Communism debate nuance edition

[Glowie]

Inspired by @AgendaPoster to debate Marxism/Socialism/Communism in civil tone, ability to add nuance, citation and encourage healthy debate with civil language and manners. I'd invite @Save the Loli and anyone else in civil manner, avoiding name calling and use of fallacies. Trusting both sides use nuance and citations.

I'd like to continue with point I was making about Tibet and communism's alleged conservation of culture and tradition

Mao described four olds and decreed to Destroy them
They gave Tibet exactly same treatment, including mass killings, burning ancient manuscripts, destroying 6000 monasteries, sacred sites and statues.
Primary source to Mao's four olds dictate in action
Secondary source with photographic proof
Tertiary source to China's massacre in Tibet, destruction of monasteries, manuscripts and mass killings
Pictures of remains dated to 1958
Pictures of massacres dating back to 1966-1976
Xi isn't any different preserving that tradition.

Marxism encouraged attracted homosexuals
Lenin decriminalized it
Stalin banned it again and started import to US. Gee I wonder what's with chink androgyny, Loli/Shota dross. Importing cultural poison is a proud communist tradition creating troons, emasculated men, low birth rates and NEETS today.


Tibetan issue out of the way, I'd like to deconstruct why many flavours of communism appeal to college students and why key principles are fundamentally flawed starting from hypocritical Marx

In his critique of Gotha method he stated the following

"Since labor is the source of all wealth, no one in society can appropriate wealth except as the product of labor. Therefore, if he himself does not work, he lives by the labor of others and also acquires his culture at the expense of the labor of others."

It's ironic that Marx never did any labor in his life, he briefly lived off his wife named Jenny von westphalen, royalty. Despite the royal wife, Marx couldn't stay afloat

"[Karl] was notoriously incapable of keeping accounts, and Jenny was a regular customer of the London pawnbrokers."

Marx begged money from Engels of all people.

Marx hasn't seen or lived the life of a worker; he lived off labourers.

In conclusion, he is a hypocrite and contradicts himself in word and deed.

Marxism, later Socialism, and communism trumpeted a classless, equal society. This is contradictory to human nature; any attempts to mould or change human ego-centric thinking are impossible. Humans as a species have been competitive since we learned to walk upright. The impossibility of Communist utopias was proven by two classes: the rich and the poor. The labourer and the champagne socialist crawled out of the bucket of crabs, stepping on each and every comrade on the way up the ladder through corruption, crime, or opportunism. Life is unfair; people are unequal through birth or circumstance. The average worker in the USSR didn't feast on caviar and champagne. They were the first to feel crop failures and famines.

Backwards nature of collective ownership and state-mandated control.
Since the inception of the Kolkhoz system and handing factory or farm ownership to the state yielded less than stellar results, the party yes man that replaced bourgeois ownership didn't succeed due to a lack of experience in the field or production. Even though things went smoothly, state-mandated production lines produced goods in excess, be they vehicles, food, or household goods. The quality of these products was subpar, not to mention the waste of resources due to poor management and orders. Imagine if bakeries were ordered to stop making wheat-based bread and start making eye breads, or car plants were given orders to stop the current line of vehicles and start making cars based on a blue print given by the government; at worst, new car chassis would have to be remade, then wait for electric parts from a different state-owned factory. By decree, socialist economies must be self-sustainable at all times and only trade with other socialist countries.

State-mandated employment has no worker rights or protections. The state mandates your working place, your working hours, and your wages. There aren't unions, and workers are banned from protesting. Even after free market reform, perestroika for example, and Deng's reform in China, it took decades to catch up with the free market nations. Even after reforms, state-mandated or incentive-driven production still produces things in excess, ignoring the basic concepts of demand and availability. See China for a modern example of state control gone wrong: mountains of excess produce leading to bankruptcies, tanks and militias preventing workers from leaving, and suicide nets at Foxconn plants.

 

[NerdShamer]

Marx hasn't seen or lived the life of a worker; he lived off labourers.

In conclusion, he is a hypocrite and contradicts himself in word and deed.

Karl Marx is the greatest neet who ever lived, if you think about it

 

[AgendaPoster]

I think the debate is about whether communism or capitalism are more conducive to social conservatism and more ethnically homogenous societies.
There's also a debate about how much value one puts on freedom from degeneracy vs the pretty much proven material benefits of capitalism.
Another important point is the balancing of freedom vs authority. And we know quite well that authoritarian rule is a danger, even if it starts favoring you. We also know that even liberal, democratic societies can be severely authoritarian, given the proper incentive, i.e. a pandemic or hate speech deemed to be destabilizing.
And lastly, it's very, very important to discuss things in the historical context.
It's obviously not fair to compare social norms from 1970s Russia with 2023 US. It has to be kept to one era, if comparisons are to be at least somewhat accurate.
Gonna drop in later after more people post

 

[Mothra1988]

This should be good. *gets popcorn* lol

 

[Whatevermancer]

nuance edition

Communisms = bad, m'kay? Don't do communism. Cause communism = bad, m'kay?

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Communisms = bad, m'kay? Don't do communism. Cause communism = bad, m'kay?

I'm going to be charitable and not use name calling and fallacies. Stalin and Mao are often misunderstood to represent big government, but their political careers actually emphasized cheap, efficient, and limited government, challenging the party bureaucracy. Mao's Cultural Revolution empowered Chinese peasants, allowing them to challenge local party bosses and have equal power in local governance. Stalin's 1936 Constitution established limited government with formal procedures and protocols, seeking to strip power from the party and give it to Soviet democracy. Both Stalin and Mao promoted forms of public and collective property, giving individuals freedom to own and exchange the products of their labor, emphasizing decentralization. Stalin's efforts to empower the people were halted by his party bureaucracy, and after his death, Khrushchev's policies weakened the collective farm system and led to a bureaucratic Soviet state.

 

[Glowie]

I think the debate is about whether communism or capitalism are more conducive to social conservatism and more ethnically homogenous societies.
There's also a debate about how much value one puts on freedom from degeneracy vs the pretty much proven material benefits of capitalism.
Another important point is the balancing of freedom vs authority. And we know quite well that authoritarian rule is a danger, even if it starts favoring you. We also know that even liberal, democratic societies can be severely authoritarian, given the proper incentive, i.e. a pandemic or hate speech deemed to be destabilizing.
And lastly, it's very, very important to discuss things in the historical context.
It's obviously not fair to compare social norms from 1970s Russia with 2023 US. It has to be kept to one era, if comparisons are to be at least somewhat accurate.
Gonna drop in later after more people post

Was it Thomas Jefferson who said "He who sacrifices freedom for security for freedom deserves neither", sure US is going full Weimar Republic, economy is bad, Biden is a rerardñ and culture war is tiring, if I was American I wouldn't accept surveillance state, low trust society's where government government is as likely to ruin you for slightests of offenses, snitch culture on top constant surveillance state.
On top of that hard leaning commie countries are developing nations are poor and housing. There's no future in Communist countries for people who want to make their own choices or live a spiritually.

Not to mention own land in communist countries. Marx himself dictated to get religions and any folk traditions. Any threats to the state gets eliminated.

 

[AgendaPoster]

Was it Thomas Jefferson who said "He who sacrifices freedom for security for freedom deserves neither", sure US is going full Weimar Republic, economy is bad, Biden is a rerardñ and culture war is tiring, if I was American I wouldn't accept surveillance state, low trust society's where government government is as likely to ruin you for slightests of offenses, snitch culture on top constant surveillance state.
On top of that hard leaning commie countries are developing nations are poor and housing. There's no future in Communist countries for people who want to make their own choices or live a spiritually.

Not to mention own land in communist countries. Marx himself dictated to get religions and any folk traditions. Any threats to the state gets eliminated.

I don't think there are any communist countries anymore. There are some authoritarian and totalitarian ones, but they are still run by capitalistic principles. The exception might be North Korea due to its extreme isolation. China is deeply capitalistic. Russia is capitalistic too.
Basically not even an attempt at wealth spreading or nationalizing industries is being made anywhere. Workers do not control anything and no longer have class solidarity.

 

[N Space]

Communism is a failed ideology and even tankies admit so because any time you point out a communist/socialist country that is shit, they'll be quick to claim it wasn't communist because xyz reason. This leaves two alternatives:

1. You admit these countries were communist in which case communism doesn't produce good living standards.
2. You deny these countries were communist in which case communism is an utopic ideology that is impossible to implement.

---

@AgendaPoster is Cuba communist, socialist or neither?

 

[Glowie]

I don't think there are any communist countries anymore. There are some authoritarian and totalitarian ones, but they are still run by capitalistic principles. The exception might be North Korea due to its extreme isolation. China is deeply capitalistic. Russia is capitalistic too.
Basically not even an attempt at wealth spreading or nationalizing industries is being made anywhere. Workers do not control anything and no longer have class solidarity.

Cuba is still a communist country, people I knew in college were graduate of all girls high school, people have so low income that the girl I knew sent money to rest of her family still stuck in there, Authoritarian government, non existent job market and armed police who won't hesitate to beat everliving shit out of you or outright shoot you. Communist countries that were found after bloody revolutions, don't exactly like thought of angry mobs with guns even after Obama lifted their embargo, most of their tech is from the 60s outside rare cases, government sites for the rest of the world. Cuban infrastructure is either too old or ramshackle for nation wife fiber optic or 5G towers, internet blackout for the poorest and low-middle income families serve as great firewall of sorts. Only gringo tourists get the luxury hotspots and hotels. Tourists without bodyguards aren't adviced to go the slums due robbery/kidnapping risk. Communist/socialist countries don't value human life and low trust nature towards gringos still beam through the cracks.

There's a reason why Cuban government is all too eager to take CCP money in exchange for land for permanent surveillance/military stations near Florida's naval and air spaces. Cult of Castro still hold a grudge and CCP being great humanitarians build debt trap there, just like in Laos and in some African countries.

To add Vietnam abandoned state run economy model for free market, jobs and income. Vietnam is all too happy to take companies leaving from China.
Xi's neo Maoism and paranoia makes it impossible for foreign businesses to run in China, Vietnam by contrast accepted economic reforms for free market models.

 

[AgendaPoster]

is Cuba communist

Know very little about it but from what I read seems socialist would be a fair description

 

[Ghostse]

I'm going to be charitable and not use name calling and fallacies. Stalin and Mao are often misunderstood to represent big government, but their political careers actually emphasized cheap, efficient, and limited government, challenging the party bureaucracy. Mao's Cultural Revolution empowered Chinese peasants, allowing them to challenge local party bosses and have equal power in local governance. Stalin's 1936 Constitution established limited government with formal procedures and protocols, seeking to strip power from the party and give it to Soviet democracy. Both Stalin and Mao promoted forms of public and collective property, giving individuals freedom to own and exchange the products of their labor, emphasizing decentralization. Stalin's efforts to empower the people were halted by his party bureaucracy, and after his death, Khrushchev's policies weakened the collective farm system and led to a bureaucratic Soviet state.

Mao killed a shit ton of chinks and Stalin murdered a shit ton of slavs, so both are mega-based.

 

[Glowie]

Know very little about it but from what I read seems socialist would be a fair description

Current president Miguel Díaz-Canel is a communist and Cuba is one party and has been since the revolution. To be fair Lenin described end goal of socialism is communism. Socialism so unstable that it needs a police state socialism/communism is used synonymously for that reason for example CCP's import of "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" to different third world countries and various front groups that work for CCP as a proxy organizations like how Soviet Union used youth leagues.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

I already did a similar thread. I hope OP avoids his tendency to make assertions and then when disproved pulls a random fallacy out of a hat (usually one he himself is commiting).

I'd like to continue with point I was making about Tibet and communism's alleged conservation of culture and tradition

No one denies people died in Tibet during Maoism and the destruction of the theocracy present there. Tibet was the last warlord state reincorporated into China, and their powerbase was in the monasteries. But it's been noted for decades that Confucianism has revived in China and influences CCP policy. In North Korea, Kim Jong-il and Kim Jong-un have ruled as Confucian monarchs would. I guarantee you'll find more authentic Korean culture in North Korea than the absolute consoomer shithole known as South Korea. Remember, South Korea watered down their soju and has lots of restrictions on eating dog, but that's been Korean culture for centuries.

Stalin banned it again and started import to US. Gee I wonder what's with chink androgyny, Loli/Shota dross. Importing cultural poison is a proud communist tradition creating troons, emasculated men, low birth rates and NEETS today.

Stalin had nothing to do with that. The Frankfurt School were anti-Stalinists and so was Foucault and his postmodernists. By the 1960s communism in the West was very divided and both Maoists/anti-Revisionists and pro-Moscow communists in a minority.

State-mandated employment has no worker rights or protections. The state mandates your working place, your working hours, and your wages. There aren't unions, and workers are banned from protesting. Even after free market reform, perestroika for example, and Deng's reform in China, it took decades to catch up with the free market nations. Even after reforms, state-mandated or incentive-driven production still produces things in excess, ignoring the basic concepts of demand and availability. See China for a modern example of state control gone wrong: mountains of excess produce leading to bankruptcies, tanks and militias preventing workers from leaving, and suicide nets at Foxconn plants.

There are unions in all communist countries, they are just run by the state. There's a lot to be argued that this is how a union should function since independent unions can be dangerous to societal cohesion (or otherwise end up defacto controlled by the state as in the modern day country). Sorel and Mussolini make fine arguments in their writing regarding this.

The performance of China and the USSR in the 20th century is testimony to communism as an alternative to capitalism. It just isn't a good alternative. The best results historically and societally were achieved by the 1950s United States back when we had strong unions and a strong society which for the first time in history was culturally united coast to coast.

Tourists without bodyguards aren't adviced to go the slums due robbery/kidnapping risk

LMAO Cuba is the safest country in Latin America. The murder rate is on par with the US (US murder rate is usually 5-6/100K and Cuba's is about the same), and that's the US as a whole. Chicago for instance has 28 murders per 100K and it only gets far worse if you look at Baltimore, St. Louis, or New Orleans. The reason Cuba is so safe is because they implemented "not real communism" where criminals get shot or sent to gulags. Venezuela couldn't figure this out, so they are a shithole. Nicaragua (commie country) somewhat did, hence why Nicaragua is also relatively safe by Latin American standards and still has a lower murder rate than Chicago.

 

[Glowie]

Stalin had nothing to do with that. The Frankfurt School were anti-Stalinists and so was Foucault and his postmodernists. By the 1960s

Stalinism failed miserably so even more so after WW 2, he purged dissidents left and right to the point he managed to fail steamroll Finland
Moreover Stalin's failed attempt to stamp out religion
Failing that he installed NKVD puppets to control orthodoxy
Ordered Trofim Lysenko to fix widespread famines only cause more deaths from starvation
Failing to admit fault Stalin purged Lysenko instead of his policies

are unions in all communist countries, they are just run by the state. There's a lot to be argued that this is how a union should function since independent unions can be dangerous to societal cohesion (or otherwise end up defacto controlled by the state as in the modern day country). Sorel and Mussolini make fine arguments in their writing regarding this.

The performance of China and the USSR in the 20th century is testimony to communism as an alternative to capitalism. It just isn't a good alternative. The best results historically

Incorrect autocratic Russia banned every form of Union under Stalin autocracy, trade and otherwise
Only union was state and started projects Like infamous Lykoma highway or road of bones with death toll of quarter of million at least

As far economy superpowers go USSR was cooking the books since consumer market decline in 60s combined with high inflation Ruble to Dollar exchange rate which was set by soviet state
Since you citates claims about productivity and USSR and later founded CCP relied Soviet needed food aid from United States not once But twice and the fact US, UK and rest of the western world bought propaganda hook line and sinker.
On Cuba.

LMAO Cuba is the safest country in Latin America. The murder rate is on par with the US (US murder rate is usually 5-6/100K and Cuba's is about the same), and that's the US as a whole. Chicago for instance has 28 murders per 100K and it only gets far worse if you look at Baltimore, St. Louis, or New Orleans. The reason Cuba is so safe is because they implemented "not real communism" where criminals get shot or sent to gulags. Venezuela couldn't figure this out, so they are a shithole. Nicaragua (commie country) somewhat did, hence why Nicaragua is also relatively safe by Latin American standards and still has a lower murder rate than Chicago

I was talking about Cuba and Cuba alone and travel risks there Mentioned few travel advisory boards, mentioning high crime and Human trafficking and sex tourism.
I specifically mentioned not to travel alone in Cuba especially outside tourist zones, that was my point.Risk is even higher if you're critical of communist regime

This is about Cuba not United States their issues can't handwave Cuban ones, it's a diversion tactic explained below

I will continue this debate in good faith if you are.

My next point being can state controlled economies function in 2023 and onwards, I already mentioned how communist countries like Vietnam started prosper after they opened up to free world while countries like China under Xi is floundering with abysmal employment rate and kicking foreign companies out the country, And many more factors and Venezuela declined even further despite cash injection

History and current communist countries prove that communism isn't viable in modern world. My sources are above

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Mao killed a shit ton of chicks and Stalin murdered a shit ton of slavs, so both are mega-based.

Stalin didn't kill millions of people. For now I'll focus on Stalin, not Mao. Stalin was not only one of the greatest men of the 20th century, he is also one of the greatest men in all of human history. Stalin remains as the human embodiment of the will of the common people of the world. No matter how much the imperialists and reactionaries of the world attempt to heap a pile of rubbish onto the memory of Stalin the winds of history and truth will remove it. Long live Stalin long live his great legacy, and long live the people of the world for whom he struggled and lived. The deep analysis of the Stalinist era and the nuance of its history is extremely important to understand, especially when everyone in the west is faced with fictional stories of "totalitarianism" and the conflation with Nazi Germany. My post will represent the first time many people have heard a balanced way of describing the era. There is a reason Stalin is the most popular communist leader in world history.

As for the so-called "holodomor," Stalin's so-called "genocide," whether a famine gets remembered or noticed at all is usually determined by its political significance. There were many famines and generally bad living conditions in tsarist Russia, but that is not politically useful for the ruling class so the corporate media and pop-history is not interested. The manmade famine in Afganistan doesn't get much attention, even though it's happening right now, simply because the USA is doing it.

 

[Ghostse]

Stalin made a deal with Hitler and when Hitler betrayed him first, went catatonic for like two weeks.
He was a sperg and also a closeted/self-hating faggot.

 

[BirdUp]

traditionally millions of sellers offer various things and see what billions of people buy the most then adjust supplies and prices (high demand means high supply, and high supply means low prices; vice versa)
it is logistically impossible for a central-planning board to sort through zillions of surveys and inefficient for a cartel to hold referendums on what appliances people want (the other "solutions" are likewise dumb)
also stalin said rape is OK: "And what is so awful in his having a bit of fun with a woman after such horrors? ... The Red Army is not ideal. The important thing is that it fights Germans—and it is fighting them well, while the rest doesn't matter."

 

[Ghostse]

also stalin said rape is OK: "

like I said, MEGABASED ... but a closeted fag & manlet. No one is perfect.

 

[AgendaPoster]

The idea for this topic was "Is social conservatism done better/more efficiently in communism or capitalism"
Just making it into a shitflinging contest and revisionist lunacy about Stalin and Mao is kinda pointless and sad.
Always remember that you do NOT have to defend any ideology wholesale. You can always look at what it does well and see how you can learn from that. There is no automatic link between "we don't like fags here" to "we should nationalize your farm and expropriate your land".