions of dollars in revenue is a kind of intelligence. Use your head, imbecile.

>I meant Marxist theory as a broad descriptor of general communist theory rather than referring to the man himself.
Ah ok, I see where you were coming from then. Agree with you completely then.
>I don't really know how anyone could call themselves a follower of a political ideology while acknowledging that the ideology is also totally impossible to implement
I'm an economist. We have mathematical proofs to show that communism works, and if it doesn't work in real life then it must mean that human genetic evolution - our self interested nature - plays a big part. Like I said before, if communism is implemented successfully, then it will be because of genetic evolution and not because people implemented it politically.

Just like how all the cells in our body work in unison to optimize our life processes, you need people to work in unison to realize the benefit of communism. However, if you have self-interested individuals - cancerous cells, then you can't have communism and must regress to capitalism.

Because western world has NO (zero, 0, null ) commies. What you have is a internal traitors working on country disruption. If they had any other ideology for that - they will follow it as they do it here in russia pretending to be "nazi", "democrats" or "liberals".

An economist who works in a hospital? Powerful..

> Why are amurricans derp?

/thread

>I'm an economist. We have mathematical proofs to show that communism works
kek, did you get your PhD at UMass or the New School then? or do you just count Cockshott's book as a mathematical proof that Communism works?

Because their Commie handlers leave out the good stuff.

If I think about it on like a two-year scale or so, it's gone from yelling at the sky type stuff to people who can maintain an extended debate.

Marx was a Satanist spook who worked for his banker in-laws. His entire role was to subvert meaningful revolution that would affect his financier-class family.

It works well as a viral ideology because the philosophy / talking points were engineered by spooks who knew what they were doing in the context of the suffering of the human condition.

But also never forget that Bolsheviks were largely Jewish racists intent on destroying Russia, and directly responsible for the murder of 10s of millions.

Absolutely, it’s just a shame they can’t do better. Or maybe it’s a shame that they even try, a true collectivist wouldn’t waste time that could be spent helping their community.

Commie passing by.

For all retards not understanding or deliberately strawing Communism, it is about workers control and ending class conflict.

Pol is echo chamber and you REAL extreme right wingers as some of you, can't express your ideas anywhere then here as annon fags among people who larp and take everything as joke on this board.

Why am I here? I come here for lol and to larp, sometimes as anarcho-cap (as dystopic idea it is quite interesting)

Stay mad and go do some school shootings ;) pew pew

ps. USA becoming third world country! and Trump/Republican administration is pumping more money in military.

youtube.com/watch?v=fAKyi3SYC_I

Well, you see, only productive people would bother wanting to seize the means of production. These types just say it will magically happen some day on its own.

>ending class conflict
>by stirring up class conflict
k

Hahahahahahhaha

10/10

Personally I find a system that only works without human individuality to be missing the point at best, with the potential for absolute abhorrence at worst.

All the cells working for the body is fair enough as an example, but those cells don't have an individual human experience, and I do. I don't want to experience life as a component, I want to experience it as a system, if you understand what I'm saying.

An optimised economic model might not account for what the destruction of individuality necessary to that model's implementation does to the human experience. I don't think a loss of individuality would be positive for humanity.

Fuuu kys

Economists are clinically indistinguishable from sociopaths.

This

Communism sounds very appealing to the lower classes. But the sophisticated know it's BS

Put another way, a good system for ants may not be a good system for men.

This is pretty much the reverse of true, Communism attracts the "intellectuals" because it plays to their absolute conviction that they ought to control everything in society.

People like you are so fucking retard. You ramble on about the injustice of the capitalist system, and how it creates poverty and social injustice, and then on the other hand you support open borders, and unsustainable legal, and illegal immigration.

Cultural marxism makes everybody dump.

Those are the low class intellectuals, which most seem to be in my experience.

Fpbp

>ending class conflict.
Fuck off faggot. You just want to steal property from the "upper class" because you think that you're entitled.

Communists usually argue that third world immigration is caused by capitalism and is in the interests of the bourgeoisie, but they would never actually support deporting anyone. That would be racist!

That doesnt mame them intellectuals. It makes them sociopaths.

>You ramble on about the injustice of the capitalist system,
You have no idea what Communism is about. Stay mad and start reading.

How is going in Canada, will Canadian culture be destroyed, since soo many immigrants are coming in? How much do you give it until major economic, moral and cultural collapse or when race war in Canada will start to stop all that? Maybe you should DO SOMETING ABOUT IT?

A true communist must be a racist, as racial homogeneity was always implicit in early socialist writings.

the sophisticated truly love communism

Leftism has pretty much moved on from class conflict anyway. It's mostly about identity struggle nowadays. Obviously, race struggle is a bit more effective here in America.

Communism can work for some countries that have low human development, and need time to grow their capabilities to produced and be competitive with other countries. And this is applicable to smallish nations. Cuba as an example.

But in other countries, like the US, it will never work, because it is already at a completely different stage of civilization. And it's much bigger. Only through tyranny could communism work in a place like the US.

Of course. I think it’s a grave error to apply Marxist thought to race studies, though.

so you say learn to green text and suddenly you dont have to address any points. lazy commie gtfo of this board

Communism never did attract the sharpest tools in the shed.

>in early socialist writings.
You might give source on that? oh shit, I forgot this is pol where people just spew shit for giggles and larp.

Beside, Marxist are not dogmatist (for what they are here a lot of times wrongly accused), we LOATH dogmatism. Who cares what some old prick wrote 100 years ago, when totally different material conditions were then now. Marxist point is, that Ideological though of Marxism is changing and upgrading together as time progresses material conditions - unlike some other, which are lost in history due being so retarted that it was unable to upgrade them and walk into future of ours.

I do no what communism is all about, I have been to communist countries, and work with people that were born and live in those societies, and they have nothing positive to talk about it.

Canada no longer needs any immigrants, not because of "precious" culture", but because our economy can no longer offer prospects for people with little to no education to find the opportunity to have a decent quality of life.

Furthermore, our coffee shops are filled with idiots like you, with university educations, serving coffees cause they can't find work.

And no matter how many taxes we pay, we still have tons of poverty, and drug use, and so.

In the US, the problem is much much bigger, but you're so fucking dumb you can't even grasp that simple fact.

sure thing. is this something you tell yourself before sleep?

>we loath dogmatism
Yes, you get 5 different Marxists in a room, ask them a question, and get 5 mutually contradictory answers, and each Marxist will tell the other that they're destined for the Gulag.

If you’d read any Marx you’d know he doesn’t talk about blaq ppl

And there it is. It's not in the best interest of the leaders to have their minions well informed on the ideology.

>muh anecdotal evidence.
Are you just autistic or trying to deceive yourself?

reuters.com/article/us-communism-nostalgia/special-report-in-eastern-europe-people-pine-for-socialism-idUSTRE5A701320091108

Literal propaganda article full of anti-communist propaganda says otherwise. You can use google and find thousands of articles or polls where people express that socialism was better.

You did not answer my question.

pic - white man living in a tent :(

>Wars for resources - resource supply stability are inherently capitalist

lol no, every civilization fights over resources, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany fought bitterly in the Caucasus (incl. Stalingrad) because the Nazi's were going for broke to take the oil near the Caspian/east caucasus

I've tried to ask Commies to pinpoint who exactly is Proletariat and who's Bourgeoisie when it comes to middle management, self-employed, franchisers, etc. They can't even outline who they want to steal from, let alone the philosophy behind it. Communism is a brainlet "ideology" for fifteen year olds

Wow that didn't take long
>define Communism without using any of the literature from the people that liferally created it.
Fucking spastic.

Wat are you even talking about. Leaders? Communism is about workers control and democracy. Were you hit on head as young or are you just being lazy and do not read?

Nah, commushits like you aren't worth wasting valuable neuron activity on. Your failed cult is being relegated to the dust bin of history as we post.

Let’s ask all the dead people, nigger lover

How do you implement this endstate realistically?

See

> In order to seek the maximization of group rewards, you need to have a predisposition towards liking your fellow human beings.
That doesn't happen outside of high trust societies. Ethnocentrist societies are invariably high trust, and all the most successful commie countries have been ethnocentrist - for example China post-Mao - the PRC is 100% dedicated to Han supremacy and gives not two fucks to minorities

You don't. "communist magic" happens on its own, and then you get utopia.

Ah yes, because all the socialist revolutions of history were achieved by a leaderless working class. You’re falling back on the “not real Communism” meme, aren’t you? The workers never had control in communist countries.

Are you fucking dense? He was asking that guy to define Communism without referencing the people that created Communism. Ok here's one for you, I'll ask you to define Keynesian economics without referencing any of his works. Off you go.

gommies like the idea of a revolution, they want to hurt rich normal (sane) people and get free shit. I think they imagine that they'll have some kind of position of authority too.

they're kind of like some neo-nazis who only want an excuse to kill or hurt minorities

Suppose that you have a society of altruistic people trying to maximize group rewards. Now suppose through mutation a single individual attempts to cheat and better his own rewards at the expense of the group.

He should be able to reach a superior outcome for himself even though it is an inferior outcome (even vastly so) for the group.

Thus such a trait is selected for. Evolutionary game theory does not allow such a society to evolve truly. The best we can do is trust based cooperation games.

Again, is this something you tell yourself before going to sleep?

Last time I've checked retarded side of youtube and other social media - we were WINNING WAR with muh cultural Marxism, all collages are our institutions which fill young with Marxism :)

nationalreview.com/2017/03/socialism-poll-american-culture-faith-institute-george-barna-tradition-liberty-capitalism/

pic related. they are having parades in public, while you retards are hiding here in this echo chamber

>They all think they’ll end up as overseers and on the party committees and can’t envisage themselves ending up in the work camps or out on the fields.

They won't end up in either place, they'll end up in mass graves because they are overwhelming idelogical threats.

It's more likely people like some average poltards - high conscientious (duty driven), low empathy, shrewd opportunistic political operators, will end up higher in positions of authority in the party.
The fact of the matter is Communism as an ideology attracts creative free spirits, and then it kills them because creativity is individualism, to be free spirited is self serving

Socialism is not Communism.

Do you understand that, with modern technology, we have nearly resolved the issue of supply and demand for most of the basic needs of human beings in developed nations?

Do you realize that we have reached nearly peak efficient for just about single industry out there? And also, that through technological development, this dynamic is accelerating.

So what does this mean?

It means we no longer need millions of workers to do jobs that require little to no education, or even low IQ.

So where are we going from here?

You already have millions of poor people in the US that cannot find jobs, and you want to import more of them, when they bring absolutely zero benefit to the US economy.

How is Communism or Socialism going to improve on this situation?

>t. Brainlet who never went to business college

Seriously, at least read a book before you embarrass yourself online.

I think you would have to be pretty deluded to think there aren't some geniuses among the low class people. Perhaps they never had the chance to apply that genius, since image is so important to advancement. Perhaps they don't find money to be a worthwhile pursuit.

A lot of what makes e-celebs famous isn't really intelligence, just industriousness, which is different. There are absolutely lazy geniuses.

>Now suppose through mutation a single individual attempts to cheat and better his own rewards at the expense of the group.
Then communism is fucked. But this most likely won't happen just the same way multi-cellular organism don't devolve into single cellular organisms.
>He should be able to reach a superior outcome for himself even though it is an inferior outcome (even vastly so) for the group.
Correct.
>Thus such a trait is selected for.
But he will reproduce with others who don't have the same trait. But yeah, I think in spirit what you're saying is true. The trait can be propagated.
>The best we can do is trust based cooperation games.
Sure, but cooperation games completely abstract resource allocation within a group, and in that regard, they're actually smoke and mirrors, in my opinion.

>Ethnocentrist societies are invariably high trust, and all the most successful commie countries have been ethnocentrist
Yeah, perhaps NatSoc is the first step to proper communism.

One, you can’t even spell; and two, “democratic socialists” are a powerless group who don’t even put Marxist ideals into practice.

>lol no, every civilization fights over resources
Jackass, there's been no need to fight over resources since the discovery of farming. We're just fighting to feed our low-level evolutionary addictions at this stage.

>but those cells don't have an individual human experience,
True. I guess you're right. Perhaps just like single cellular organisms, you'll always have individualistic people in the world, and those who like multi-cellular organisms care for the group, make their own communities.
>An optimised economic model might not account for what the destruction of individuality necessary to that model's implementation does to the human experience. I don't think a loss of individuality would be positive for humanity.
Perhaps you're right. Maybe evolving to a hive mind is not the best in terms of experience since we can't experience the universe through an individual lens.

>kek, did you get your PhD at UMass or the New School then?
Purdue.
> or do you just count Cockshott's book as a mathematical proof that Communism works?
"Moral Hazard in Teams" by Bengt Holmstrom - 1982.

>Socialism is not Communism.
falling for that meme, what a brainlet, no wonder you are "losing" this war of ours.

Yes, I do know what you are saying, thats why I'm communist. but you probably do not understand what am I saying, because you are retarded.

I’m sure there are, but the number is so low that we never hear from/about them.

And you just called them “lazy geniuses”... which means they are intelligent, no? And it’s more than industriousness. I mentioned earlier that they have a powerful ability to target and manipulate a demographic to their great advantage—to say that isn’t a form of intelligence makes you seem jealous.

>But this most likely won't happen just the same way multi-cellular organism don't devolve into single cellular organisms.

Isn't that essentially what death is?

>And for it to happen “naturally” as you’ve said multiple times, humans would have to evolve to value group success over individual success.
This is me faggot.
>Yeah, this is true. I don't think humans have genetically evolved for communism to be relevant

Oh, I misread the last line of your post. Yeah lazy geniuses actually prove my point that capitalism favors intelligence over luck. Being lazy limits application of intelligence and said application would result in some form of success/stability. Luck is a non-factor for a lazy person.

Good discussion I have to say. You're making me spend more time than I should on my phone at work.

How do you think a society of people focused wholeheartedly and genuinely on group rewards would potentially come about? Eugenics? Can't think of something that isn't monstrous/inhumane to implement this.

If the model and humanity at large aren't compatible, I would suggest that the model and not the man must adapt.

But you said otherwise multiple times. You said genetic evolution of certain traits is necessary for communism to succeed. Stop backtracking. Your argument is retarded.

You’re having a discussion with a retard.

I find it funny how most commies despise Trump supporters when many of them would be your target demographic for an actual communist revolution.

You're just flinging insults around, and getting all superior about it. Learn to engage with people.

That’s exactly what the person you’re talking with is doing, brain ape.

>The only way a collectivist society succeeds is if total race homogeneity is present,
Yeah, perhaps NatSoc is a good first step.

all the unabashed gommies I've met all thought they would get some posh position in the new regime

>democratic socialists
Wew what bunch of faggots. National Socialist are better

I agree. I know you’re not actually retarded, I just like to say naughty swears!

>But you said otherwise multiple times.
You suck at trolling.

From my experience, these fags think white privileged excludes this group from the nu-proletariat (which includes mainly blacks, Browns, and queer crazies).

I haven't been insulted by anyone but you, cunt. Reciprocal behavior fucko.

because if they did they wouldn't be commies.

Perhaps a few of them, those who get far like Staline.
In such a case I admire their inner Machiavelli.
The rest are still faggots

You said a genetic change was necessary to create the traits what would benefit communist society. Unless you’re talking about extreme eugenics that genetic change would only come about through evolution. Are you too daft to see your mistake? That you said “I don’t think evolution is necessary” goes against your other posts.

Shut the fuck up, nigger lover. Go read a book.

not an argument

Intelligent men aren't communists, it's mutually exclusive.
Anyway it's the same thing with anarcho-communists
Which is hilarious because they don't comprehend the hypocrisy of their ideology being opposite and contrasting.
One being without any state or authority, no shared anything, purely individualistic and darwinistic.
The other being requiring a state to function, sharing goods by force and removing individualism and removing darwinism etc and so on.
It's like a vegetarian that eats meat.
Communists don't think. it's why they are communist.
>It is because the propaganda is, we wuz gud guyz in ww2!!!! and then we share money and shit and everyone is treated gud!!!! so be comununist!!!!!!
It appeals to fools like deeper darker knowledge appeals to truth seekers, e.g. us.

>National Review
Most millennials think socialism means social democracy

>Good discussion I have to say.
My pleasure.
>How do you think a society of people focused wholeheartedly and genuinely on group rewards would potentially come about? Eugenics?
I'm a firm disbeliever in eugenics. Not because it's not a sound idea, but because we don't really know how the engine of life creates genetic mutations. Perhaps the genes are correlated in some way and even we selectively bred people to care for each other, a genetic mutation may undo that.

To be honest, even though I know communism is mathematically superior, I don't believe it should be implemented forcibly. If it so happens that the environment forces humans to evolve into a group thinking peoples, then it's fine. As the environment changes, so will the humans. But I don't think humans being the "environment" by controlling the breeding process is a good idea - there's a very very high chance it will fail.

>If the model and humanity at large aren't compatible, I would suggest that the model and not the man must adapt.
Absolutely. If I had to choose in an absolute sense, I wouldn't side with communism. I know it's theoretically better, but like you said, it's not meant for humans. That implies that it's not the humans, but the communistic model that must be rejected every time it's implementation via political means comes to the fore.

Most millennials think socialism means free college and health care and more paid time off from work

>I just like to say naughty swears!
Same here faggot.

That's social democracy

>Unless you’re talking about extreme eugenics that genetic change would only come about through evolution. Are you too daft to see your mistake?
No, eugenics is not the only way. Environmental changes that prevent individualistic humans from reproducing is possible, though not very likely.
>That you said “I don’t think evolution is necessary” goes against your other posts.
Did I say evolution is not necessary? If so, that was a typo. I've maintained that human evolution is necessary for communism to be properly implemented.

Why even discuss it with him if you have already made up your mind AND are going to strawman his argument? Do you even realize it’s a strawman?

>it is about workers control and ending class conflict.
And look how prosperous, happy, and worker-drive all communist nations have been!

Kill yourself for thinking that it will ever work.

You do realize “mathematically superior” in your context means completely useless in real-world application and mostly likely impossible. Superior mathematics, which you haven’t linked, mean nothing if you completely ignore the human element. That claim isn’t useless to discussion, a fact you even seem to admit. Fag boy

As a professional economist, his validation only comes through more funding after having proved his mathematical models are superior.

And most millenials think communism and social democracy are one and the same—this goes for the right and left. Again, anecdotal, but I doubt you’d disagree.

Oh, I don’t know what the fuck we were arguing about then. My bad, friend.

>Do you even realize it’s a strawman?
Capitalism has had 12,000 years to perfect itself. Communism has had about 100 years with shitty people implementing it. Do retarded faggots like you mention the times capitalism has failed when you speak about the failures of communism in its short history? How is the time comparison a strawman argument?

Faggot.

I thought he said he worked in a hospital...........

>You do realize “mathematically superior” in your context means completely useless in real-world application and mostly likely impossible.

Why are you so poor at trolling faggot? This is me from the same post you just referred to

>Absolutely. If I had to choose in an absolute sense, I wouldn't side with communism. I know it's theoretically better, but like you said, it's not meant for humans. That implies that it's not the humans, but the communistic model that must be rejected every time it's implementation via political means comes to the fore.

Maybe I'm jumping threads, but modern health care is exactly the same statistical modeling game run by economists. It's all about expected monetary value of life.

You're the right wing equivalent of
you thick skulled idealogue.

I think that's a good place to leave it. Communism is not a positive force for humanity, as implemented under humanity's current form it is monstrous, and there is no achievable way to modify humanity to fit the system that is not also in itself monstrous.

>Oh, I don’t know what the fuck we were arguing about then. My bad, friend.
Happens faggot. I took no fences from your comments.

Rejects that need the state to take care of them will gravitate towards leftism purely out of self-preservation.

Communiggers are like women who think an all female business ends in fighting stress and drama, in reality it makes it 500x times worse.
As that one woman found out the hard way.

>everyone must work for it
Then how do you incentivize work that requires a lot of education? How do you get people to choose undesirable but necessary work over desirable work? Why do some people get the desirable jobs but some get undesirable ones?

my best guess is they are clinically depressed losers that get an adrenaline rush when they're in a pack.

>I think that's a good place to leave it. Communism is not a positive force for humanity, as implemented under humanity's current form it is monstrous, and there is no achievable way to modify humanity to fit the system that is not also in itself monstrous.
I agree. Good day to you mate.

>Communism is about workers control and democracy
what if I don't want to do what you say and I'm in the minority? the gulag?

you'd fall in the category of the fifth columnist subversive shill.

Interesting, how much replies and buthurt is in commie threads. :D

Friendly advice. You guys should get out more.

I just think you shouldn’t claim mathematical superiority is all. I’m sure thousands of economists would disagree.

Suck me dick, bitch. This is Cred Forums

I dated a white liberal (didn't last long at all) that liked the idea of socialism. I asked her if she liked the USSR and she said she wasn't educated enough on that subject.

So it really is true. These people are just useful idiots to the elites.

I wouldn't say being born with a very attractive female body and being handed a smart phone and the internet makes you intelligent.

It's not hard to post pictures of yourself with males being genetically wired to gawk at you. I think it takes industriousness more than intelligence, because you just have to keep spending time on it more than you have to be smart.

Do you not think there are plenty of millionaires out there who are dumb as rocks? Hell, many artists aren't talented, they're just useful for (((Execs))) to push propaganda. Truly good music isn't what is being pushed on the radio, truly good art isn't what's being fed to the mainstream.

I think luck is still a factor. You never know the opportunities or lack thereof that go into a person's life. You never know how much a genius level intellect may be stunted by being put in an environment that keeps them down.

You even claim they're so 'few' we don't hear of them, but that's an absurd claim. We don't hear of them because they're low class, not because they're stupid/don't exist.

The more I look at communism the more retarded it appears. Not only did it not work near the time it was attempted it will definitely not work in the future when technology changes how labor is achieved. It didn't work then and it's not going to age well in the future. That's a multi level of fail.

I think you’re right honestly. I think my issue was being too broad with my definition of intelligence, so we were arguing semantics more than anything. I still feel like these attractive women’s abilities to create and maintain an audience of millions requires some type of intellegence, but maybe that’s naive optimism and retardation sells.

And for the luck thing—I push so hard against the claim that luck is all that matter bc so many use it as an excuse for their failures in a capitalist economy. Many leftists subscribe to the Adorno-style view that luck is everything, and that to be lucky is such a rarity that it’s a non-factor. From personal experience, I find it difficult to believe that the lower classes have any decent number of geniuses. We actually do hear about the low class geniuses who make it; they get inspirational movies made about them.

But I’m sure luck plays more than a marginal role, and I admit my language was hyperbolic. I’m just careful not to overestimate it. To use me as an example: I’m not exceptionally intelligent or industrious, so I’m not likely to be a great success. Personally, luck has had seemingly little effect on my circumstances, except for my birth and skin color I guess.

Great discussion.

Hope to see you two more on others thread. Was a ^measure to read you.

And by that “luck is everything but also a non-factor” comment I mean that a common cultural Marxist view (and I use that descriptor in the least memey way possible) is that to be lucky is the only way to “make it” in a capitalist economy, but that so few people from the working class are lucky enough to make it that it’s almost like luck doesn’t exist. Because it’s so rare. But people misuse that view to claim that luck is the primary cause of success, when Adorno actually used it to describe the false consciousness that leads citizens to spend much of their lives waiting to “get lucky.” So yes, luck is a complicated issue in both Marxist and anti-Marxist rhetoric.

>that luck is all that matter

Yea, I definitely disagree with that idea. Luck is a factor in life, but I disagree with people who act as though personal choices don't matter.

It's clearly a mix of both, and even with shitty luck you'll do a better job of managing with higher intellect. But you can be intelligent and still get cancer, either from genetics or from chemicals in childhood.

I'm glad we're basically in agreement, but here's where I'll try and throw a wrench.

I think intelligence actually can be a negative especially in a society like ours. The reason being I believe intelligence can actually make a person MORE susceptible to the various forms of brainwashing in our society.

A big factor of intelligence is simply memory. Having more intelligence means you will be able to understand and repeat the propaganda being fed to you, generally before you've developed enough critical thinking to question it (as in being a child in school).

Dumb people, obviously, will not pay attention or remember the lies being told to them, and thus their lack of intellect can almost be sort of a shield from some of the brainwashing.

I say this as I have friends whom I know to be at least a standard deviation above average, but who are completely taken by all bullshit.

I agree, and I also think that birth circumstances are where luck most comes into play. But I have to attack that claim bc it’s one of the main ways people argue for gibs or try to excuse criminal activities—by blaming it all on birth circumstance. It’s a multifaceted issue, though, and one I definitely don’t have a perfect grasp on.

That’s an interesting consideration and not something I’ve ever thought about. It’s a good explanation for why high IQ people often fall into the pits of identity politics—it’s easier for them to remember and parrot the talking points of whatever their leaning is. It also helps explain why some rural, working class Americans (that I know personally) completely ignore political discussion and just have general convictions. Hmm.