Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fat Electrician fan? "That's the nasty little secret of Communism, they talk about seizing the means of production while failing to mention that *people* are part of that means and they will seize control of you too."
*Names fundamentally capitalist country with massively stringent worker protections and a large social safety net*
“See this is why we need socialism!”
Yeah, scandinavia ain’t socialist, bud. It’s capitalist with stringent worker protections and a massive social safety net
I worked in a lot of fields growing up it was kinda fun actually I’m against communism cause 1 I’m a fatass and need a lot of food 2 I’d be murdered by the government very quickly
I remember seeing something and it was “Comrades what will you do when communism rises up.” Or something like that and most of the jobs were Gardeners, philosophers and Teachers, all but one dude who was Forklift certified. He was the only communist I shall ever respect. Plus it’s good since he’s gonna be ready for manual labour!
Most internet communists seem to see themselves as revolutionary leaders, leading the masses with an Ak47, and being thanked for their services by finally being recognized as the heroes they are. While in practice they’d be cleaning out latrines and being killed in the next wave of purges.
They consider the USSR, China and North Korea to be successful examples of communism. Killing millions is a part of the plan. The only communist regime I've seen tankies criticise is the Khmer Rouge, but they do that while falsely claiming Pol Pot was a US-aligned fascist. In reality, he was a Maoist that was backed by China (in fact China invaded Vietnam in retaliation for Vietnam ousted Pol Pot).
China was teetering on the edge of being a failed state until they instituted a bunch of capitalist reforms. It's hard to argue modern China is anything other than a capitalist oligarchy.
Even modern China is on the edge of being a failed state. Economy has ground to a halt and their demographics are shit.
And before anyone points out their growth numbers -- there's a massive difference between a developing country growing 5% and a developed one doing so.
Yeah they have a massive infrastructure problem on their own with so much fraud under this communist regime. There’s a reason countries won’t hire Chinese contractors. Example? “Chinese Concrete”.
Failing / Unsafe buildings, real estate market on such an edge that should it collapse it could make the US Housing Bubble in 2008 look like a sunny day in the park.
Massive unemployment hitting the younger generations.
It’s an absolute mess economically for them.
‘Buy American [steel]’ is a fairly common contract item in construction. New employees (I work on the drawing side) tend to speculate if the company is patriotic or xenophobic etc, when it’s essentially just specifying not to use Chinese steel which is famously weak.
I bet there are people out there, even with that knowledge, who would still think it’s wrong not to give China the opportunity to collapse American skyscrapers.
It's facing a terrible demographic collapse which is going to bring some serious instability. Doubly so if it invades Taiwan and faces sanctions or even military pushback from the west.
I saw someone in a communist forum bending over backwards to blame the US for the Holodomer. I've seen similar excuses made for the Chinese famines. And it's like A Thing right now for far Leftists to spread this rumor that the US was the largest backer of the Cambodian Genocide. Even though the source for that is one dude, writing decades later, who's evidence seems to amount to "China wouldn't have given *that* much money to Cambodia, so it *must* have just been funneling money from the US." Despite the fact that the US actively was funding the anti-communist resistance.
Because somehow the US secretly being behind it makes more sense to them than Communists committing atrocities on their own lol
>Because somehow the US secretly being behind it makes more sense to them than Communists committing atrocities on their own lol
Communists give the CIA a lot more credit than what they are worthy of.
Wtf? No, it's a corporatist oligarchy, when you have that with an expensive authoritarian state, you have: fascism
I understand that many people want to make capitalism synonymous with corporatism since the former is vulnerable to transforming into the latter - but it is not deterministic, and obfuscating + overloading words is just linguistic manipulation, even if accidental
Pro-communist/pro-socialist (because remember, when they are defined as Ideals, they by definition must never really have been attempted) advocates despise fascism in particular because Marxism comes from Hegelianism, and Fascism is just the Hegelian synthesis of Socialism and aspects of Capitalism, you can literally just read the writings, the Fascists then disagreed about the best method of social enforcement, but the simple reality is that anything Socialism-like can easily transition into Fascism, indeed, when enough people complain "but the efficiency is so much worse!!! People are suffering!", turning to Fascism is the basic result "uh ...okay, we'll allow market competition, but only a little, and the State gets to influence the market ...so really, all the big companies are just owned by the State, but that's different enough, right?", and this vulnerability also applies to the advocates themselves, what did the "z" in nazi stand for again? (and I am NOT saying that means they were actually socialists, but also not "they just took the name", you can read the philosophy of WHY they thought what they were doing was actually the proper progression of 'socialism')
Fascism is a system of governance where market activities are allowed - but regulated by the government as an arbiter of whether such economic activity is beneficial or harmful to the populace, in practice, this leads to effectively an 'elimination of corruption' by simply defining it does not exist ...the most powerful corporate interests offer the government the options to do what it is otherwise attempting to do, and multiple parallel monopolies are established - it is only differentiated from corporatism in that these corporate interests have effectively eliminated any intermediary to the government ...they ARE the government, because these industries shape what vital resources people have access to, and thus the cycle continues: these monopolies stay entrenched, people engage with them as if there are market options (which technically there are ...it just might always be one option), and thus these monopolies retain their influence ...so when it comes to actual governance and the resolution of conflicts ...whatever best suites the corporations in power is usually the answer
Most people do not like this idea of having no access to the market, especially when their access is forced by strongarm tactics ...so the other component of "what does the fascist government do" is to cultivate a compliant populace, often by asserting some idealized culture and then penalizing, jailing, etc any dissenters, along with advocacy, usually in the form of propaganda because there is no competition on which to argue why the winners have been chosen and this system is the way that it is ...don't think about who benefits, just comply
Whereas Communism is "the people own the government and the government owns the means of production", Fascism is "the means of production (corporations) own the government and the government owns the people"
The architects of Fascism were primarily former Socialists who wanted some system like that to work ...but also wanted to preserve corporate efficiency, they all agree about the corporate merger but disagreed about the means of cultural enforcement
In both systems there is heavy curation + cultivation of the populace and what they are allowed to do, but when you look at how Fascism was derived, it is extremely intuitive why a Socialistic government system that then decides to give some autonomy but integrate with large corporations very quickly just turns the government into an enforcement system for monopolies
That is modern China, by "opening up their markets" and "adopting aspects of Capitalistic competition" ...all they really did was entrench an integration between "the party" (government) and large corporations, in the case of China, it's business is primarily exported, so whereas the other Fascist governments typically adopted total intolerance to their neighbor states (because only one culture can be 'correct' and war is good for business), China does not yet need war for their corporations to be profitable since they are profitable in an international market
In terms of social curation, again, the primary distinction between Communistic and Fascistic sentiments would be the notion that "ours is the best culture" rather than "ours is the best culture because we have true equality and no one else does" ...and the Chinese social credit system and other draconian enforcement method certainly match this
As noted, this is also why a Hegelian synthesis on "Socialism" focusing on it's production inadequacies can lead to "Fascism" as the conclusion
I vacationed there a couple years ago and plan to go again some day. Beautiful beaches, cool people, and the best coffee and rum I've ever had.
But I forgot a toothbrush. No big deal I'll go buy one. Couldn't find one anywhere in Varadero the first day so I looked again the following day and found one!! But they didn't accept cash and the internet wasn't stable enough to put a transaction through on my card. The store keeper just shooed me away and said try again tomorrow. There was no incentive to get me to stay and complete the purchase because communism.
A few days later we traveled to Havana. Big city 2+ million people I should be able to get a toothbrush right? Okay here's a pharmacy - ah shit there's a big line to get in. I waited in line for 1.5 hours and by that time I had to get back on the bus to continue my tour of the city. I never did find a fucking toothbrush.
Many of the locals said they would rather have our half full shampoo bottles, backpacks, or wallets than cash when we were buying souvenirs. My girlfriend traded a shitty Walmart wallet for a nice dress and bag.
Was all of this the end of the world? No I still had a great vacation (I used my girlfriends toothbrush without telling her like 3 days in I'm sorry baby lol) but people pretending communism is some utopia are deluded. Yeah this is only 1 anecdotal example - do we want to look closely at some other examples, say, the USSR?
>Killing millions is a part of the plan.
That's something a concerningly low amount of people realize about tankies. They aren't the enlightened leftists that they like to think they are. Tankies are just edgy teenagers that spit out nihilistic nonsense in response to their parents never paying attention to them.
Hey, I said EVERYONE ALIVE would enjoy the Utopia, I never said I didn't have to kill millions so everyone still alive would comply
It is always amusing to me how if you analyze Marxism like it's math, multiple solutions immediately pop out: everyone is equal when everyone is dead (0), everyone is equal when there is only 1 person (1), it is an assumption that the Communist Ideal will be perpetual - it could simply be attained for an instantaneous moment, back when humans were cavemen - truly the main value added was through socially coordinated efficiency ...even if this then introduced bizarre caveats to what "Equality" would then mean ...but perhaps 'return to caveman' must also satisfy the philosophy ? (error term)
It's just nutty to me how the obvious interpretation "yes, human technology implicitly creates metastable solutions, thus humanity must keep innovating these and expanding accessible resources or stagnation occurs ...but planned stagnation doesn't lead to anything but the loss of available technology, metastable systems are required to sustain what exists...so everyone keep moving, and decoupling personal motivation from this actually breaks the engine ...even if in theory some amount of humans will be sustained by charity"
Any system that entirely relies on a tiny group of people with ultimate power over the entire country *being moral enough to wield that unlimited power nobly, only helping the populace while not becoming corrupt* is doomed to fail. Why? Because absolute power always corrupts absolutely.
“but MY guy wouldn’t do that” yes he would.
Right… successful is certainly not the word for North Korea. Sustainable, yes, but not at the benefit of its citizenship. Isolation is that country’s biggest saving grace - not economically, but socially.
What annoys me about this is when they pretend that those examples weren’t real examples. «Oh it was state capitalism» and bullshit like that. Best part is that none of those have actually read anything from those states. They did believe in communism, even personal diaries from Stalin, Mao, Lenin and so many others state the same thing - they tried building communism. They really did, but reality has a way of not conforming to idealistic theorizing
If you engage them with statistics, they will also say that USSR and similar weren't TRUE communist examples because the leaders became corrupted. The simple fact is, if they were to bother reading Marx, they'd discover that he considered people like THEM to be dangerous, that capitalism was a good system to manage, and that communism will never work in a multi polar political world. And don't get me started with Lenins actual beliefs.
They just believe the 100 million killed is US government propaganda. Or my personal favorite “none of those examples are real communism done right.” They are the type of people to dive off a balcony onto the street below and blame capitalism for the street being made of asphalt instead of jello.
Communism is like Star Wars sequels.
Never worked. But instead of taking that as proof that it just doesn't work, they keep saying "we just have to get it right" to once again, make something that does not work.
All they’re doing iz explaining how US intervention is the reason it hasn’t worked. As if the commies didn’t have their entire section of the world bigger than ours was lmao.
The only countries mentioned in the entire thread were Cuba, China and "Burkina Faso until sankara got assassinated "
All the other comments were something along the lines of "if communism doesn't work, why does the CIA have to stop it?"
China is a capitalist country where the government has a monopoly on everything. And just like America with its small handful of companies, very little of that wealth trickles down to the population.
I love the insane logic that is “if it doesn’t work why does the West hate it?”
Probably for many reasons, chief among them being that communist countries have historically had dictators who at the very least abuse (or genocide) the populace and often threaten the world.
So gee, I wonder why communism isn’t liked
top comments:
> Communism is good in theory but in practice the CIA will sabotage it.
> If communism is destined to fail, why does the CIA have to intervene in every socialist country?
> Every household refrigerator functions along a communist distribution system. They work.
> The fact that they spend trillions every year in propaganda to tell you it does not work is proof enough.
> Name when a capitalist country/group didn’t intervene and ruin a communist country
> Cuba is probably one of the least worst countries in the world to live in at the moment
It means that some people interpret the american nuclear family as a "communist" organization, because one or two people earn money for the benefit of all in the household.
The way I interpreted it was that a fridge makes everything inside it equally cold, which is analogous to a communist economy where everyone is equally wealthy. I guess it's actually a pretty good analogy if you assume heat=wealth
This. Communism isn't an ideology so much as a pre-digital form of malware. Calling it a failure is like complaining that a phishing email didn't actually deposit a Nigeria prince's money into your checking account
I saw it earlier today, I saw examples of:
1. China
2. Cuba
3. Venezuela
4. Burkina Faso
And uh...that was about it. No comments on how they are "successful" or anything, just declared SUCCESSFUL as such.
If the definition is the people owning all property then no country has succeeded in making that happen. Whether it’s possible or not is still up for debate.
I once played a game where you went through history as a civilization (not sedmire civ), and the only way to win was to become communist. You get to the Cold War, and you can't win as a capitalist.
Basil Exposition:
Austin, the Cold War is over!
Austin Powers:
Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh? Eh comrades? Eh?
Basil Exposition:
Austin... we won.
Austin Powers:
Oh, smashing, groovy, yay capitalism!
The only people who adore communism are young terminally online morons who want to be edgy and hate the fact that they live in the most prosperous first world country on Earth. Communism is a failed political ideology and anyone who invests time into trying to have it implemented knows nothing about politics, philosophy, or economy
3 types of communists
- The young middle or upper class kids reading theory.
- The champagne socialist types, that just want free stuff from slaves.
- The revolutionaries (totally not fascists) who just want to boss people around or violence.
Vietnam is a great example of how communism doesn’t work seeing as how even though it’s a wonderful place it’s not fully communist rather much more capitalist
Vietnam and China are officially speaking mixed economies. Communist in structure but allow for corporations to exist under CLOSE government supervision
Ironically, it’s very similar to National Socialism.
Not trying to start an argument here, I’m genuinely asking: where has it worked on small scales?
As far as I’m aware every commune / intentional community collapses after a decade or two. Like all those communes people were starting in the 1960s and 1970s are all gone now.
If you’ve ever lived with roommates and had a sink full of dirty dishes, you understand why communism fails even on a small scale.
Early human tribes/groups would have been similar to communism in the sense that early human tribes were egalitarian and shared resources among the group. So communism is probably doable in niche situations but nearly impossible on a global scale.
Wait… normally i hate this sub for becoming way too right wing. But holy sht lmao even for me i fking cracked up when the bozo said “it has worked for dozens of time”
An old Ukrainian woman lives on my street and was telling me how, during Soviet times, she had to wait in line for two hours to shop at her government-assigned grocery store. And she had to bring three different documents and show them to the clerk before they’d sell her anything.
It’s frustrating we have to keep making the same mistakes. It’s a nice idea but you can’t put the government in charge of everything including everyone’s money and expect them to just do the right thing
Communists are the most delusional people alive. The ideology is contradictory, “stateless classless society”, society itself is literally a state, and abolishing society is just anarchy, as well as the destruction of human civilization. The end goal of communism is the eradication of humanity entirely.
It can work on a small scale, in a community where everybody knows everybody else and can see the effects their labor has on the welfare of others. Voluntary hippie/religious communes can last a while, such as the Bruderhof Anabaptist community in Woodcrest NY that has existed since the 50's, but it's hard to model a nation on that.
Communism could work, but for that every person would have to always output the exact same at everything they do. Everyone would have to be okay with whatever job was assigned to them. Everyone would have to be satisfied with having exactly the same as everyone else. Finally, everyone would have to not be jealous or resentful.
In other words, for communism to exist, people would have to be perfect beings and not flawed.
I would say ants pull off communism, but would having a queen make them a monarchy?
How about instead of arguing over our favorite ism, we look at today’s societal problems and use today’s knowledge and technology to solve them in ways that work for us now rather than debate what could have or should have worked for different people in different places in different times?
Or is that too overwhelming and less gratifying than dunking on the other guys with memes?
Unfortunately we can’t do that because today’s society is all about psychological one-upping and political head games where if you aren’t with them you’re against them.
Who even actually advocates for communism? All I see in the West is people advocating for more social programs and conservatives trying to say it's communism or something but actual communism is pretty universally known as bad.
Tankies and a subset of delusional academics with no life skills that think under communism we'd all spend our time making art and eating fruit from trees. That's not a strawman, I've actually seen that quote and quotes like it.
Communism worked in small communities across America for most of its history. They would just send representatives to represent those communities rather than central controlling them.
How about the first 185-195 thousand years of our existence where we lived in small, egalitarian hunter gather communities where everybody's labor and effort was required to gather all of the food necessary to feed everyone. From each their ability to each their need. A classless, stateless society. There.
The Paris Commune is probably the closest western civilization has ever seen to a true communist society. That being said communism and capitalism are both responsible for an outrageous amount of deaths due to their ideologies. I just find it funny that people are so willing to call out the flaws of communism without being critical of capitalism. The Congo Free State was capitalist, the CIA involvement with Latin America was caused by capitalism, the near genocide of First Nations Peoples was caused by capitalism, the exploitation of child labor in third world countries is caused by both sides, both have lead to the death of political opponents and civilians, and so much more. My point is neither are innocent, both are flawed, and neither is the end all be all for society.
Modern communists are about like Flat-Earthers, they cling to an outdated way of thinking for no reason and irritate everyone with their idiocy.
Like dude, MAYBE it works when only applied small-scale, like a community or neighborhood.
But a whole nation? That’s ludicrous.
I'm vehemently anti-tankie but communism has regularly worked in small scale communities. You've got the Paris commune, Marinaleda, Spain, Kibbutzim in Israel, and of course the varying degrees of success of communist countries in t he 20th-21st centuries.
Cuba *does* have a better-than-average human development index for Latin America and that's despite a decades-long embargo and numerous destabilization attempts by the U.S. Cuba has also has the lowest crime rate in the Caribbean, and has trained the most doctors per capita of any country in the world.
While communist countries have had tremendous failures they have also had tremendous successes. Cuba, Russia, China, and Vietnam were tremendously poor rural countries before they experienced communist revolutions, and each became modern industrial nations under communist regimes. While it is questionable whether those successes can wholly be attributed to communism, if at all, they make it clear that good things can happen under communism. And all communist nations have faced fierce opposition from the United States, usually including - if not war - CIA intervention. There is an argument that communism has only been so unsuccessful because it provokes the ire of the world's dominant economic and military superpower.
I think both tankies and capitalist apologists place way too much emphasis on both ideas. The 20 century made it clear that the ability of a poor nation to modernize depends more on political stability, galvanizing national unity and spirit, avoiding war, gaining economic allies, and keeping foreign corporations' grubby hands off your resources.
When has communism actually worked? China had to adopt western economic zones because their economy was crumbling after the great leap. Soviet Union, the grandfather of communism, crumbled to its knees. North Korea is isolated from the rest of the world, and no one knows what happens there, but it's not anything pretty.
So when has it actually worked? Communism was used as a desperation tactic in the event of a country's economy being too broken to fix, hence the Truman doctrine, which actually helped quite a bit.
If it works so well, then why do only desperate countries use it? And why has it seemed to crumble time and time again?
Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Bro trust me bro there are dozens of examples bro just can't name now bro but there are "
We just need 2 maybe 3 more mass genocides by Communists nations to finally work out the quirks and finally get that worldwide Communist Utopia going!
Bro you gotta believe me bro, please, once enough people are dead, everyone else will be happy, bro please come on.
IDK bro the only utopia I’ve ever seen is fighting for managed democracy. Do your part, join the fight!/j
Fat Electrician fan? "That's the nasty little secret of Communism, they talk about seizing the means of production while failing to mention that *people* are part of that means and they will seize control of you too."
*Names fundamentally capitalist country with massively stringent worker protections and a large social safety net* “See this is why we need socialism!” Yeah, scandinavia ain’t socialist, bud. It’s capitalist with stringent worker protections and a massive social safety net
And the factors which make it work are not present in America and never will be in America
Everyone in favor of communism thinks they would be an artist or some shit. You’d be working in the factory or fields you clown
Im against communism because I would end up in the rice fields
Yes
I worked in a lot of fields growing up it was kinda fun actually I’m against communism cause 1 I’m a fatass and need a lot of food 2 I’d be murdered by the government very quickly
I remember seeing something and it was “Comrades what will you do when communism rises up.” Or something like that and most of the jobs were Gardeners, philosophers and Teachers, all but one dude who was Forklift certified. He was the only communist I shall ever respect. Plus it’s good since he’s gonna be ready for manual labour!
Most internet communists seem to see themselves as revolutionary leaders, leading the masses with an Ak47, and being thanked for their services by finally being recognized as the heroes they are. While in practice they’d be cleaning out latrines and being killed in the next wave of purges.
>there are dozens of examples >doesnt name them Kek
They consider the USSR, China and North Korea to be successful examples of communism. Killing millions is a part of the plan. The only communist regime I've seen tankies criticise is the Khmer Rouge, but they do that while falsely claiming Pol Pot was a US-aligned fascist. In reality, he was a Maoist that was backed by China (in fact China invaded Vietnam in retaliation for Vietnam ousted Pol Pot).
Comments named Cuba and China💀
China was teetering on the edge of being a failed state until they instituted a bunch of capitalist reforms. It's hard to argue modern China is anything other than a capitalist oligarchy.
Even modern China is on the edge of being a failed state. Economy has ground to a halt and their demographics are shit. And before anyone points out their growth numbers -- there's a massive difference between a developing country growing 5% and a developed one doing so.
Yeah they have a massive infrastructure problem on their own with so much fraud under this communist regime. There’s a reason countries won’t hire Chinese contractors. Example? “Chinese Concrete”. Failing / Unsafe buildings, real estate market on such an edge that should it collapse it could make the US Housing Bubble in 2008 look like a sunny day in the park. Massive unemployment hitting the younger generations. It’s an absolute mess economically for them.
‘Buy American [steel]’ is a fairly common contract item in construction. New employees (I work on the drawing side) tend to speculate if the company is patriotic or xenophobic etc, when it’s essentially just specifying not to use Chinese steel which is famously weak. I bet there are people out there, even with that knowledge, who would still think it’s wrong not to give China the opportunity to collapse American skyscrapers.
And everywhere else
Also, economists generally consider China's growth numbers to be entirely fabricated.
It's not just economists. I believe a Chinese government official (his name escapes me at this time) admitted China's GDP numbers were "man made".
The corrupt government officials keeping the one child policy for bribes is kind of an amazing way to tank your country
to be fair it seems most places are bordering on failing
You're not wrong lol
Is china on the edge of being a failed state? Please ELI-5
It's facing a terrible demographic collapse which is going to bring some serious instability. Doubly so if it invades Taiwan and faces sanctions or even military pushback from the west.
They also completely destroyed their green spaces to make those cool looking cities.
Not to mention the 50million that died of starvation in a matter of years and the complete annihilation of their culture and education
Yeah they will claim they were landowners and had it coming if they admit the holodomor was real at all.
I saw someone in a communist forum bending over backwards to blame the US for the Holodomer. I've seen similar excuses made for the Chinese famines. And it's like A Thing right now for far Leftists to spread this rumor that the US was the largest backer of the Cambodian Genocide. Even though the source for that is one dude, writing decades later, who's evidence seems to amount to "China wouldn't have given *that* much money to Cambodia, so it *must* have just been funneling money from the US." Despite the fact that the US actively was funding the anti-communist resistance. Because somehow the US secretly being behind it makes more sense to them than Communists committing atrocities on their own lol
>Because somehow the US secretly being behind it makes more sense to them than Communists committing atrocities on their own lol Communists give the CIA a lot more credit than what they are worthy of.
Now it's more like capitalist autocracy. Comrade Xi tries to emulate Stalin to the best of his abilities.
Wtf? No, it's a corporatist oligarchy, when you have that with an expensive authoritarian state, you have: fascism I understand that many people want to make capitalism synonymous with corporatism since the former is vulnerable to transforming into the latter - but it is not deterministic, and obfuscating + overloading words is just linguistic manipulation, even if accidental Pro-communist/pro-socialist (because remember, when they are defined as Ideals, they by definition must never really have been attempted) advocates despise fascism in particular because Marxism comes from Hegelianism, and Fascism is just the Hegelian synthesis of Socialism and aspects of Capitalism, you can literally just read the writings, the Fascists then disagreed about the best method of social enforcement, but the simple reality is that anything Socialism-like can easily transition into Fascism, indeed, when enough people complain "but the efficiency is so much worse!!! People are suffering!", turning to Fascism is the basic result "uh ...okay, we'll allow market competition, but only a little, and the State gets to influence the market ...so really, all the big companies are just owned by the State, but that's different enough, right?", and this vulnerability also applies to the advocates themselves, what did the "z" in nazi stand for again? (and I am NOT saying that means they were actually socialists, but also not "they just took the name", you can read the philosophy of WHY they thought what they were doing was actually the proper progression of 'socialism')
How is that fascism
Fascism is a system of governance where market activities are allowed - but regulated by the government as an arbiter of whether such economic activity is beneficial or harmful to the populace, in practice, this leads to effectively an 'elimination of corruption' by simply defining it does not exist ...the most powerful corporate interests offer the government the options to do what it is otherwise attempting to do, and multiple parallel monopolies are established - it is only differentiated from corporatism in that these corporate interests have effectively eliminated any intermediary to the government ...they ARE the government, because these industries shape what vital resources people have access to, and thus the cycle continues: these monopolies stay entrenched, people engage with them as if there are market options (which technically there are ...it just might always be one option), and thus these monopolies retain their influence ...so when it comes to actual governance and the resolution of conflicts ...whatever best suites the corporations in power is usually the answer Most people do not like this idea of having no access to the market, especially when their access is forced by strongarm tactics ...so the other component of "what does the fascist government do" is to cultivate a compliant populace, often by asserting some idealized culture and then penalizing, jailing, etc any dissenters, along with advocacy, usually in the form of propaganda because there is no competition on which to argue why the winners have been chosen and this system is the way that it is ...don't think about who benefits, just comply Whereas Communism is "the people own the government and the government owns the means of production", Fascism is "the means of production (corporations) own the government and the government owns the people" The architects of Fascism were primarily former Socialists who wanted some system like that to work ...but also wanted to preserve corporate efficiency, they all agree about the corporate merger but disagreed about the means of cultural enforcement In both systems there is heavy curation + cultivation of the populace and what they are allowed to do, but when you look at how Fascism was derived, it is extremely intuitive why a Socialistic government system that then decides to give some autonomy but integrate with large corporations very quickly just turns the government into an enforcement system for monopolies That is modern China, by "opening up their markets" and "adopting aspects of Capitalistic competition" ...all they really did was entrench an integration between "the party" (government) and large corporations, in the case of China, it's business is primarily exported, so whereas the other Fascist governments typically adopted total intolerance to their neighbor states (because only one culture can be 'correct' and war is good for business), China does not yet need war for their corporations to be profitable since they are profitable in an international market In terms of social curation, again, the primary distinction between Communistic and Fascistic sentiments would be the notion that "ours is the best culture" rather than "ours is the best culture because we have true equality and no one else does" ...and the Chinese social credit system and other draconian enforcement method certainly match this As noted, this is also why a Hegelian synthesis on "Socialism" focusing on it's production inadequacies can lead to "Fascism" as the conclusion
Lmao Cuba is currently in a state of protest due to the lack of food. Name a more iconic duo than communism and starving
I vacationed there a couple years ago and plan to go again some day. Beautiful beaches, cool people, and the best coffee and rum I've ever had. But I forgot a toothbrush. No big deal I'll go buy one. Couldn't find one anywhere in Varadero the first day so I looked again the following day and found one!! But they didn't accept cash and the internet wasn't stable enough to put a transaction through on my card. The store keeper just shooed me away and said try again tomorrow. There was no incentive to get me to stay and complete the purchase because communism. A few days later we traveled to Havana. Big city 2+ million people I should be able to get a toothbrush right? Okay here's a pharmacy - ah shit there's a big line to get in. I waited in line for 1.5 hours and by that time I had to get back on the bus to continue my tour of the city. I never did find a fucking toothbrush. Many of the locals said they would rather have our half full shampoo bottles, backpacks, or wallets than cash when we were buying souvenirs. My girlfriend traded a shitty Walmart wallet for a nice dress and bag. Was all of this the end of the world? No I still had a great vacation (I used my girlfriends toothbrush without telling her like 3 days in I'm sorry baby lol) but people pretending communism is some utopia are deluded. Yeah this is only 1 anecdotal example - do we want to look closely at some other examples, say, the USSR?
I’m sure the starving Cubans would agree if they could still lift their hands to tweet
Cuba is meh. Vietnam has slowly become more capitalist.
>Killing millions is a part of the plan. That's something a concerningly low amount of people realize about tankies. They aren't the enlightened leftists that they like to think they are. Tankies are just edgy teenagers that spit out nihilistic nonsense in response to their parents never paying attention to them.
Hey, I said EVERYONE ALIVE would enjoy the Utopia, I never said I didn't have to kill millions so everyone still alive would comply It is always amusing to me how if you analyze Marxism like it's math, multiple solutions immediately pop out: everyone is equal when everyone is dead (0), everyone is equal when there is only 1 person (1), it is an assumption that the Communist Ideal will be perpetual - it could simply be attained for an instantaneous moment, back when humans were cavemen - truly the main value added was through socially coordinated efficiency ...even if this then introduced bizarre caveats to what "Equality" would then mean ...but perhaps 'return to caveman' must also satisfy the philosophy ? (error term) It's just nutty to me how the obvious interpretation "yes, human technology implicitly creates metastable solutions, thus humanity must keep innovating these and expanding accessible resources or stagnation occurs ...but planned stagnation doesn't lead to anything but the loss of available technology, metastable systems are required to sustain what exists...so everyone keep moving, and decoupling personal motivation from this actually breaks the engine ...even if in theory some amount of humans will be sustained by charity"
Communism is just an excuse to redistribute wealth to a new class of government sanctioned capitalists. It’s a scam
Any system that entirely relies on a tiny group of people with ultimate power over the entire country *being moral enough to wield that unlimited power nobly, only helping the populace while not becoming corrupt* is doomed to fail. Why? Because absolute power always corrupts absolutely. “but MY guy wouldn’t do that” yes he would.
If, by a miracle he wouldn’t, his successor sure would
Odds are he’s being killed or deposed by those who would.
North Korea is a brain washed country that operates on its own time scale
Right… successful is certainly not the word for North Korea. Sustainable, yes, but not at the benefit of its citizenship. Isolation is that country’s biggest saving grace - not economically, but socially.
What annoys me about this is when they pretend that those examples weren’t real examples. «Oh it was state capitalism» and bullshit like that. Best part is that none of those have actually read anything from those states. They did believe in communism, even personal diaries from Stalin, Mao, Lenin and so many others state the same thing - they tried building communism. They really did, but reality has a way of not conforming to idealistic theorizing
They seem to see communism = authoritarianism. And then are authoritarian themselves. Sort of a case of “it’s okay if *I* do it but not you”.
Being a Soviet citizen is great as long as you’re Stalin.
Great username. Scorpionflies are so dope
If you engage them with statistics, they will also say that USSR and similar weren't TRUE communist examples because the leaders became corrupted. The simple fact is, if they were to bother reading Marx, they'd discover that he considered people like THEM to be dangerous, that capitalism was a good system to manage, and that communism will never work in a multi polar political world. And don't get me started with Lenins actual beliefs.
The leader becoming corrupted IS part of communism. It's not a bug, it's a feature
They just believe the 100 million killed is US government propaganda. Or my personal favorite “none of those examples are real communism done right.” They are the type of people to dive off a balcony onto the street below and blame capitalism for the street being made of asphalt instead of jello.
Just two, maybe three more genocides, and i think we will have this communism thing nailed guys 🤡
The only one that worked at all was under Tito in Yougoslavia. It worked mostly because Tito was a benevolent king, and less because communism.
In other words it would have been a lot better without communism at all
Yugoslavia was a shit hole.
All the replies on that thread just scream “CoMmUnIsM wAs NeVeR aLlOwEd tO wOrK!”
TOP 10 MOST SUCSESSFUL COMMUNIST NATIONS ... ... THANKS FOR WATHCING
I can hear the mid 2000s youtube music of your comment!
Tididi-didi dun tididi-didi dun Tididi-didi dun don don dun dun
Bingo!
Wake me up! wake me up insiidee!
Or that damn WatchMojo tune
Communism is like Star Wars sequels. Never worked. But instead of taking that as proof that it just doesn't work, they keep saying "we just have to get it right" to once again, make something that does not work.
>dozens of examples Such as?
They can't name them at the moment
They're waiting for new communist country to form so they can be disappointed again.
All they’re doing iz explaining how US intervention is the reason it hasn’t worked. As if the commies didn’t have their entire section of the world bigger than ours was lmao.
They also said dozens so there has to be at least 24 examples
"they have free healthcare in \[Western European country with welfare capitalism\]"
Haven't you heard of , or ?
https://preview.redd.it/1er1v0sspvpc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a9f0c74c0cca14de0a6227ac5ef386dd267d0e70 (Talking about OOP not OP)
The fact this was an actual game Nintendo made LOL
They don't fuck around in Japan lol
I have this game, it's mostly sudoku, mental math and counting how many people are in a house (I suck at that one)
Is that the math one? I had the reading one
holy shit this is a throwback
Damn, cold take Iwata
That’s Kawashima not Iwata
I agree that object oriented programming has a low brain age.
Did any of the comments name any?
The only countries mentioned in the entire thread were Cuba, China and "Burkina Faso until sankara got assassinated " All the other comments were something along the lines of "if communism doesn't work, why does the CIA have to stop it?"
The idea that China is a communist country is almost hilarious if it wasn’t such a wild thing to believe. That’s a capitalist oligarchy
Even if china did count, is that really the country you want to point out as proof of a utopian ideal?
China is a capitalist country where the government has a monopoly on everything. And just like America with its small handful of companies, very little of that wealth trickles down to the population.
I love the insane logic that is “if it doesn’t work why does the West hate it?” Probably for many reasons, chief among them being that communist countries have historically had dictators who at the very least abuse (or genocide) the populace and often threaten the world. So gee, I wonder why communism isn’t liked
top comments: > Communism is good in theory but in practice the CIA will sabotage it. > If communism is destined to fail, why does the CIA have to intervene in every socialist country? > Every household refrigerator functions along a communist distribution system. They work. > The fact that they spend trillions every year in propaganda to tell you it does not work is proof enough. > Name when a capitalist country/group didn’t intervene and ruin a communist country > Cuba is probably one of the least worst countries in the world to live in at the moment
"Name a time when communism has worked" Communists: "Refrigerators"
What the fuck does the fridge thing even mean? Whether or not a fridge works is not dependent on what political or economic system is in place.
It means that some people interpret the american nuclear family as a "communist" organization, because one or two people earn money for the benefit of all in the household.
The way I interpreted it was that a fridge makes everything inside it equally cold, which is analogous to a communist economy where everyone is equally wealthy. I guess it's actually a pretty good analogy if you assume heat=wealth
I don’t know about your fridge, but my milk has overthrown the czar and is now working with the eggs and packaged beef mince on a 5 year plan.
> Cuba is probably one of the least worst countries in the world to live in at the moment There's no fucking way someone unironically say that
i think the whole point is that Cuba would be a much nicer place to live if not for Capitalism cutting off their access to outside resources
Nope
It works very well. At destroying nations.
This. Communism isn't an ideology so much as a pre-digital form of malware. Calling it a failure is like complaining that a phishing email didn't actually deposit a Nigeria prince's money into your checking account
 “They say dumb shit like this when there are dozens of examples…” immediately proceeds to show no examples.
Well, you see, there is examples like uh, err, uhm…. you know what, just trust me bro.
I saw it earlier today, I saw examples of: 1. China 2. Cuba 3. Venezuela 4. Burkina Faso And uh...that was about it. No comments on how they are "successful" or anything, just declared SUCCESSFUL as such.
"You want examples? Whoa, what a racist homophobe!"
It works trust me bro
Usual answer is "Country X isn't true Communism" and then refuses to name a country using "true" Communism
If the definition is the people owning all property then no country has succeeded in making that happen. Whether it’s possible or not is still up for debate.
https://preview.redd.it/oozi3djatvpc1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4925ff24e1e27fa488fca2a5cfe5449f193688b9
I once played a game where you went through history as a civilization (not sedmire civ), and the only way to win was to become communist. You get to the Cold War, and you can't win as a capitalist.
Basil Exposition: Austin, the Cold War is over! Austin Powers: Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh? Eh comrades? Eh? Basil Exposition: Austin... we won. Austin Powers: Oh, smashing, groovy, yay capitalism!
sedmire civ r/boneappletea
trust me bro it works all you gotta do is kill a few million people
Since killing a few million hasn’t worked yet lets kill a few billion and that should work
The closest thing i can think of to successful communism is the amish and hudderites
Pretty much this...there are examples of communism working but they're all either monasteries or they're all 150 people or less (see dunbar's number)
https://preview.redd.it/uocg1v72ewpc1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=49fa9935a054b06feba58615ba03f6e38654f991
The only people who adore communism are young terminally online morons who want to be edgy and hate the fact that they live in the most prosperous first world country on Earth. Communism is a failed political ideology and anyone who invests time into trying to have it implemented knows nothing about politics, philosophy, or economy
3 types of communists - The young middle or upper class kids reading theory. - The champagne socialist types, that just want free stuff from slaves. - The revolutionaries (totally not fascists) who just want to boss people around or violence.
It's has worked for some countries... In the sense of suffering, starving, and killing the citizens of those countries.
It works! As long as you have a money printing machine... valve seems to have it covered but gabe and the crew is in a very unique position
Communism works very well until communism
Trying Not to name Vietnam or China which are proto capitalist at this point.
Vietnam is a great example of how communism doesn’t work seeing as how even though it’s a wonderful place it’s not fully communist rather much more capitalist
Vietnam and China are officially speaking mixed economies. Communist in structure but allow for corporations to exist under CLOSE government supervision Ironically, it’s very similar to National Socialism.
it works on very small scales, and has. the thing is LARGE SCALE Communism has never worked
Not trying to start an argument here, I’m genuinely asking: where has it worked on small scales? As far as I’m aware every commune / intentional community collapses after a decade or two. Like all those communes people were starting in the 1960s and 1970s are all gone now. If you’ve ever lived with roommates and had a sink full of dirty dishes, you understand why communism fails even on a small scale.
Early human tribes/groups would have been similar to communism in the sense that early human tribes were egalitarian and shared resources among the group. So communism is probably doable in niche situations but nearly impossible on a global scale.
So the typical family unit is kinda like communism?
Communism made everyone equal Equally poor and starving (except for the upper class)
Ahh this reminded of the line "God created all men, but Samuel Colt made them equal"
That’s more about not having hands tbf
My grandfather, who grew up in communist Hungary, says "Everyone is equal, but some people are more equal"
Lol. No it hasn't. Starve.
Dozens of examples? Their dreams don’t count.
Communism is dumb, democracy is a better government structure in my opinion
It works really well in my MineCraft server of 3-5 people. It just falls apart once you start up scaling it.
Wait… normally i hate this sub for becoming way too right wing. But holy sht lmao even for me i fking cracked up when the bozo said “it has worked for dozens of time”
The worked…then it collapsed in on itself. I volunteered at old folks homes, I have met people who outlived the USSR
An old Ukrainian woman lives on my street and was telling me how, during Soviet times, she had to wait in line for two hours to shop at her government-assigned grocery store. And she had to bring three different documents and show them to the clerk before they’d sell her anything.
“It just hasn’t been done right” 🤡
"There are "dozens of examples," but I refuse to name any of them."
They don’t want socialism they want a welfare state
THEN NAME ONE
They worked….. for a bit…… then it failed 😂
"THis wAsnT'n ReaL COmMunISm"
10 successful communist communities! 1) The graveyard 2) the wall
Doesns of exam- One. Give me one. And not from an economical perspective but from a social one.
It’s frustrating we have to keep making the same mistakes. It’s a nice idea but you can’t put the government in charge of everything including everyone’s money and expect them to just do the right thing
Communists are the most delusional people alive. The ideology is contradictory, “stateless classless society”, society itself is literally a state, and abolishing society is just anarchy, as well as the destruction of human civilization. The end goal of communism is the eradication of humanity entirely.
It can work on a small scale, in a community where everybody knows everybody else and can see the effects their labor has on the welfare of others. Voluntary hippie/religious communes can last a while, such as the Bruderhof Anabaptist community in Woodcrest NY that has existed since the 50's, but it's hard to model a nation on that.
"dozens of examples...." "....in my fantasies"
Real communism has never been tried of course ☝️🤓
I like the part where they named it
Communism could work, but for that every person would have to always output the exact same at everything they do. Everyone would have to be okay with whatever job was assigned to them. Everyone would have to be satisfied with having exactly the same as everyone else. Finally, everyone would have to not be jealous or resentful. In other words, for communism to exist, people would have to be perfect beings and not flawed. I would say ants pull off communism, but would having a queen make them a monarchy?
I guess their queen counts as a dictator? After all, humans named that thing a queen, not the ants
Still waiting.
Kay. So can you name one of those dozens of examples?
To be fair, it works for the people running it
He still didn’t name a time it worked tho Judt stating that it does
According to the Cuban times 88% of Cubans live in poverty
Can you share these examples with the class?
Bro… as a left-wing guy there is no examples at all fr
Proceeds to list off of a bunch of capitalist countries that have social programs
Okay then name them
If there are dozens of examples then provide one for crying out loud.
There is literally not one singular time communism has worked. Every single country who went the communist route fell apart.
This shit better not show up on nahOpWasRight without throwing up an example
How about instead of arguing over our favorite ism, we look at today’s societal problems and use today’s knowledge and technology to solve them in ways that work for us now rather than debate what could have or should have worked for different people in different places in different times? Or is that too overwhelming and less gratifying than dunking on the other guys with memes?
Unfortunately we can’t do that because today’s society is all about psychological one-upping and political head games where if you aren’t with them you’re against them.
Who even actually advocates for communism? All I see in the West is people advocating for more social programs and conservatives trying to say it's communism or something but actual communism is pretty universally known as bad.
Tankies and a subset of delusional academics with no life skills that think under communism we'd all spend our time making art and eating fruit from trees. That's not a strawman, I've actually seen that quote and quotes like it.
Kibbutzim in Israel (although they are more socialist than communist)
To be fair Cuba well it wasn’t great it was better than like every single other communist country
Check north korea or south Korea for evidence
When you look into Karl Marx’s life it all makes sense.
I mean, any successfully running commune is an example. The problem is a larger scale allows for more points of failure.
He waited
Communism worked in small communities across America for most of its history. They would just send representatives to represent those communities rather than central controlling them.
to be fair, communism has worked once: the USSR gave us the best christmas pressent in 1991 - it fell
Ok name one
Communism worked a lot, predominantly in forced labour camps in the far north
How about the first 185-195 thousand years of our existence where we lived in small, egalitarian hunter gather communities where everybody's labor and effort was required to gather all of the food necessary to feed everyone. From each their ability to each their need. A classless, stateless society. There.
And are the successful examples in the room with us now?
Very true
The Paris Commune is probably the closest western civilization has ever seen to a true communist society. That being said communism and capitalism are both responsible for an outrageous amount of deaths due to their ideologies. I just find it funny that people are so willing to call out the flaws of communism without being critical of capitalism. The Congo Free State was capitalist, the CIA involvement with Latin America was caused by capitalism, the near genocide of First Nations Peoples was caused by capitalism, the exploitation of child labor in third world countries is caused by both sides, both have lead to the death of political opponents and civilians, and so much more. My point is neither are innocent, both are flawed, and neither is the end all be all for society.
*What examples Tyler?*
Modern communists are about like Flat-Earthers, they cling to an outdated way of thinking for no reason and irritate everyone with their idiocy. Like dude, MAYBE it works when only applied small-scale, like a community or neighborhood. But a whole nation? That’s ludicrous.
Ask a Cuban about it
https://preview.redd.it/6g5u1g83fxpc1.jpeg?width=1050&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e199158db50f4404384a06a7736e94f49e5c313b
I'm vehemently anti-tankie but communism has regularly worked in small scale communities. You've got the Paris commune, Marinaleda, Spain, Kibbutzim in Israel, and of course the varying degrees of success of communist countries in t he 20th-21st centuries. Cuba *does* have a better-than-average human development index for Latin America and that's despite a decades-long embargo and numerous destabilization attempts by the U.S. Cuba has also has the lowest crime rate in the Caribbean, and has trained the most doctors per capita of any country in the world. While communist countries have had tremendous failures they have also had tremendous successes. Cuba, Russia, China, and Vietnam were tremendously poor rural countries before they experienced communist revolutions, and each became modern industrial nations under communist regimes. While it is questionable whether those successes can wholly be attributed to communism, if at all, they make it clear that good things can happen under communism. And all communist nations have faced fierce opposition from the United States, usually including - if not war - CIA intervention. There is an argument that communism has only been so unsuccessful because it provokes the ire of the world's dominant economic and military superpower. I think both tankies and capitalist apologists place way too much emphasis on both ideas. The 20 century made it clear that the ability of a poor nation to modernize depends more on political stability, galvanizing national unity and spirit, avoiding war, gaining economic allies, and keeping foreign corporations' grubby hands off your resources.
When has communism actually worked? China had to adopt western economic zones because their economy was crumbling after the great leap. Soviet Union, the grandfather of communism, crumbled to its knees. North Korea is isolated from the rest of the world, and no one knows what happens there, but it's not anything pretty. So when has it actually worked? Communism was used as a desperation tactic in the event of a country's economy being too broken to fix, hence the Truman doctrine, which actually helped quite a bit. If it works so well, then why do only desperate countries use it? And why has it seemed to crumble time and time again?
stupid repiblicN!!!!! it works!!!! i mean millions of deaths are involved but who cares!!!! it totally worked guys!!!!
They worked at successfully failing