Define communism.

china = pretty vagina

you are brown and red

>>25524231 its exactly like feudalism except with a stalin instead of a king

>>25524201 >strangled communist countries with heavy embargos, isolating them from world trade God I hate commies so fucking much all of you cunts are the first in line to bitch about free trade as "imperialism". The EXACT same pople blaming the embargo for Cuba being a shithole were protesting against the FTAA.

15

here you have your working communism in chinkland

The communist strongholds in Île-de-France became the most ethnically replaced areas. It sums up quite well the goal of communism: a big dumbing down.

>>25524288 Not a problem if you properly clean the tank and swap the hoses

>>25524271 bourgeois dictatorship with superficial marxist characteristics >>25524281 >>25524294 >>25524296 anti-colonial, third world nationalism, with superficial marxist characteristics

Real life is American propaganda then. Even in the most free and democratic countries, people do not willingly surrender all their property to local authorities who they then entrust to redistribute according to whoever they deem necessary. The allocation of labour and resources is more efficiently distributed in a free market where men are able to apply themselves according to their wants than when resources are distributed seemingly arbitrarily by a pseudo-democratic body. The ultimate crushing blow for socialism is that if one knows that created wealth will be seized by Soviet Hitler Chi Minhzedong, then there is obviously less of an incentive to exert effort to create wealth. Why should anyone want to work harder or push themselves if you cannot enjoy the fruits of your own labour? >>25524310 > superficial Marxist characteristics Has genuine Marxism ever been attempted?

>>25524401 yes in the soviet union and china before deng

>>25524401 you are making a lot of underlying suppositions and premises and taking them as inherently true to then base your arguments on them, like most ultralibertarian tards do not everyone makes the best decision for themselves, especially as groups, separated by geography, by age, by gender, etc. think of it as a family. Families are inherently communist, because only the father and mother work, and the children dont produce shit, or they produce very little, yet they need same amount of food, same house to sleep in, same bed, same warmth so they dont freeze. if you applied 'free market' thinking to a family, you would let the children starve and freeze to death, because they dont produce. and its the same with population, whats happening now with capitalists, most of the wealth is going to top 10% of the population and the bottom are getting fucked. >The ultimate crushing blow for socialism is that if one knows that created wealth will be seized by Soviet Hitler Chi Minhzedong, then there is obviously less of an incentive to exert effort to create wealth. This is another retarded unprovable claim that sounds good but doesnt stand up to logic. Money is not the only incentive in the world, especially after a point, once you have a house and and food on the table and whatnot, you dont get motivated by money. The soviet union, china etc, they have made or are making great wealth and great advancements in technology, people feel good when they create things, then they improve, when they help others, it's not purely about money. >Why should anyone want to work harder or push themselves if you cannot enjoy the fruits of your own labour? because fruits are not only in money. they are in satisfaction, in fame, in approval from peers, in the pursuit of excellence etc. only moneygrubbing selfish goblins think of 'money' as the be-all, end-all. >distributed seemingly arbitrarily its not arbitary, its actually very smart and its for the benefit of everyone. thats one of the smart things that ceausescu did for example, he raised living standards for everyone, developed the whole country and made cities everywhere, not just in the capital and 1-2 points of interest. every single place got roads, got hospitals, got apartment buildings, it was done, as i said in the beginning, taking into account where humans live for illogical and irrational reasons, not just pure profit.

North Korea is the most successful communist state.

>when they either strangled communist countries with heavy embargos So a system that demonizes you and actively conspired to topple you also must have free trade and economical parity? >isolating them from world trade and prosperity Actually freedom of travel was mostly restricted in communist countries, to avoid brain drain and overall loss of workforce >or outright killing its leaders? Yeah, totally not an angry mob against an inept and wimshical dictator.

>>25524589 >totally not an angry mob against an inept and wimshical dictator. if you think the common man has an ak-47 under his pillow and can go out and topple a leader you are living in childish fantasyland. revolutions never happen from 'angry mobs' or any angry mobs could topple things everytime everywhere. Its always people from inside the system with support/backers from other, foreign intelligence agencies. its happened a million times by usa and the soviets. regular people dont have tanks and cant fight the army. its stupid to think common people are more than just useful idiots who give the appearance of it being 'grass roots'

>>25524556 > if you applied 'free market' thinking to a family, you would let the children starve and freeze to death, That's actually what happens when you apply socialism. Pick up a history book please. The rest of your post is a sort of guilty admission of the true nature of socialism. The government has all the characteristics you think that the selfish ordinary man has. It's silly to support socialism after 100 years of it having been in practice across several different countries who found themselve adopting it under many different apparitions. The praise you lavish on socialism for not sending your country back to the Stone Age is misplaced. Have you considered how much wealthier Europe would be had half of it not suffered under socialist tyranny?

Chavez and Venezuela made me realise.

communism only works in entirely white and male communities i would share everything with you, brother, but never with a nigger or a woman

>>25524678 >Venezuela is that the country where people were farming gold on runescape to convert to US dollars online because it was the only way they could make a living?

But, like. Why would anyone take the risk of attempting to achieve communism when there are a few good and very real recent examples of extreme disfunction and collapse of a nation, its culture, peoples heritage, and faith. Of which the consequences linger dreadfully and without a clear end.

>>25524699 no thats china

>>25524704 ching chong ping pong tsing tsao ding dong

>>25524704 xueng xiao zhueng zhing song tao

Serbia isn't communist but what they went through with nato bombing them in the 90s because they split from the west is what will happen in any of bernds fantasies of a country saying no to immigration ans multikulti. Nato and the EU would rape them into the stone age.

>>25524774 lol

heh hehe Huuuuuuuuufff

>>25524401 >Even in the most free and democratic countries, people do not willingly surrender all their property to local authorities who they then entrust to redistribute according to whoever they deem necessary. Because people don't trust them obviously. I suppose Marx would say that exposes the issues with the "alienated" social structures and so called free and democratic countries are actually not really that in principal but are forms of dictatorships. A free society of individuals would be different than what exists and what exists isn't really free in any meaningful sense. >The allocation of labour and resources is more efficiently distributed in a free market where men are able to apply themselves according to their wants than when resources are distributed seemingly arbitrarily by a pseudo-democratic body. You don't even need marxism to attack that idea. Classical welfare economics exposed ways in how inefficient markets can be in reality. >The ultimate crushing blow for socialism is that if one knows that created wealth will be seized by Soviet Hitler Chi Minhzedong, then there is obviously less of an incentive to exert effort to create wealth. That's already basically the case with certain industries under capitalism. Most digital goods can't really be controlled and rationed like the owners want and if you demand $1000 for a piece of software it'll end up mostly pirated freely. Relationships between initiative, access to resources, production, distribution, etc has to end up pretty arbitrary because resources are allocated based on who can craft probable narratives and raise funds based on nepotistic networking/etc and you can't make zero marginal costs work so need monopoly pricing to make markets in software/etc stuff work. >Why should anyone want to work harder or push themselves if you cannot enjoy the fruits of your own labour? Autism. A society based around people who do things because they want to, alternative is you can say that can't work because society exists based upon force to make people create and protect institutions bigger than themselves they hate.

>>25524201 STFU NIGGER!