Communism debate nuance edition

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mothra1988 said:
Are you too stupid to realize how paradoxical the idea of accusing someone being against communism as just being a kike is? I swear they clone you idiots in a factory, and each copy becomes increasingly dumber and closer to complete self parody.
Click to expand...
Ever since the start of another round of fighting in the Holy Land the /pol/estinians have been paragliding into our board to shit this place up with their "six million more" garbage, one called me a Rabbi for making fun of dead terrorists. But yeah the template's getting a bit dusty, no?
 
Duke Nukem said:
Ever since the start of another round of fighting in the Holy Land the /pol/estinians have been paragliding into our board to shit this place up with their "six million more" garbage, one called me a Rabbi for making fun of dead terrorists. But yeah the template's getting a bit dusty, no?
Click to expand...
This thread exists because the KF loli poster thinks communism is the true conservatism. They've obviously been mind fucked to the point they think up is down and left is right. If the planet was invaded by space aliens, I'm sure we'd be hearing about how the aliens are based and we should submit ourselves to their rule.
 
Mothra1988 said:
This thread exists because the KF loli poster thinks communism is the true conservatism. They've obviously been mind fucked to the point they think up is down and left is right. If the planet was invaded by space aliens, I'm sure we'd be hearing about how the aliens are based and we should submit ourselves to their rule.
Click to expand...
So he's basically a power worshiper with no principles? Sounds like your typical leftard actually. Still a relief from the usual "communist countries were centers of learning and culture with 69 gender meth fueled sex orgies and free everything paid for by the government what a paradise" crap though.

Also, those alien bastards would probably have every human on their side due to NPC programming. I'm convinced the meme is real, before you say "get a new joke," I seriously wish I was fucking joking.
 
Tablet County said:
The civility didn't even last two pages. Fucking politispergs I swear.
Click to expand...
I for one abide by the rules, reporting infantile rage to jannies and continuing the debate. He should stick to the rules @AgendaPoster and I started this in good faith prove fallibility of communism and get clarification from @Save the Loli for his claim that communism preserved tradition, I've posted multiple instance where communist leadership tried to eradicate religion, folk tradition and more. I leave rule violations for others and leave emotions out of the debate.

Opposition has yet make valid counter argument, instead of resorting to insults, genetic fallacies and baseless accusations.
 
You guys literally can't help it from being hostile even when the subject is quite neutral. If communism is an emotionally neutral thing to me who I was born under it and had multiple family members fucked up by it, it should also be to you.
Now, the social conservatism thing... it's very complex, and I think the problem is put wrongly.
What communism or socialism offer you (and I mean national communism, like we had in Romania, and socialism in one state, not internationalism modern flavors) is the state mechanisms for control, i.e. unapologetic totalitarianism. If the leaders feel like doing some progressive shit, they will use totalitarian power to that end too, like Cuba having free transitioning lately or w/e. But if they wanna do socially right wing things, they also will.
There is also confusion about what socially right wing is, mostly because of lack of historical context.
For example, in the 80s it was not socially conservative to despise faggotry and be 100% against gay marriage. That was true behind the Iron Curtain, AND in the West. It was just normal for that era. Back then, social conservatism would've been something like racial politics. Both the US and the USSR were highly progressive on race as the winners of WW2 and because of the ritualistic opposition to everything Nazis stood for.
The typical isolation in communist nations is also conducive towards social conservatism, as capitalism values open societies with healthy market practices, freedom of movement for labor etc.
In general, the society that is closed, more totalitarian, more collectivist and less freedom/rights focused will become more conservative, or better said, more socially right wing.
Obviously this can be taken to an extreme.
These social controls in my country meant that something as small as growing your hair, wearing jeans, not tying your basketball shoes was seen as potential rebellion and suspicious, and would often lead to visits to the school leadership, calls to parents etc. Is this good? Maybe, to some amount, as discipline is important.
As one can notice, there is a lot of balancing to do here and it's very hard, very emotionally charged and often very hard to justify rationally, as leftoids like to point out when they deconstruct traditions and norms.
A TL;DR would be, IMO, that capitalism is by its nature more open and has limited tools to deal with what we consider degeneracy. At the same time, it's able to produce more wealth and happier societies... at least for a while until the inherent contradictions in freedom&liberty/equality as mantras come to bite you in the ass.
Communism (again, not internationalist woowoo lunacy, but what has been put in practice) is more conducive to closed, often very oppressive societies with far less individual expression allowed or encouraged. It's often not a pleasant society to live in, even when economy is not that bad.
So, a smart person would try to find ways to take what works best in these ideologies and form some sort of fusion product, and when that gets obsolete, when new theories and ideologies occur, do it again, and again.
 
Mothra1988 said:
If you can't tell if communism is bad, you are a complete doofus who should have been aborted honestly. Don't know what school system you came out of, but it was obviously an embarrassment. The fact some of you guys would willingly sign up for breadlines is hilarious.
Click to expand...
Where is anyone saying communism is good in this thread? Seriously, show me.
Glowie said:
You keep pulling figures without citations and asserting that they're true. If you were capable opening and read citations I linked in every post, supposed GDP growth, which you claim without evidence I might add, unlike my claims which are from soviet and analysis by CIA, since you tend to attempt sources you like I added secondary source highlight inflation and high cost of living in USSR and paper reporting Income in 1977 USSR. Kruschev was proven wrong alongside soviet GDP myth In reality at least of 40% soviet union lived in poverty in 60s
Click to expand...
Yes, posting silly libertarians is totally going to convince me instead of the actual stats from the Maddisen Project that show Soviet GDP growth. If a nation doesn't have such GDP, they aren't funding the enormous amounts of projects the USSR had from the space race to their huge army to their nuclear arsenal to their quest for global communism. That's just simple logic.
Glowie said:
Assertion without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I will dissmiss your assertion with evidence
Click to expand...
Here's a good one on the truth of the so-called Holodomor and how it was created by Ukrainian Nazi collaborators and the CIA.

Also check the ethnicity of the Soviet leaders after Stalin. Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Chernenko, and Gorbachev were ethnic Ukrainians. Or go look through a list of Soviet generals from WWII. Almost anything ending in -enko is Ukrainian, and boy, there sure were a lot of them.
Mothra1988 said:
This thread exists because the KF loli poster thinks communism is the true conservatism. They've obviously been mind fucked to the point they think up is down and left is right. If the planet was invaded by space aliens, I'm sure we'd be hearing about how the aliens are based and we should submit ourselves to their rule.
Click to expand...
Where did I say that? I know from past experience your reading comprehension is zero, so I'm looking forward to seeing what silliness you come up with.
Glowie said:
I for one abide by the rules, reporting infantile rage to jannies and continuing the debate. He should stick to the rules @AgendaPoster and I started this in good faith prove fallibility of communism and get clarification from @Save the Loli for his claim that communism preserved tradition, I've posted multiple instance where communist leadership tried to eradicate religion, folk tradition and more. I leave rule violations for others and leave emotions out of the debate.

Opposition has yet make valid counter argument, instead of resorting to insults, genetic fallacies and baseless accusations.
Click to expand...
You posted no such thing. But let's look at the actual examples.

China closes down gay centers. Xi Jinping is marginalizing women in politics and cracking down on feminism. Jiang Qing is an imporrtant Chinese intellectual who runs a private college in Guizhou, has praised China's steps of bringing back Confucian morality and order, and has openly called for the Chinese political system to be overhauled in favor of a Confucian-inspired system.

North Korea condemns some gay international law judge. North Korea claims there are no homosexuals in the country.

Most Vietnamese oppose gay marriage.

Stalin re-banned homosexuality (Article 121 of the Soviet penal code, in effect until 1991), and one of his favorite writers Maxim Gorky said "Exterminate all homosexuals and fascism will vanish.” Stalin outlawed abortion and had a steep tax on divorce.

Ceausescu banned abortion and contraceptives and promoted mothers to have large families.
 
Save the Loli said:
Ceausescu banned abortion and contraceptives and promoted mothers to have large families.
Click to expand...
That didn't work well at all, sadly, besides the initial boost. By the 80s abortion was common, but it was done illegally, often leading to deaths or severe illness. Unwanted children in a collapsing economy was disastrous, and were abandoned to be taken care of by the state, which was also collapsing and was unable to provide.
These half-bakes solutions are often insufficient. Like in Hungary today, where the intentions and even welfare state are provided, but feminism and liberalism have corroded society to such a degree that it's really, really hard to stop the train. Even with Orban. Even with the 98% Hungarian cohesive state.
Still, partial intentions are still better than nothing.
Another important factor is geopolitics.
For example, because of the competition and the brainwashing fallout of the WW2, USSR and the West often took reactionary positions to what the other did. It's seen even today with Russia and Ukraine, two countries with very, very similar cultures, but reflexively pushing against what the others do. Is the West now progressive? Trad Russia. Is Russia now trad? Fuck that Ukraine is gonna legalize fag marriage, that will show the vatniks! It's just endless and it's so incredibly retarded.
Even in Romania, nowadays socially RW positions are suddenly associated with Russia to the point where you get suspected of being pro-Kremlin if you're anti-progressive.
The US is also doing this. The more Russia and China push towards more totalitarian states, the more Washington moans about democracy and liberalism, minority rights and so on, even though they couldn't care less is Israel is genociding a whole island of dindus.
I think that social conservatism, which I really hate as a term but sounds better than socially right wing, should consider at least 3 categories:
- women rights and what was done, when. Suffragette movement seems to be a pretty Western phenomenon, but the truth is the USSR was also highly progressive, at least in policy, as attitudes did not change much, just like in the West
(important modern extension being gender politics, i.e. the smolbeanuWu queer and trans crap)
- minority rights and ethnocentrism/how normalized it is; as an extension there are racial politics, but that's more of an American thing
- individual rights and freedoms
Separate aspect which is so large that it kinda requires its own topic is the economic aspect, and the tendencies of capital and markets, which I don't think they are neutral, as they always lean towards cheap labor and mass production, which works best inside libertarian, less regulated societies.
Also, a government that is able to punish corporations when they go nuts on some undesirable direction, like social media, is highly useful when it comes to implementing some basic social norms. Nationalizing rebellious capital is always tempting, but comes with its own set of dangers. Nationalization, if you have the proper government and laws in place can fix a lot of defective stuff. For example, a nationalized Twitter would be forced to abide by the 1A as it's run by the government. Imagine the chaos.
 
Save the Loli said:
Where is anyone saying communism is good in this thread? Seriously, show me.
Click to expand...
@Save the Loli you're singing praises of it
Save the Loli said:
Yes, posting silly libertarians is totally going to convince me instead of the actual stats from the Maddisen Project that show Soviet GDP growth
Click to expand...
Maddisen project was founded in 2010 and isn't meant for historical data, I attached three separate PDF that show high cost of living, low income and Kruschev being proven wrong, case of special pleading on your part
Save the Loli said:
You posted no such thing. But let's look at the actual examples.
Click to expand...
I plastered such sources on your profile page, but not here yet. Let's look into those examples of yours.
Homosexuality and troons are legal in Vietnam
Stalin encouraged eugenics and forced sterilisations
Atheist five year plan in Russia.

Destruction of four olds in China
CCP beating rest of the world with low replacement rates due one child policy and two and three children policies failing
Gays are legal, troons too

Xi and his predecessors maintained trad values by dooming entire family lines
Save the Loli said:
Here's a good one on the truth of the so-called Holodomor and how it was created by Ukrainian Nazi collaborators and the CIA.

Also check the ethnicity of the Soviet leaders after Stalin. Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Chernenko, and Gorbachev
Click to expand...
Global research is well known and registered Propaganda and conspiracy site This Canadian organisation never pass peer review. Canuck infowars.

Implication that failings of USSR is some sort of Ukrainian plot is equally baseless, Kiev is a distance away from Moscow since according to you Holomdor was a hoax why would fellow comrades hold any animosity?
 
AgendaPoster said:
If communism is an emotionally neutral thing to me who I was born under it and had multiple family members fucked up by it, it should also be to you.
Click to expand...
I really wish more Americans could drill this into their heads. I've know a lot of people who grew up under communist regimes, and definitely had their criticisms of those regimes, but they are less spergy and emotionally invested in it than some upper middle class white boy who grew up in the suburbs and has a creased GADSEN flag hanging on his wall.

When it comes to preserving tradition, one of the really good books on the subject is Schumpeter's Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. Schumpeter approaches the subject matter as someone who's sympathetic to capitalism but still predicts its downfall, and some of the most interesting chapters for me were the ones where he talks about how capitalism in inherently corrosive to tradition, even the traditions which underpin it. This is because it introduces a mentality of things like accounting to things like family - he predicted that eventually people in the west wouldn't get reliably married, have kids, and raise kids because it was 'the thing to do' as enforced by the culture - many would run the numbers and see kids as a drain on their resources. Those people would eventually better adapt to a capitalist society, and so things like the family would be gradually eroded.

What I found even more interesting, however, was when he talked about the erosion of the idea of property itself. He talked about how the idea of a man who owns his factory, whose destiny is tied to the success of that factory, and who has 'skin in the game' appeals to just about everyone, and forms the psychological and moral bedrock of capitalism as a system. But Schumpeter predicted that this would be undermined, that ownership would become fragmented and absentee in nature, and that eventually the great masses of people wouldn't see someone who had never set foot in that factory, who owns a 2% share that they bought a month ago when it was trading low and plan to sell again once the price rises, as in any way admirable or worth defending. That by vaporizing this real, visceral sense of property capitalism would erode its own foundation and turn the public against the capitalist class, which at this point would have no real connection to the production from which they draw their wealth. The original DuPont family members were in a large part chemists and inventors or direct managers of the family business - now their company is owned by a bunch of faceless global investors.

It really is incredible how well he predicted this world of liquid, international, culturally corrosive capital, especially seeing as the book was published in the 1940s. Overall, though I don't agree with communism, I find that Marxist or even third-party commentators in general have a much deeper, more profound grasp on economics than the libertarians that love to crow that Socialists 'should read basic economics'. Hayek & Mises aren't 'basic economics', and most of the people who say this have skimmed those two and a few other big names and have zero grasp of the discipline on a wider level. Those two are pretty fringe - that doesn't mean that they didn't have some decent insights that I find helpful, but reading their books and then treating them like scripture has nothing to do with 'understanding economics'. Just listen to someone like Yanis Varoufakis talk about this stuff and put him up against any of the big libertarian 'explainers'.

Anyway, I think that communism 'preserving tradition' is a toss-up. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, but what it has going for it is that the system itself isn't corrosive towards traditions. One of those really dumb tells that I see, one which shows that someone is pretending to have read Schumpeter without actually having read him, is when people cite 'creative destruction' as a good aspect of capitalism that Schumpeter discovered. The opposite is true - Schumpeter pointed out that 'creative destruction' is a huge liability of capitalism, because it means that the system, once set in motion, is incapable of putting on the brakes and exercising enough constraints to protect its own foundation from the instability which it generates.
 
Last edited:
Glowie said:
Maddisen project was founded in 2010 and isn't meant for historical data, I attached three separate PDF that show high cost of living, low income and Kruschev being proven wrong, case of special pleading on your part
Click to expand...
LMAO that's literally the point of it IS to compare historic GDP. And is that the same paper where you neglect to note that the USSR had less inequality than most Western democracies beside socialist Scandinavia? Or that most poverty was concentrated in Central Asia which was an absolutely dirt poor region with borderline medieval conditions before the USSR?

BTW show me where I praised communism. I praised one single aspect of communism (okay, Stalinist aesthetics--which are very traditional BTW--are nice too, so that's two), and honestly more of a result since it's rarely been a feature of communism. Pointing out historic truth about the USSR is not "praising communism." Unlike you, I don't have to constantly make up nonsense or exaggerate facts about countries and political ideologies I don't like. I don't like the USSR, China, or communism. But I can acknowledge the aspects they succeeded at or otherwise didn't fail as hard. Our current elite certainly acknowledge the successful aspects of China hence why they want everyone to have a social credit score and a censored internet.
Glowie said:
I plastered such sources on your profile page, but not here yet. Let's look into those examples of yours.
Homosexuality and troons are legal in Vietnam
Stalin encouraged eugenics and forced sterilisations
Atheist five year plan in Russia.

Destruction of four olds in China
CCP beating rest of the world with low replacement rates due one child policy and two and three children policies failing
Gays are legal, troons too

Xi and his predecessors maintained trad values by dooming entire family lines
Click to expand...
1. It was never illegal in Vietnam to begin with but is socially discouraged. Any recent moves are still resisted by many in Vietnam (as my survey from a fag site shows) and may have something to do with the pro-US stance Vietnam has been taking.
2. Eugenics and forced sterilization is only progressive if you're Margaret Sanger or some other Democrat from the 1920s
3. Don't forget the part where the Soviets reversed course.
4. That was Mao, not Xi. Mao was by far more leftist than any leader China has had since, and not just in the economics sense
5. Irrelevant to this argument
6. It has not been illegal in China since 1912. China still condemns it as an illness.
Glowie said:
Global research is well known and registered Propaganda and conspiracy site This Canadian organisation never pass peer review. Canuck infowars.
Click to expand...
LMAO NATO is whining about a website that doesn't fit their narrative, TOTALLY a reliable source.
Glowie said:
Implication that failings of USSR is some sort of Ukrainian plot is equally baseless, Kiev is a distance away from Moscow since according to you Holomdor was a hoax why would fellow comrades hold any animosity?
Click to expand...
What are you even babbling about? I explained the so-called Holodomor was an overstated famine in response to some point about famines you made. Nothing more than that. When you say "no logical fallacies", you should follow your own rules and stop building a mountain of straw to argue against.
 
Save the Loli said:
BTW show me where I praised communism. I praised one single aspect of communism (okay, Stalinist aesthetics--which are very traditional BTW--are nice too, so that's two), and honestly more of a result since it's rarely been a feature of communism. Pointing out historic truth about the USSR is not "praising communism." Unlike you, I don't have to constantly make up nonsense or exaggerate facts about countries and political ideologies I don't like.
Click to expand...
You made a thread debating how communism is arguably more "conservative" than Western conservatism. There's nothing to conserve from communism since many of its citizens living under that ideology would live in pisspoor conditions into inevitable death by famine or overworking.
 
Holy shit she deleted her reply too :story:
For everyone in the audience @Mothra1988 after being btfo'd in multiple concurrent communism topics dogpiling on @Save the Loli decided to make a thread SPECIFICALLY for shitting on the guy after being denied cunty satisfaction.

I proceeded to show her litany of faggotry and everyone had massive yucks. She then bitched about how the thread was getting off-topic IN MASS DEBATES (the topic of which being shit on loliman btw with the offtopic being "no shit on OP instead") got bitchy, left to her hugbox. Then deleted her thread.

Then came here to try and @ someone she thought was her "ally" in fighting the pedocon fight (which she thinks is a fight because of @Save the Loli 's username having loli in it btw, literally nothing else). Which then lead to the obvious rofling of people involved in the thread. Which lead to her attempt at comment deletion.

She did not like that and is instead looking through my comment history and replying to shit I replied to instead, again. :story:
 
The Last Stand said:
You made a thread debating how communism is arguably more "conservative" than Western conservatism. There's nothing to conserve from communism since many of its citizens living under that ideology would live in pisspoor conditions into inevitable death by famine or overworking.
Click to expand...
Correct, I did. There's always something to conserve no matter the society. Many communist states figured out in the end that the opium of the people is a good thing and permitted many religions. The USSR did after Stalin, China did after Mao, etc.

Right now we live in a very totalitarian society (if it wasn't, then this 100% legal site wouldn't have so much trouble staying up). But we don't conserve anything and instead do ridiculous Cultural Revolution-tier nonsense, which even modern China admits mistakes were made in that period. Conservatives rarely denounce the destruction of our culture since conservatism has been reduced to tax cuts for megacorpations and donations to Israel. It's plenty fair to say that many communist societies, with few exceptions like Lenin and definitely Mao, were just as conservative if not moreso than the average conservative today. Doesn't mean communism is good or that we should emulate it, since it's pretty clear that at best it's just a worse version of today's society.

Ironically, Lenin is worth emulating in the sense that he took a minority faction of Russian socialists and took over the country with them. Says a lot about what a determined group of people could do, and way more than Hitler who had to get voted into power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom