/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17722959
Central planning always fails.

>>17722959
Gooogooo Gaga

>market goes down
>somehow this makes communism right

>>17722976
Ussr was a dictatorship. Cuba was a dictatorship. The CCP is a dictatorship (and is now capitalist). Spot a similarity?

nihao

>>17723004
Capitalism is failing system that is being killed by the inevitable greed that grows within. For example: if every single company didn't fucking put all of their manufacturing in China so they can use sweatshops instead of properly paying local workers or at least having local automation plants, our supply chains wouldn't be fucked right now.

>>17723070
we should give our property rights to the state

>>17723004
Capitalism is a system that rewards cutting corners and concentrating wealth to a few individuals. It will only lead to opressive States or collapse

>>17723070

>>17723113
this. we should just skip straight to the oppressive state part

he knew

>>17723105
Depends on what you mean by that.

Your house? No. That fuck huge manufacturing plant? Sure. No single individual on this planet should control that many resources in such a finite universe.

>>17723147
A coffee shop? That's okay too ( but it would to be regulated to avoid the problems of capitalism.

>>17722959
Is that Jerry Garcia?

>>17723133
How about we actually develop a actually good and interesting system instead of falling for some nihilistic doomed bullshit

>>17723147
exactly comrade.
No one should be allowed to have 1million dollars of wealth. The government should take it and give it to other people
999999 is ok but 1million is too much

>>17723147
Can I have multiple houses, and rent a few of them out?

>>17722976
Yugoslavia was based af tho

>>17723185
No

>>17723147
I agree the government should own all the wealth. That is ok

>>17723171
Ron Jeremy

>>17723182
and we should reduce the value of the dollar against an index of consumer goods so that that 1million dollar become less and less, until we effectively abolish private property. Then only the party will control peoples lives

>>17723202
Atleast, not without some good old regulation. If you trading items or some shit, that may be fine and dandy.

>>>/pol/
>Ib4 Marx is economics
No, else the udssr, Venezuela, China, Nord Korea and Vietnam as kambodscha might not be shitholes

>>17723202
>>17723228
Then to hell with your system.

>>17723185
Rent is theft comrade.

>>17722959

where in the manifesto did it say that a virus would make panicfags crash the market?

>>17723252
>would you pay rent willingly
Yes, if the arrangement benefits me.

>>17723185
But if it gets to a point where your concentration of resources might cause a type of hierarchy, then the gov might go after your ass.

>>17723250
why don't you want to be poor with us comrade

>>17723264

>>17723252
>Rent is theft
>But the government stealing everything from everyone isn't theft

>>17723276
see >>17723278

>>17723237
>All are oligarchy and/or dictatorial societies.

>>17723288
Commies are more guilty by an order of magnitude more evil than what they accuse capitalists of.

>>17723252
>paying for food is theft
Nope.
>would you pay for food willingly
Nope.
>then why do you pay rent
Because the farmer makes me.
>if someone forces you under threat to give them your money, that's theft
Selling food isn't theft though.

Apply this to whatever good or service you want, its just as retarded.

>>17723278
read what op comrade wrote >>17723147
people shouldn't be allowed to own things outside of what lets them survive while working.
No one should be allowed to accumulate wealth

>>17723252
Not quite if everyone gets free quality housing and the trade is in good faith, regulated, and causes no disturbance in society.

>>17723288

>>17723329
>No one should be allowed to accumulate wealth
So what is the point of working?

>>17723355
The gun to the back of your head, comrade.

>>17723355
Food and water is all you need.

>>17723355
the party will put you in a gulag if you don't work, what are you a capitalist?

>>17723329
I disagree. That type of forced bare bones living is completely necessary. We can properly distribute resources to everyone without such a cruel solution. And if someone does accumulate too much, we can just redistribute.

>>17723343
>everyone gets free housing
this is the kind of adult innovative thinking communists are only capable of

>>17723371
>That type of forced bare bones living is completely necessary.
exactly comrade

>>17723364
Gulags are completely inhumane. If someone refuses to work, just send them to therapy or rehabilitation center. And if they are being a disturbance to society, send them to a place like halden

>>17723399
Don't worry about it bro.

>>17723398
Sorry, unnecessary. There's no reason for it. We already live in a society that can mass produce goods like no tommorow. Shouldn't be too hard to avoid that type of living.

>>17723399
>therapy
>rehabilitation center
but if there is no consequence to not working everyone will choose this option. I still vote gulag comrade

>>17723399
>rehabilitation center
here's your rehabilitation center bro

>>17723355
To give purpose to your existence by doing what you can to support your community and fellow man who support you in turn. There's a reason that the root word of socialism is "social."

>>17722959
BE SURE TO REPORT ALL LEFTYPOL SPAM THREADS

>>17723435
Imagine all the organs you could redistribute
>>17723425

>>17723360
Unfortunately, I'm good friends with the local commissar. I'm immune to prosecution. Now, off to the gulag with you. Social dynamics never go away, they simply change.
>>17723363
No.

oh look, impoverished losers have come to gloat. i am so btfo right now.

>>17723426
Restrictions on travel and personal time is enough punishment. Halden has the data to show this method works.

Inhumane prison camps aren't the answer

>>17723450
Organ harvesting is on the verge of irrelevance due to lab grown organs

>>17723438
>To give purpose to your existence by doing what you can to support your community and fellow man who support you in turn
What happens if this community doesn't actually support me or care about my contributions? What is stopping somebody who is far more socially manipulative from taking control of this glorified high school environment you plan to throw everyone into? Good looking people and those who are socially more connected will have greater power than those who are not, no?

What is stopping your worker's councils from turning into a thinly veiled popularity contest, like all democracies and communes turn into?

your never gonna make people want to be human when they like being dogs op
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiaF4kuxJco

>>17723489
>Unfortunately, I'm good friends with the local commissar

Wrong. Under communism all humans are perfect and moral and would never act like this. Off to gulag with you for being evil and corrupt

>>17723489
why haven't you moved to a communist country comrade

>>17723500
Hopefully regulation and the government. But that's a problem every type of society has, even this one. Sometimes shit slips through at the very beginning and everything slowly decays.

>>17723521
Because there are none that exist. All the governments of the wor

>>17722959
This has little to do with the faults of capitalism, any economic system, any type of society, can be brought to its knees by a pandemic.

>>17723553
what about the chinese communist party

>>17723542
All the governments of the world are either too weak or too corrupt.

>>17723171
Thought that too at first I guess its stalin?

>>17722959
Yes, we know CRUZ is mooning. Don't rub it in.

>>17723328
Big brain

>>17723572
That's state capitalist at best. They are unfortunately a oligarchic tyrannical state that gives the corps cheap sweat shop labour and silences anyone with legitimate criticism.

>>17723604
what about the ussr was that communist?

>>17723612
State capitalist as well. And also unfortunately very tyrannical and oligarchic

>>17722959
the hand of the free market short circuiting commie brains again I see

>>17723625
has communism ever been tried?

>>17722959
Most of /biz/ is retarded and uses the word “commie” unironically. Capitalism is in its final stages. It will be entirely obsolete when automation and AI eliminate wage labor. Socialism is the only viable solution.

>>17723647
If any attempt even deviates 1% from Marx's vision, then communism has never been tried.

>>17723647
It has been almost brought into existence. Unfortunately, it's attempted formations also had the bad trend of "brutal militaristic assholes" showing up.

The closet we've gotten has probably been with tribal community's and other similar types.

>>17723681
wow I wonder why

>>17723680
Marx is not grand daddy of communism. It's has existed long before him.

>>17723704
Unfortunate backstabbing and hero worship to put it simply.

>>17723542
>hopefully
So you, nor your intellectual class, have no solutions to the most basic of human problems (nepotism and power accumulation)? Don't you think this government will eventually become infested with cliques of people, each with their own goals that may not necessarily align with the founding philosophy of the society?
>But that's a problem every type of society has
Indeed. But this problem is the actual foundation of all other problems. So your system still doesn't fix anything. It just advantages other kinds of people (maybe people like you).

>>17723722
so why will it be different your way?

>>17723704
Oh yeah, and the CIA as well.

The fact /biz/ has more genuine communists on it than even /pol/ does is a little weird honestly

>>17723681
>brutal militaristic assholes keep magically showing up every time we try to set up a system of government with complete control over the economy and people's way of life, what the hell!

>>17723750
they're shills

>>17723147
Yeah so lets put it in charge of other humans that are just as incompetent but this time they aren’t even sepcialized in said industry, not even China does such retarded shit.

>>17723758
If they were, they'd be on /pol/ or something. Not here

>>17723722
>>17723681
Its almost as if clique formation and nepotism are the actual things wrong with society, and not distribution of capital.

>>17723776
pol is full of socialists
biz is full of capitalists

>>17723750
they are from d*scord.
>>17722959
>every time the market corrects 20%, communism is proven superior to capitalism

>>17723726
It's not impossible to avoid all these problems. You have to make sure the foundation of your society is solid from the very start (making sure the wrong people don't get into power, no bullshit laws, etc) and basically babysit it for a bit in the beginning.
As for who this system favors? No one. It doesn't have a reason to favor me or anyone else once it's set up properly.

This is of course a lot harder than it sounds, of course.

>>17723768
Assuming that everyone is incompetent won't get anything done. And who says that these individuals won't be skilled?

>>17723845
it almost sounds like for communism to work, we'd have to live in a magical fairyland where human behavior is completely different from the universe we live in. it's almost like when you discord trannies try to spread gommunism on this board you only end up making your ideology look even more retarded to anyone with two brain cells to rub together

>>17723892
It took me a while to realize this thread wasn't satire.

>>17723500
>What happens if this community doesn't actually support me or care about my contributions?
Then they suffer the consequences of lost productivity represented by your death and/or voluntary removal from society.

>What is stopping somebody who is far more socially manipulative from taking control of this glorified high school environment you plan to throw everyone into?
Without a hierarchy, there is no power to "take." Also, bums are generally pretty well disregarded and have a strong stigma in societies that value community contribution, so that problem kind of solves itself.

>>17723892
Not really. Humans are perfectly capable at being reasonable enough for this to work.
Also, I am neither transgender or from discord.

>>17722959
I’m genuinely curious: how do you define the socialism that you are for? How, for example, does a computer get manufactured in such a system?

>>17723845
>Its not impossible to avoid these problems.
But it actually is, since its inbuilt to human behavioral evolution. An example:

Tom is a relatively well liked man. He is somewhat of a social butterfly, he is very tall and attractive, a constant womanizer and is well liked in his community. He is currently running to be the local agricultural commissar and is a favorite to win.

Linus is somewhat different though. While is very intelligent and a well regarded scientist in his region, he is not very personable nor social, and is considered unattractive by many. He too is running for local agricultural commissar.

Under this system you are proposing, who would win that position? How is it any different from the current status quo?

>>17723913
>voluntary removal from society.
How would this occur?
>Without a hierarchy, there is no power to "take."
So you don't believe in social power?
>bums are generally pretty well disregarded and have a strong stigma in societies that value community contribution
Even ones that are physically attractive or have very charismatic personalities? Cause people like this tend to thrive in any environment.

>>17723973
Well, if this is a perfectly reasonable community, Linus of course. If they are dumbfucks, they'll vote for Tom and will either collapse or replace tom.

As for the current status quo: it's not that the community doesn't want linus, they are unfortunately ruled by a hierarchical oligarchic society where wealth and power is concentrated to a small group of people. These people are unfortunately very stupid, greedy, and would not and could not give a fuck if the community collapses.

>>17723884
Oh I don’t know, maybe the human tendency towards nepotism and corruption?

>>17724070
Your gonna have to source that.

>>17724014
>How would this occur?
By your refusal to participate in the community.
>So you don't believe in social power?
I believe when you properly construct a system that has no centralized power structures, individual bad actors, regardless of their personal "power" sources (appearance, locution, physical brutality, etc.) will pose no threat to it.
>Even ones that are physically attractive or have very charismatic personalities? Cause people like this tend to thrive in any environment.
Actually, they tend to thrive in environments where their words speak louder than their actions. Superficial environments, if you will, where people don't actually know each other at all. In environments where they have to put up or shut up, they stand out like sore thumbs.

>>17724082
Are you retarded? Honest question.

>>17724112
Nah, just need a source for such a claim.

>>17723637
>Adam Smith's Free Market
>The dude who literally warned about excessive ownership, barons buying up the land, and how even the Free Market needs regulation
>the guy who believed public infrastructure, health, schools, the military, and pensions should be publicly funded
Adam would be a Socialist by your fried Neoliberal "Market Rationalism" brains.

>>17724130
Yeah, here’s one: leave your mom’s basement, ffs even the ancient Greeks and Romans talked about man’s propensity towards corruption. It’s like saying that men are attracted to sexy women, it’s pretty elementary stuff that everyone over the age of 18 who has worked for a living understands.

>>17724185
Alrighty then, well I'm going now. Cause it's midnight.

>>17724205
Night anon. I think you're overly idealistic, but you seem nice enough and your heart's in the right place. It would be great if a system that avoided those problems could be found, but it's a huge riddle to solve in any way that wouldn't cause more problems.

>>17723312
>it isn't real communism™

>>17724267
I dunno how you have sympathy for these brainlets, they annoy me and their stupidity is dangerous. Maybe you’re a simpleton too.

>>17724300
We're all frens on /biz/

>>17724330
Nice is derived from the word stupid, look up the etymology. Undeserved kindness is folly.

>>17724379
>Undeserved kindness is folly.

Unfortunately, most people learn this from harsh experience.

>>17724027
>If they are dumbfucks, they'll vote for Tom and will either collapse or replace tom.
That's fine if its a small community. The problem is that men/women like Tom are a dime a dozen in circles of power at the highest levels of every single human group. This is why societies keep falling apart. Most people are not rational.
>>17724094
>By your refusal to participate in the community.
And if they force me to participate or if I'm not otherwise able to leave, then what?
>individual bad actors, regardless of their personal "power" sources (appearance, locution, physical brutality, etc.) will pose no threat to it.
But this is wrong though. There will always be a social pecking order, and your position in it will be determined largely by your personality and how you look. A generally attractive person is going to be given more opportunities to succeed than somebody who doesn't have those traits by society. This is a natural hierarchy, present in lower apes, that cannot be altered by simply changing the economic circumstances. This hierarchy will absolutely impact society at large, since almost every community will have this dynamic playing out.
>In environments where they have to put up or shut up, they stand out like sore thumbs.
How do you explain the numerous failings of communist groups (both primitive hunter-gathers and nation states), many caused by these incompetents?
>>17724130
You need a source for differences between human in-group and out-group behavior?

>>17724379
Don't mistake kindness for weakness.

>>17723006
Yep, socialism and communism are thinly veiled dictatorships.

Sage all leftypol tranny threads.

>>17722976
>communism is when the government does things

>>17723355
so you can earn your keep of course!

>>17723647
No, because it is impossible to implement.

NatSoc on the other hand...

>>17722959
It is funny how some stuff that Marx predicted are basically accepted, even by capitalists.

Marx wrote how Capitalism was destined to suffer crisis after crisis, and now no one bats an eye when millions become jobless/bankrupt in every one decade or so.

>>17722976
>let’s repeat old 50s propaganda I’m an individualist thinker
>>17723006
Somehow none have rulers for life. Weird.

>>17725304
>Somehow none have rulers for life. Weird.

Nope, just until the Kremlin kills them.

Also, a picture of Lenin in every room. (Or Mao, or Kim)

They definitely weren't cults of personality.

>>17722976
Ok boomer.

reminder to stop being newfags and sage/hide all leftypol raid threads

>>17723006
>Thinking I have a problem with dictatorship
Anon, the real problem with Stalin was that there were too many people who should have been killed that escaped judgement.

>>17723946
http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/new_socialism.pdf
see the chapter on consumer goods

>>17722976
>Central planning always fails.

Markets have reduced living standards pretty much everywhere they were introduced, In Russia the introduction of market economy have resulted in 12 million excess deaths compared to the previous communist system. It cause a economic gap where they needed 16 years just to recover and return to Soviet era levels of economic development. The only thing that's worse than introducing market economy is having a big war rampage through your country What does improve living standards was/is industrial machinery and cheap mass-production and construction, but that's a result of technology, that isn't tied to markets specifically.

If you compare China and India, where both have market economies, but China has much higher state involvement in the economy, you can see that this is likely the cause for the higher living standards and higher rate of improvement. Even if you compare the western countries, when social democracy had higher state involvement with the economy, the living standards were rising, while with neo-liberal market economy the living standards of people are declining again.

>>17725269
Yep. It's also weird how right wingers / neolibs say they praise Adam Smith, when Marx's economics is heavily developed from Smith.

You can be a right winger, anti-communist and still reap the reward of understanding capitalist dynamics. Marxist books get distributed in the pentagon and marxists are hired by wall street moguls because they consistently produce better insight (look up Michael Hudson, literally worked for David Rockefeller, also gives talks in the Pentagon).

Right now, the peak synthesis of economics IMO is:
Marxian + MMT
But you have to approach MMT from a Marxian perspective, Steve Keen is good but also misguided.

I could do a thread about economics explaining why we've been waiting for this crisis for 3 years now, and also why it will get worse. Not sure if anyone is interested.

>>17723647
Nope. Communism means stateless, moneyless, classless society. Every state ruled by Communist party never called itself communist, they called it socialist.
Primitive communism was indeed a thing in prehistoric times though.

>>17725450
Alright commie, I'll bite.

China can pull that off because it's racially United (most "communist" countries were).

Also, for the millionth fucking time China is hardly communist.

You want some form of social redistributive government to work in America? It's not going to happen thanks to "diversity". All that hippie shit that lefties have been spewing for that past 60years is just neoliberal capitalist subversion of Marxism. We have too many social groups vieing for power right now to have any kind of order or cohesion required to take on Das Kapital. Look at how niggers regard Bernie Sanders.

A good example of this is what happened to Feminism. Getting women in the world force doubled the worker pool (especially for a service based economy) without doubling the jobs. Wages then stagnated through the 70s all the way to today where they are only half of what they should be. The irony is that Marxists constantly drone on about the destruction of the nuclear family, which might I add only benifits the capitalist.

Marx was right about a lot of things, I won't deny that. But he wasn't entirely sure footed on group behavior. You should read some fascist or National Bolshevik literature. They came after Marx, and are more dialectically advanced than Marxism, and there fore can critique Marxism.

Tell me why capitalism can kill many more in imperialism... yet its only the evil commies, that carry the burden of every death on the system. For capitalism its war just happens, for socialism its "aggression" and "terror" a. When prisons(and ther vast abuses) happen in capitalism the criminal needs punishmeant, only in socialism is a prison a "gulag" some extra ordinary evil. If theres a famine in capitalism its oh well crops fail sometime it "happens" for socialism even thou crop failure happens as well, its 100% government caused. You people actually think your systems double standards are a argument. Why are capitalist such hypocritical sob's?

>>17725587
None of those countries were truly communist, friend.

Now off to Gulag.

>>17725503
That pic describes muricans perfectly. Most of them are poor retards with massive egos who'll NEVER be rich no matter how much they believe they will be.

>>17722959
go back to /pol/ you literally uneducated retard.

You legitimately know nothing of economics.

>>17724994
it is by definition unless you are a retarded ancom

>>17725569
>which might I add only benifits the capitalist.
Not sure if you mean this was controversial, just wanted to say, it isn't among marxists.
>It isn't going to work because of "diversity
Whatever does end up would still be better than being forced to live in poverty, and having most of your work be appropriated by your employers. There's so much work that is so profoundly useless, if we just organized a little better, we wouldn't have to work so much, and that is a huge gain IMO.
>>17725613
The "communism has actually never been tried" is misleading. All those countries were trying to implement communism (and that is called socialism). They generally did really good, despite what propaganda tells you.
>>17725667
I've asked before, would you like a Q&A thread about heterodox economics, especially Marxian economics? Stuff about the current crisis and profits, etc.?

A few days ago some anon posted a nice critique of these leftypol fags "raiding" biz. He posted with an image of the doomergirl on the chungus body, anybody save that?

At any rate, argue about this on pol, you fucking queers. Tell me how to profit from it here.

nvm found it
Commies possess the same mindset that the religious-right do. They view everyone as too stupid to understand the truth, which only they possess from having read their history of circlejerking theory from Hegel-onwards. A lot of the /lefty/ critique of capitalism is valid, but they have so many glaring holes in their worldview that remains as, like their right-wing equivalents, they tend not to interact with anyone beyond their immediate circles. The commie's planned 'infiltration', which is always their mode of operation (due to inability to fulfil revolutionary fantasy) is the same manner in which religious-right christians travel to the third world as missionaries. In both cases, it all roots back to their innate and repressed desire for power over other people, as some unrealised infantile desire, which is the last thing they could ever admit to wanting as it would show them to be nothing more than those they claim to hate the most - for the commies, fascists, and for christians, satanist's - but it truly is the ultimate thing that drives their every action. This is why you find so many despondent, bottom of the barrel folk on the left - they were often the victims of bullying growing up and in many cases have suffered traumatic experiences which have created repressed emotion. The same repressed emotion that drives those they criticise the most (it's all projection, see). They dress it up with the long-winded and arduous debates on theory and talk themselves into believing their own bullshit, much like the religious-right, all of which serves to only cement the fundamentals of their worldview which they never sufficiently question, again, much like the religious-right. In other words, these people are mentally ill and have lost grasp of their basic humanity.

>>17725269
>Marx wrote how Capitalism was destined to suffer crisis after crisis, and now no one bats an eye when millions become jobless/bankrupt in every one decade or so.
Yes its so horrible how the great depression has happened every decade and half the population is homeless, oh wait, thats not true, you are just a lazy faggot most people are doing fine in the US.

>God why isn't everyone living in the lap of luxury like millionaires! so unfair

>>17725691
That's my point boyo. Learn marxism, understand economics, ??? profit.
I'm currently shorting the market. Porky is underestimating the effects of coronavirus and the already late crisis massively. This will get way worse.

>>17723113
well its been like 200 fucking years, when is it going to happen, those braindead fucking retards said capitalism will collapse soon back in the fucking 1910s and here we still are.

>>17725721
>boyo
kys neckbeard

Commies possess the same mindset that the religious-right do. They view everyone as too stupid to understand the truth, which only they possess from having read their history of circlejerking theory from Hegel-onwards. A lot of the /lefty/ critique of capitalism is valid, but they have so many glaring holes in their worldview that remains as, like their right-wing equivalents, they tend not to interact with anyone beyond their immediate circles. The commie's planned 'infiltration', which is always their mode of operation (due to inability to fulfil revolutionary fantasy) is the same manner in which religious-right christians travel to the third world as missionaries. In both cases, it all roots back to their innate and repressed desire for power over other people, as some unrealised infantile desire, which is the last thing they could ever admit to wanting as it would show them to be nothing more than those they claim to hate the most - for the commies, fascists, and for christians, satanist's - but it truly is the ultimate thing that drives their every action. This is why you find so many despondent, bottom of the barrel folk on the left - they were often the victims of bullying growing up and in many cases have suffered traumatic experiences which have created repressed emotion. The same repressed emotion that drives those they criticise the most (it's all projection, see). They dress it up with the long-winded and arduous debates on theory and talk themselves into believing their own bullshit, much like the religious-right, all of which serves to only cement the fundamentals of their worldview which they never sufficiently question, again, much like the religious-right. In other words, these people are mentally ill and have lost grasp of their basic humanity.

>>17725613
Really? kinda why I called them socialist!

>>17725708
ouch, lefties BTFO'd forever. How bout giving an actual critique of the theory, the scientific results, the historic results, etc etc.
It's honestly tiring to have people believe in neoclassical economics which is basically magic.
And btw, I thoroughly enjoy discussing with MMT (not marxists) because they don't believe in fairly tales, even if they deny marxism (I'm somewhat of a MMT fan myself). What can you replace marxist economics with? Please tell me because I've been searching and have found nothing that compares, and I'm eager to learn.

>>17725680
>>17722976

You have no idea what communism is do you?
Communism is essentially the absence of government. And it's never been achieved.

>>17723252
jesus this is retarded
>Would you pay rent willingly
yes retard, I want to live in a house and currently can't afford to just go out and buy a 2 bedroom 3,000 square foot home in a nice place, so i'll pay someone else to be able to borrow their house for a bit.

>>17725682
>if we just organized a little better, we wouldn't have to work so much, and that is a huge gain IMO.

My point is that organizing has now become impossible. We matched on in the promise of the religion of "equality" blindly into the hands of the capitalist. We are rootless, groupless, and soon homeless. You won't get any of the things you want until you decide a United community that actually gives a shit about it's own people.

Marxists simply refuse to admit the limitations of the human spirit. The unconstrained vision is a disease.

>>17725784
How bout fucking off to where you came from?
>number will go down tomorrow
Excellent take, btw

>>17725708
We don't think people are to stupid we believe due to cultural upbringing and how capitalism hasn't come to bad conditions YET. That, that is why people don't come to it more often, the left always rises when capitalism has a collapse.

>>17723351
I did make earth, as soon as I became self aware the world was mine and theres no reason beyond my morality and need for others to help me in life that I should let anyone tell me otherwise, I'd claim everything as mine if it didn't end up hurting others and risking my own life.

>>17725682

> if we just organized a little better, we wouldn't have to work so much, and that is a huge gain IMO.

My point is that organizing has now become impossible. We marched on believing in the promise of the religion of "equality", blindly into the hands of the capitalist. We are rootless, groupless, and soon homeless. You won't get any of the things you want until you are willing to build a united community that actually gives a shit about it's own people.

Marxists simply refuse to admit the limitations of the human spirit. The unconstrained vision is a disease.

>>17725800
Not what I said but ok.
Btw, I've been here since way back. Made a bundle with BTC and Dash. Recently made good gains with Link.
Probably been here before you. Keep seething no-book theorylet.

>>17725503
>I could do a thread about economics explaining why we've been waiting for this crisis for 3 years now, and also why it will get worse. Not sure if anyone is interested.

why should we be, commies predict a crisis every year, you're bound to get it right at some point like a broken clock. wake me up when commies actually become billionaires with their miraculous insights in markets.

>>17722959
Wish there was communism
No work. Only shitpostan.

>>17725865
>implying capitalism isnt a boom bust cycle

Absolutely infantile!

>>17723329
>>17723363
>>17723438
Jesus christ that sounds dreadful, fuck the "social" responsibility of the people, fuck the community, fuck "the people", if my whole life from birth to death is going to be living in a box with no accommodations, nothing to drink and eat but water and bread, nothing to do but work all day just to keep others alive, nothing to keep beyond what I use for working, whats the point of living not only as my own life, but as a species, what purpose does humanity have when life has become nothing but being in a box with a hamster wheel that produces food, water every single day with no change or hope.

legit communists should just kill themselves because living a life like that with no joys or goals is literally the same as being dead.

>>17725852
Perhaps you're right, I don't discount this possibility at all and I think about it a lot.
Regarding how capitalism works, there's nothing better than marxism. I anticipate social unrest soon.
Regarding the future, neoliberalism is failing all around the world. I'd much rather live under a system as socialist as possible, and would rather this dystopia to stop getting worse. Both are interests of socialists orgs.
>>17725865
Read Nassim Taleb. The market can remain irrational for a shit load of time, especially with intense government interference as we have seen these past years. You can't predict the massive tax breaks and economic stimulus plans of the government. You can only diagnose the sick market as sick and wait for it to show signs of cracks, like now.

>the solution to the government enabling worker exploitation is to give control over everything to the government!

Commies are retarded. Have some fun with then and ask them what their job will be after the communist revolution.

>>17725935
No, but you see, after the government has been given all the power, they'll give it away to the people. Haven't you read Marx?

>>17725935
I don't care, as long as I do as little of it as possible. I could clean toilets or write software if it meant 8 hour work weeks. What is your current job, beside making money for your handlers and polishing their boots with a smile on your face, aka the eternal wage cuck?

>>17723399
What if I go to the therapy center and just ignore what they say.

>>17725542
>stateless, moneyless, classless society
Legitimately impossible with a population over 1,000, you need a state or system to keep things going.

>>17725930
Do yourself a favor and read some Fascist / NatSoc literature. Not Hitler, he wasn't a philosopher, nor did he have much interesting to say. You need to Read Giovanni Gentile. He was a hegelian philosopher and scholar, much like Marx. But he offers a critique of Marx that can only be delivered in hindsight.

You've read Marx, now read his counter part. Marx was not infallible, buy he was certainly on to something.

>>17725935
Because giving worker rights to companies are a better solution?

Enjoy working 10+ hours while dealing with work after finishing your job.

>>17724175
none of that is socialist because all of that already is in place in counties you call capitalist.

>>17725909
Boom, bust is better than 100% bust.

>>17724175
Shh, don't tell the libertarians that.

>>17723669
>final stages

>Be 1890s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1910s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>be 1920s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1930s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1940s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1960s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1970s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1980s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 1990s
lmao communism is over
>be 2000s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 2010s
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 2020
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait
>Be 2030
guys capitalism is going to end soon, just wait

>>17725929
Listen NO socialist wants this totalitarian nightmare state you dipshits keep fearmongering about. For unempathtic people like yourself I can understand a cooperative society might sound like complete hell, you would rather other people work for you as a capitalist yourself then work with others for EVERYONES gain. That means YOURS AS WELL. Most commies want direct democracy with some sedition... we want to control the state not have it control you. If thats starts to occur it's a counter-revolutionary. Comrade we need to introduce what revisionism is!

>>17725960
>they'll give it away to the people
Ah yes, the people...

>>17725997
>reading works by Gentiles
Found your problem.
Any specific book by Mr. Gentile? He has a ridiculously huge repertoire.

>>17726065
And would you mind making a thread about it in the leftist bunker? I'm sure more people would be interested in a good critique of Marx.

>>17725960
Haven't you read history? That history were socialist never had 50% of the world and we're they were surrounded by hostile capitalist forces. Oh sure lets get ourselves overthrown because libertarianism and shit... ok

>>17726065
Probably start with any of his works regarding Idealism. There are also several commentaries written for his works that are pretty good, and can help guide the reader a bit. I don't have a specific suggestion for those other than to be weary about choosing commentaries.

>>17723171
its robin williams...

>>17726057
Yes you retard, but what I want I know is impossible just like you should know what you want is impossible, what you want and what you want to give us are two separate things, that totalitarian shithole nightmare is the only way communism can work, thats why they always end up that way then you say "oh it wasn't real communism.

>>17726059
He's also strawmaning like all capitalist do, that the state would structurally control you, instead of you control it! Yes the state will turn power over the people. once the mechanisms for organized society, can be done without what defines a state to begin with. Until then the people control the socialist government not the otherway around. Again if that starts to occur, it is a counter revolution within the government and itself needs revolt!

>>17726205
>the people will control the state because Marx said so
Read Böhm von Bawerk.

>>17726057
>Listen NO socialist wants this totalitarian nightmare state you dipshits keep fearmongering about.

Intentions are irrelevant, outcome is the only thing that matters. There is no reason why a proletarian dictatorship would ever give up their control on all capital they've acquired during the revolution. Not a single communist revolution has ever led to any sort of democratisation long term in the past.

>>17726098
My ass is going to bed. Give some of his works a glance and choose some stuff you find interesting. They'll probably disregard it and shit on it instantly because he ghost wrote for Mussolini. Also it has the word fascism in it, which is automatically bad to most marxists, and if the conclusion is wrong the argument must be wrong amirite?

>>17726111
There were other reasons than economics why western nations were opposed to communist states. They were the aggressors most of the time and caused millions of casualties and brutal oppression during the implementation of their totalitarian systems.
The total abolition of private property cannot be implemented by peaceful means not is it compatible with a democratic state.
Socialism is inherently tied to total state control of the economy and therefore all individual life.
If you believe that a state with that much power would give that you’re delusional.
Rhine capitalism as practiced in most of Europe has a far better track record than any form of state socialism does.

>>17726205
>Until then the people control the socialist government not the otherway around
This is where you are wrong, the people NEVER control the government, they just put somebody to rule for them, usually the most charismatic guy around.

>>17726127
I still think you should do a thread on the bunker about this guy. I'm not seeing a lot of economics though. I guess he was more concerned about Marx's (mis)treatment of Hegelianism and the dialectical process.
>>17726246
I got distracted reading excerpts and the wikipedia article. Thanks for the recommendation mate. Do pop by, worst case you get banned ;)

>>17726152
Nope it ended up that way because of the material conditions of starting out in feudal states, with imperialist powers trying to destroy you. It ended up that way because of structures we know now needed fixing. Socialism is a economic system not a governmental. Capitalism has never occurred outside of a oligarchy of banker punks. Oh but blah blah blah free market idealism and delusion. Saying socialism can't be libertarian is a strawman when your own economic system can't be what you want yet you believe in it funny how that works. Also many people whether its former USSR citizens or yugos... want it back even for all the shortcomings! We can do complete democratization, we can localize governments so that politics are closest to people grips as it can be. We can make representative bodies were representatives are subject to being removed by the populous will. We can greatly expand economics production creativity by giving more a decision.

>>17725680
actually, "by definition", it is not

>>17726012
lol total nonstatement

the post you're replying to is pointing out how meaningless the labels are

if they aren't socialist, then let's just get them

>>17726335
>Rhine capitalism or social capitalism,[1] is a socioeconomic model combining a free market capitalist economic system alongside social policies that establish both fair competition within the market and a welfare state.

Imagine being so retardedly feels based and biased against any kind of socialism that you can't even call it social capitalism and you have to replace it with "Rhine". All this politics shit is hilarious with all these biases around their own shit all feels over logic every time.

>>17726356
Last reply, facism isn't really a direct critique of Marxism economic theory. Rather, it's a holistic approach to socialist society. For example, they probably don't make the distinction of economic policy vs social policy such as the fashion today. Rather, everything is social policy. They'd also probably tell you the type of government possible is relient on the spirit (zeitgeist) of the people. Fascism's grand theory is essentially that the state works as an ultimate unifier of the people.

What does it take to unify a people? More than a government with welfare programs. The people must think as one, they must have commonality. Society is not made of disparate individuals, and a man can not be reduced to the work he inputs into the system. As you can see, Fascism is not in opposition of socialism, rather it is a socialism of the soul of the people. Giovanni attempts to explain what that might look like in his works. Of course, the answer of how to unify a people, or at least the one he gives, is not a comfortable one.

>>17726337
>>17726335
>>17726234
Read my post about the conditions of these revolutions. Massive illiteracy massive damage in civil wars. Then as they made big gains in pay, health, education... for workers it recreated class dynamics. Since it had to start with bad structures in these wars with this level of illiteracy... when the class dynamics came back the leaders betrayed socialism and its why the USSR and Chinese elites choose capitalism for there own corruption in the late 1900s! Your guys analysis is flawed because its doesn't take in all the factors.

>>17724175
The way people use the concept of "the invisible" hand today is radically different from how Adam Smith originally used it.

https://youtu.be/eaZORYaygo0

>>17724130
You're retarded.

>>17726468
The reason why I’m using the term Rhine capitalism is because social capitalism or social market economy has been so corrupted and associated with things that are neither capitalist nor social.
Rhine capitalism as envisioned by Ludwig Erhard does not want to make the market more social but aims to allow each member of society to participate in the market but not to abolish it or private property.
This is a very different from state socialism because it works as intended.
While the Soviet Union caused suffering on an unimaginable scale Rhine capitalism is humane.
While socialism needs a dictatorship of the proletariat Rhine capitalism works inside a democratic system.

>>17726504
>Read my post about the conditions of these revolutions
No thanks, i read enough deterministic bullshit for today.

>>17726512
Smith was a comrade all along checkmate caps! Can't even represent your guys ideology the right way!

>>17726504
Lenin had the option of working with the social democrats and work out a peaceful movement towards social improvement.
The conditions in china were different with it being in civil war for decades so that any stable system would have been an improvement however even then Mao forced the civil war to restart.
Communists don’t use the revolution as a tool for communism to arise they use communism to justify a revolution.

>>17726675
Sorry bub history is deterministic. Past events the conditions around them do cause the present. As does fuedalist conditions described here
>>17726504

>>17726745
>Sorry bub history is deterministic. Past events the conditions around them do cause the present
It is not, since you can't calculate everything, otherwise information asymmetry would not be a thing, taking into account only social classes won't help you predict the future.

>>17725788
hahahah

y-you didn't forget about me a-anon?

>>17726745
>Sorry bub history is deterministic.
Because Marx said so?

There is an incredibly simple problem with the Marxian approach: the fact that it's not individualistic in its formulation. Marxist economics are concerned with things on the level of the group, of the society. This introduces a mathematical problem: when working with sets of data, the aggregate data can show a different trend than the actual trend which you see in properly separated data (look up Simpson's paradox). More specifically, the low resolution economics of the Marxian model cannot be verified while remaining in the constraints of the derivation of the Marxist theories.
The question of whether Marx was correct cannot be verified with methodology accepted by Marxists.
To obtain the most true model for economics, then, one must start to make meaningful distinctions in the group size considered. Aggregate data will always have the problem of multiple models matching it, so to obtain correct information we must look at economics on the most fundamental level. Hence, the correct method for economics is to consider things upon the level of the individual, and how individuals act, as the individual is the building block of the economy. Marxists will never do this.

>>17726884
reductionist bullshit, even other communists agree marx was just reducing and simplifying everything he could so it would fit his uneducated 1800s European world view and culture.