Which is more evil?

Mutual aid networks predate tool use by humans, that's like asking what communism does to promote gravity

>I was misinformed as a child growing up in the Western world and think Communism has killed more people that Capitalism

So if they're the same, why argue? Let's all be one big corporation with a ceo instead of a communist state with a dictator

The first response wasn't me, but it's a red herring because the way you pose the issue is

>droughts still happen
>checkmate communists

And I'm left doing the Jackie Chan face

Communism is an orwellian kind of evil.

Capitalism is a darwinian kind of evil.

So these mutial aid networks that have existed for ages, why are they so much more uniquitous under capitalism, and is what you are aaying is that communism doesnt consider this issue? Seems like an anti-humanitarian movement

I know enough about human nature to know that people will do what it takes to provide for themselves and their families. That they will not simply fall in line and accept what theyre given.

Unless, what theyre given is all they could want.

This is why Jesus taught to give your neighbor what you don't need. And why Buddhists strive to not want material things. It is because by nature we hoard stuff for ourselves and our familes. We are by nature materialistic. Its not just human nature, its nature - even my dog tries to hoard his bones and treats and not let others dogs get it.

>economic systems
> evil

a communist state is a large mutual aid network with an elite class that enjoys more aid than others

Just like in a capitalist state

>orwellian
>communism has nothing to do with government oppression

why are they so uneducated

Anyone who honestly wants to help make the world a better place should start here:
mises.org/

>I know enough about human nature to know that people will do what it takes to provide for themselves and their families

Typical Westerner.

What if I told you this wasn't true, and just your feelings on the matter? What if I told you there's a historical precedent for it?

Statism vs. State Capitalism vs wtfthis

Itt: idiots who think anything Stalin did is automatically communism

The only deaths caused by capitalism are sub-human niggers who wouldn't survive without being coddled by other races

Die in poberty
So both

Communism causes suffering on a scale never before seen in human history. I'd call that evil.

>mises
Lol, I hope that's not Ludwig von Mises. That guy isn't even taken seriously anymore.

This is poor inference. Im not saying that because they happen communism is invalidated, Im saying that because there are inherent values in finite natural resources, inequalities in the way those resources are used is inevitable. This is the point in the argument where the commie user said water is an infinite resource, which is why I brought up the issue of droughts, and supported the criticisms validity by explaining the ways in which capitalism incentivises the mitigation of natural disasters.

yes it does because it does not exist on any scale unless it is enforced by a totalitarian regime.

If communism is so awesome, why havent we even seen a true communism in practice? How is that no country or place or whatever has been able to actually implement it? It sure seems to have been some attempts...

This must be the same condescending faggot from the previous thread.

This is the admission I was looking for, thankyou

this guy is right, communism is against people's natural competitive element, it can't be implemented, but those except by force, and the proof is in our history, Stalinism was a direct disciple of Lenin, and how many did he alone kill?

Be that as it may, capitalism has killed far more, and it continues to kill. Think about the current obesity crisis, that's essentially a metaphor for why capitalism is so bad, because it slowly kills you, it pacifies you and is far more subtle, and it's so deeply entrenched and institutionalised that it's untouchable, a dictator in its own sense, to the whims and wishes of an out of touch, ruthless, elite

>discussing communism w ameridums
>2016

>yes it does because it does not exist on any scale unless it is enforced by a totalitarian regime.

Primitive Communism. Also, animals.
>If communism is so awesome, why havent we even seen a true communism in practice? How is that no country or place or whatever has been able to actually implement it? It sure seems to have been some attempts...

Mostly due to American intervention.

Freedom of choice

>statist shill detected
Can't get enough government cock, eh user?

Same in communism, you don't work or you're against the party you get 86'd

I don't see why people think the USA is any different than the Soviet Union.

You want to see your bread lines? Go to wall mart when food stamps pay.

You want to see the rows of identical housing? It's everywhere.

You want to see the exploitative party elite? They have two!

>Taking care of your family is a western ideal...

I'm all ears.

Would you not do whatever it takes to feed yourself. If you were starving, would you share with strangers? Survival instinct is pretty strong user

think about it, in theory, (and also in practice) communism brings people together, making it easier for said people to bring about change if they DON'T like communism

capitalism separates, isolates, divides and sets against the people, making it near impossisble to change anything, let alone the fundamental economic practice

What are you even talking about?

You don't want government. Fine. Stop using the roads, mail, police, fire fighters, ability to walk around and have a stable, safe life, and.. oh yeah, money.

>its america's fault my ideology is so inflexible it cannot be applied practically without no longer being communism

Watch this 30 minute cartoon:

youtube.com/watch?v=tGk5ioEXlIM

then watch this video:

youtube.com/watch?v=x4obeqaxhRs

and this video:

youtube.com/watch?v=uUyDcGSMPEQ

Both capitalism (Rothschild style fractional reserve banking) and communism are controlled by the people on this list:

thezog.info/list-summaries/

Also, if you want to know how the people on this list got to be where they are, start reading at page 12 in this book:

jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/jewishsupremacism.pdf

Survival instincts are far different from greed and accumulation. The destruction caused by the free market global Capitalist economy isn't borne of survival instinct. It's not the people living hand to mouth fucking things up.

Also, Confucian China would be the precedent you're looking for. In fact, the first line of the firsst book that Chinese children read states "The nature of humans is good." This reflected in their society for over 2000 years.

It took man a long time to accomplish heavier than air flight and even when the wright brothers did have a working airplane most of the world wouldn't believe them or make the trip to come watch

>straw man

Do you want me to explain why you wasted your time posting that or do you just want to give up?

>the ability to walk around is given to us by the government...

Equally so in e very regard.

At least people arent starving under any reasonably governed capitalist state in this day and age. I'll take being well fed over being without food any day.
No system is perfect, but I think a moderately regulated free market is the best thing we've got by far and has, undeniably, been the most successful system in advancing the standard of living for the average person.

>capitalism is controlled
>communism is controlled

Fuck off, no one takes people like you seriously. The Jews don't rule the world.

I dont think an economic doctrine can be "evil" as it isn't a moral entity, you could say someone who enforces communism is evil.

Neither is generally evil. However, in the past and the future, Government must adapt to social climate changes and adopt policies to strengthen its society of people. I think people in general would like to be prosperous and strong and they would elect to contribute to their society if it meant that.

see
If your reading comprehension was any good, you'd see that it was a compound clause.

I'd love for you to explain that to me. While your at it, distinguish your efforts from mine on that basis.

Says the increasingly indebted man for the 36th time

>Confucian China
And you thnk there was not hoarding of resources in that society? There wasnt rich and poor?

i completely agree with you, but my point is that in time capitalism will far outstrip communism because communism will never exist again

that being said, i think America is far too capitalist, and should be more liberal, but those fucking idiots over there are arrogant and forget their history all the time, and they'll never change

fair point

Sure. Because America directly contributed money to anti-Communist movements throughout Europe, made friends with countries at the border of the Communist world to "contain it", literally put dictators in South American countries to stop Socialist regimes from taking over, etc etc. All well-documented in history.

You're trying to twist what I said into something I didn't say or even imply.

>the ability to walk around and have a stable, safe life is provided by the government

removing the compound saved me time. readding it doesnt make you look any less retarded, it just exposes you as a city slicker. Enjoy your dirt air

Sure there was. But that's not what I claimed, is it? Confucian China wasn't Communist or even Socialist. But they prove that human nature can very much be shaped into a product of your environment.

In both Cred Forums and academia, a lot of anti-Communist arguments get shot down again and again until we boil it to the lowest common denominator: what is human nature? There's ample evidence throughout history to show that even though we don't know what it is, it's not unchangeable.

Yeah keep blaming an entire country on such solid bases as 'making friends' to isolate isolationist movements

Read a history book sometime.

But reasonably governed capitalist states have to use communist ideas like social programs to make sure there isn't any starvation

Doesn't really reflect well on the ability of the market to provide in accordance with contemporary ethical standards

>he thinks they're interchangable

this isnt an rpg...

you realize how dumb this is, right? what he said is true.

if someone cut your legs off at birth, i imagine you'd say it's your fault you can't walk?

Also...
>It's not the people living hand to mouth fucking things up.
No, but its fear of living hand to mouth that makes people hoard resources. Its nature. Just like a squirrel hoards nuts. I mean, people are beyond that level of greed for sure. People are greedy just for vanity. Again, human nature - we want to attract the best mates and looking the best to them is what many will strive for.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here.

How old are you? 20 or something?

If my intention was not to use my arms or legs, why would I blame anyone? Sounds like someone has a persecution complex

So let's eliminate that fear.

You've led your argument back to Communism.

>Animals are communist

No that's capitalism. Darwinism in literally every respect.

I like free enterprise, but capitalism is always looking for a way to fuck it in the ass.
Communism is a nice conceopt, but fucked irl.

>correctly assigning blame
>persecution complex
Not the same thing.

Communism, hands down.

> banned from progressing as an individual by an individual.
> forced stagnatation of an entire species.

That's kind of what I meant by well regulated. But fair enough, pure capitalism is not the answer either. I agree.

Redistribution of wealth is not communism tho. Public/worker ownership of the means of production is communism.

Old enough to know not to use age as an argument. Its good to see you respond to criticism, though. Upping the age on the insult and all - very innovative

Not all of them. Look at animals that work in cooperation. I couldn't be arsed to find specific examples earlier, but they're out there.

History has shown us that competition is less efficient than cooperation, but necessary up to a point.

Real chat: it is man's nature to dictate his own nature. Anything less is a beast in human skin.

Communism is utopia, 100% fed, housed, employed etc

We can never become utopia but we can use it as a meterstick by which to measure our society.

If you understand this, and aren't a communist, you're again a beast in human skin.

Do not covet more than an equal share
Do not create more individuals than can be fed
Do not make war on humans
Take all you can from beasts

You don't know anything about Communism if you think either of these apply.

Communism cannot eliminate that fear tho. I know I have savings so that when shit hits the fan, I have some cushion.

What happens when shit hits the fan in communism and there is not enough food to go around?

And yet, not old enough to know not to respond to a little sore pride.

You know I'm over your head.

>the old commie argument
>that wasn't true communism!!!!

Holy shit do you really not get how this is stupid? You said read a history book, like its the be all and end all to knowing about communism - a history book. That anons joke wasnt even thatsolid, but now I see how on point the other user is cuz you stupid af tbh famfam

Why wouldn't there be? Communism is predicated on the idea of using Capitalism until necessities are not scarce enough to matter anymore. Then after that, we can move to luxuries.

>war = capitalism
What about the commie wars edge fag?

>expects people to believe his judgment is valid using phrases like tbh famfam

The fact you had to say this shows so much insecurity my dude.

What about them?

Same thing that happens in capitalism when there's not enough food to go around, another communist state with surplus lends a hand

Or confidence. Or arrogance. Whatever you want to think.

The long and short of it is that I'm either

A) Over your head, which is why you can't give me any decent rebuttals

or

B) Too stupid to realize your rebuttals are nonsense.

You get given low hanging fruit and you just take it. Have some self respect

Communism is clearly shit house,
You can see how shit it is from space

...

...

There is certainly such a thing as human nature. There is a general way humans behave. Obviously we are all individuals and all that shit, but we need certain things from our environment and have adapted certain mechanisms to give ourselves the best chance we can to provide those things for ourselves so we can reproduce and pass down our genes to the next generation.

Do you deny that loving ones own offspring is human nature?
>No one can deny that user
Then how is it a stretch at all to say that its human nature to do whatever we can to provide for our offspring?

...

wrong question.
neither system was ever implemented properly.
every capitalism has a government which redistributes part of citizens income bending free market in process.
every communism has or had government of people who thought that they are more special kind than the rest.

not to mention that each time the 'evilness' is brought by people misinterpreting how it should work, not by the system itself.

This is invalid, and no one should take these seriously.

...

How so?

>shit would never hit the fan in a way that left all commie states in the gutter

Well I better believe you just because you said so

...

Actually, I would deny that. It's possible for people to not love their children, and if that's the case, then it's not human nature.

My argument wasn't that there is no human nature, it's that socialization can change it.

C) you are enternally buttfrustrated with bait-tier shitposting and cant rebuke with arguments, so you try and fail at insults instead. Stay salty, commie

Both have the same basic problem, corruption. Both could work if no one was greedy

...

...

...

...

...

>another communist state with surplus lends a hand
And there is a massive (black) market for that food aid, same as that has happens in the case of every famine in history. Not a true communism unless you have dudes with guns enforcing equitable distribution. And if theres dudes with guns enforcing shit, then there is a ruling class. And if theres a ruling class, you no longer have communism

A) Communism does not require a government, and is stateless.

B) There is no forced stagnation in Communism. Do you realize that the USSR transformed from a giant piece of framing land to an industrial superpower in 30 years under Stalin?

...

>trolling
ok

...

Here's a tip, kid: Never use tardspeak like famfam, or texttalk, when calling ANYONE stupid. It makes you look dumber than any possible answer you replied to.

I'm going to guess another persons estimate of you being 20 as being generous. Because if you're older than 13 then you missed all the important shit life should've taught you by now.

cognitive dissonance: the post

lol you realize no one takes this shit seriously right

k

Who is this rummle that this pic is sourcing so much?

>LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR ARGUMENTS LALALALA

Scared to actually challenge your own dogmatic beliefs?

Neither is evil only the humans are evil within their own intent ever side can work as long as filth is exhumed from society.

>inaccurate memes
>argument
pick one

Thats a shitty argument user. 99.99% of people exhibit a common trait/behavior but thats not human nature?

>you can change human nature
And you will never ever ever get people to not care about their offspring. Especially mothers. You have apparently never had a child. Just like you will never ever ever be able to force people to not care about giving their children a leg up if they can. I'm using stark examples of human nature here, but same applies for basic vanity and just wanting shit to feel better and look more attractive than your peers.

you realize these memes don't correlate to reality right?

Capitalism is more evil. In order to maintain a capitalist economy, other economies must be exploited. Profit doesn't appear from nowhere. When you buy something in a capitalist country that comes from a third world country, you are supporting the order that is established. Third world countries have sweatshops, slavery, poor living conditions, etc, because they are enslaved by capitalist countries.

Here's a tip, famfam: Never sperg out like 'kid' and go on a rant about what you deem to be the correct way to call a person stupid.

Satirisation is employed to compound an opinion or insult - it is a suggestion that the likes of black-twitter are more informed than you.

So people weren't trying to flee East Germany? There was no Berlin Wall?

>It's only inaccurate when they do it

...

>still trying to close a conversation you've lost.

Commies cant help but prove their desire to control everything

...

You can make your argument, but history has shown us that your opinion is wrong.

Perhaps some things are immutable, but your own example is already proven wrong. There have been societies where children are raised communally. You don't care about YOUR offspring, you care about the overall continuation and well being of the species.

The fact that you care about YOUR OWN offspring is for the same reason. You (abstract you) had a child to continue our species.

Both parties benefit lmfao. Your entire argument is based off the premise that life is a zero sum game and it's not

B) in the short term progression may seem visible. In a much extended period of time of stalinism, where the individual is denied his rights to become someone "great". Ultimately the species (which is slightly older than 30 years) would stagnate dramatically.

If you were here from last thread, and following this one, you would know I never posted a single meme.

No one takes them seriously. The people that post them are delusional if they think they're anywhere close to accurate.

...

>being this stupid

yeah 20 was generous

Muslims and science are a good example.

Hive species. Literal pheremone controlled slave societies. I can't think of a better nature analogy for the orwel metaphor. There's your co-operative species.

Everything else co-operates under the rule of an alpha, a position which is subject to competition. Or they just stick together as long as it suits their interests (usually abandonning the weak and sick). Or just straight up doesn't co-operate. All of these are much more darwinian extensions of self interest over that of the collective as a whole and are therefore much more capitalist in nature.

>thinks trolling means you "win"
>doesn't understand that the socratic dialectic doesn't have winners and losers

...

You're entitled to that opinion, but so far Socialist countries prove you wrong.

You cant respond with an argument, can you, famoli?

...

>I STILL want my ideas to be right

I didnt have a child to continue the species. I had a child because its a basic instinct. And so is hoarding resources.

Also, I am curious about what societies have raised kids truly communally. Sauce, please

...

>Austrian economist
kek

Communism is like a country where all people are government employees. Do you like government employees ? I don't. They lack motivation, are lazy assholes and unfriendly.

Why would you want a whole country to be that shitty ? At least, competition make people go forward and force them to be acceptable with one another.

youtube.com/watch?v=vIrFpeEudLQ&t=0s

...

Basic instinct is to continue the species, hate to break it to you. That's why bugs and animals do it.

Hoarding resources isn't natural to humans. We never did it pre-civilization.

>Oh shit here he goes again
>Socratic dialectic
>he thinks he has performed reflexic inquiry

Because the rich will use the government to keep what the feel "entitled" to.
We need to change the laws to make the system just.

ITT: Communists rekt anti-Communists but the anti-Communists don't realize it

i can't do this guys

Real capitalism is not evil.
Capitalism has a tendency to veer off toward crony capitalism (a form of oligarchy) unless the government controls it and ensures a fair playing field. Republicans love crony capitalism because they fought against every shred of law to limit the role of money in politics.

Don't hate capitalism --hate crony capitalism

>reflexic

If he actually thought this, why did he feel the need to say it?

You expect me to take you seriously when you use a word like "reflexic"?

>heh guys we already won, nothing to see here

Communism.

Capitalists know they're assholes, Communists try to deny it.

>The communist wants to ban any use of language he isnt already aware of.

basically yeah.

im pretty sure there's only one person here arguing anti-communism at this point because the level of bullshit is roughly the same in each post

see

>Hoarding resources isn't natural to humans. We never did it pre-civilization.
You must be joking. We certainly do know that there was plenty of conflict for resources prehistory.
Hoarding resources doesnt mean making a pile of shit in your house. It means accumulating and controlling resources in the world around so that you can use it. Access to fertile hunting grounds, I am sure, was a matter of much conflict prehistory.

Yeah, third world countries that get by on whatever scraps capitalist countries give them for the product of their hard labor are benefiting so much.

>the anti-communist tries to damage control by bluffing that reflexic was correct usage in the sentence

protip: it wasn't. What you were looking for was probably reflexive, which isn't even correct. The word you wanted was "dialectical" or "reciprocal".

You're out of your league user

Soviets ain't taking my tendies

>Maybe if I don't point it out they will forget about it

Oh, you're using the lay definition of accumulation. That's alright. Of course people use resources. While they're scarce, there's going to be conflict.

So we keep improving technology til it isn't scarce anymore, just like we've done with food, water, clothing and shelter.

This really isnt hard to figure out, every major communist government have slaughtered literally millions of its own people, way more than were killed in the holocaust not that capitalism is free of harming people, communism has a way worse track record

I should correct myself: until it isn't scarce enough to matter**

Communism actually doesn't have a worse track record.

But think about it - living in the West, we brush the atrocities of our own countries under the rug and highlight the positive. We do the opposite for other, opposing ideological countries.

Who the fuck gives a shit about those niggers? Not our fault they couldn't estimate the value of shiny beads

Comunism destroyed my country in the 80's... According to analists, it Drove back 50 years of development and cost 2 billion dollars in damages.
Im talking about PERU , a Latín American country
Google it if you like. Comunism is the worst thing ocurred to my country.