you said yourself you arent allowed to sell for profit if you make your own wares

Again, capitalism = private property + waged labour

yes, and selling a duck toy for a profit is a wage

WHAT

I love selling stuff

Wage is what you get for work producing stuff you don't own

ah of course

so the service industry

has no wages

because they dont produce anything

Service industry sucks

psychologists dont have wages

doctors dont have wages

personal trainers dont have wages

Of course they have

Providing services = producing labor force

wage is what you get for work producing stuff you don't own

This Ukrainian has some pretty good English

and some pretty bad logic

Better than those fucking irish

Their English is awful

Nah, I feel that my English is shitty

back to the topic

you're a freelance psychologist

And?

you work for a wage

you own yourself

you work only for yourself

that is private

and has a wage

But you don't own the people you help

your wage isnt earned while working for someone else

You produce their mental health

>you produce their mental health

i have yet to hear something this retarded in my life

^

there is no production in services

^

production requires tangibility

^

Fron the POV of economy, producing stuff and providing services are the same

🤦

Producing stuff increases the number and quality of stuff

Providing services increases the number and quality of labor force

Labor force is a good too

you produce nothing by telling a guy he has depression, who then pays you. And if you do, and he pays you and you earn a wage like that, the man who makes a duck doesnt own his customer either

so he is by your definition the same

aka a corporation, aka capitalistic

You improve that guy's mental health, and then he can work better and make more stuff/provide more services, that's why you get paid

The man who makes a duck on its own isn't earning a wage because he owns the duck

A service is economically productive. There is a whole type of economy called the tertiary economy where the primary source of GDP is services, i.e., the developed world.

^

Simply because those services are not physically tangible doesn't make them irrelevant.

@Advocatus Diaboli you owns the means to achieve the mental health

You help improve that guy's mental health because you want to help people and you charge it because you need to earn a living your self.

So, you want to help or you want to make money?

once again

You want to help and make money so you can live.

stop the word masturbation

you own the means to achieve the person's mental health

A comfortable life.

by the same logic, a lawyer helping a man to get out of legal trouble does not own the man, but he owns the knowledge to help him get out of legal trouble

your allegories make no sense

@Adoring Fan If I'm working for a hospital, I de jure temporarily lease my abilities to help people to the hospital (like it's not me helping, it's the hospital providing the service), that's the reason why people give the money to the hospital and then I'm getting paid by the hospital and that's a wage. If I'm a stand-alone psychologist, I alone own the means to cure the patient, but then the money I get is not a wage.

yes it is

legally speaking they are wages

first you went to thinking that psychologists have wages, now they dont

make up your fucking mind, tankie

^

the problem here is that you have no understanding of what you say, you merely try to fit everything into your perverted definitions of reality, so that you can apply reality to your worldview

that is not how it works.

and mind you

even if it is

like you say it is

the soviet union still had wages

now i know

You miss the point

youre going to say if youre a doctor earns wages in the ussr it's ok because he "owns the production"

yet he doesnt

How so?

Sure he does

he does only on papaer.

*paper

in practice he owns nothing

this democratic ownership is a falsehood

he can't take a machine from a hospital and put it in his own home

That's what you think

no that's what I know

Yes he can't because he's not the only owner

when everybody is the owner

no one is

The car is owned by all the people

WHAT

That’s a paradoxical statement

screaming "WHAT" while your soy is about to spill wont retract from the point that i made

the car cant be owned by all people

because people had locks

you couldnt take another man's car

you couldnt go into another man's house

Ambulance car is public property owned by all people

just because you *say* it was public, does not make it so

it is owned by the state

not by the people

by the people is a fancy, populist phrase that people love to use

And another man's car and house are PERSONAL, not private or public property

it is not so in actuality

In a true state of the people, it would be owned by the people.

^

ah of course

true

And it was in the USSR

here we go

not true communism

as always

word masturbation from post modernist idiots

Pls differ socialism from communism

Communism is stateless

Social ownership

well then the ussr wasnt communism

now was it

The USSR was socialist

^

I actually just got done explaining this in the fascist channel since these goys don't have a firm understanding of communism.

On the other hand the USSR was not legitimate socialism. The worker was made a slave to the state.

Just because something is publicly owned doesn't mean you really own it. Everything was subordinated to the state.

The USSR was brutally repressive in all of the wrong ways and economically mismanaged itself into collapse.

Please put in mind that Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Gorbachev conducted economical reforms that disrupted the economy

that is beside the point

people were slaves to the state under lenin and stalin and trotsky

>under trotsky

Slaves?

You can't make the whole population slaves whilst maintaining the most effective education system in the world

>this level of delusion

STFU nazi, you're not the one to talk about slavery

The Soviet education system was "effective"? Holy fuck no it was not.

1917 - 17% literacy
1957 - first artificial satellite

It was effective at boosting literacy. Congrats the USSR achieved parity with the rest of the world. But the Soviet education system was marred by nepotism and rapid ideologism.

Read The Truth That Killed by Georgi Markov to know what the Eastern Bloc was really like.

You're crazy deluded.

@Advocatus Diaboli stfu yourself faggot. There was no slavery under NatSocialism

ACKTUALLY

Ostarbeiter

@Advocatus Diaboli non-citizens

@εïз irma εïз I'm from Ukrainian teacher family, I know what I'm talking about

USSR enslaved its own

it sure doesnt seem like you do

Enslaving anyone is bad, even non-citizens

inb4 Gulag is a penal labour camp systm

Slavery is wrong in general

My parents lived in Hungary during the communist era.

it was

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_States

No man a slave

heheh penal labor exists in the us checkmate its the exact same as the gulag system so you cant be critical

What a shit argument.

@Advocatus Diaboli deflection

It's a kind of punishment

Nothing bad here

so was slavery then

here's the thing

a criminal in the US can't be sent to prison for wrongthink

Well Stalin used the penal labor system more for its labor than for penalizing people for committing crimes.

@FLanon true

it's completely different

Wrongthink?

the gulag was a sham

1984 @Advocatus Diaboli

I'm reading and it's really good

it was created fraudulently to mask the fact that they wanted slave labor

Ikr

I've read it

dude

they sent released prisoners of war to the gulags for forced labor

but it's not slavery

you read 1984 and you don't remember wrongthink

Ever heard of filtration camps

I’ve read it too and it’s exactly why I don’t want a fascist government

^

I can make 1984 look like a utopia

Most fascists are not totalitarian.

also 1984 was totalitarian

irma is right

I remember wrongthink, doublethink and so on

fascism is not what 1984 was about

Totalitarians are terrible

1984 is closer to Stalinism than fascism by leaps and bounds.

^

Wrong

it specifically was written as a response to stalinism

George Orwell was a socialist who was critical of the Soviet Union. And you think he was writing about fascism?

🤔

*1984* was specifically about fascism and its dangers.

not fascism

totalitarianism in general

The Russians
persecuted heresy more cruelly than the Inquisition
had done. And they imagined that they had learned from
the mistakes of the past; they knew, at any rate, that one
must not make martyrs. Before they exposed their victims
to public trial, they deliberately set themselves to destroy
their dignity. They wore them down by torture and solitude
until they were despicable, cringing wretches, confessing
whatever was put into their mouths, covering themselves
with abuse, accusing and sheltering behind one another,
whimpering for mercy. And yet after only a few years the
same thing had happened over again. The dead men had
become martyrs and their degradation was forgotten. Once
again, why was it? In the first place, because the confessions
that they had made were obviously extorted and untrue. We
do not make mistakes of that kind. All the confessions that
are uttered here are true. We make them true. And above
all we do not allow the dead to rise up against us. You must
Free eBooks at Planet eBook.com 321
stop imagining that posterity will vindicate you, Winston.
Posterity will never hear of you. You will be lifted clean out
from the stream of history. We shall turn you into gas and
pour you into the stratosphere. Nothing will remain of you,
not a name in a register, not a memory in a living brain. You
will be annihilated in the past as well as in the future. You
will never have existed.’

from the book

specifically to stalinism however Orwell did also include hitler under the umbrella

You added 'the Russians' to the beginning, admit it

"Nineteen Eighty-Four uses themes from life in the Soviet Union and wartime life in Great Britain as sources for many of its motifs. Some time at an unspecified date after the first American publication of the book, producer Sidney Sheldon wrote to Orwell interested in adapting the novel to the Broadway stage. Orwell sold the American stage rights to Sheldon, explaining that his basic goal with Nineteen Eighty-Four was imagining the consequences of Stalinist government ruling British society:"

1984 was ran like a socialist country but lead by totalitarians

>wasnt about the soviet union

@Advocatus Diaboli no you fucking retard

page 320

1984 and Animal Farm were written as allegorical pieces for the Soviet Union.

Stop denying reality.

this is what i am saying

the communist has to bend reality

to make himself correct

Like Dr. strange

tankies and the real world are oxymorons

Lol

*Animal Farm*, yes, but not *1984*.

nigger read what i wrote @(Carbo)nMonoxide

1984 was not specifically about Fascism.

I really gotta read animal farm

It’s about totalitarianism.

Ok Nazis prepare your arguments for the next time because I have to go

I am not a Nazi.

lmao

rage quit

Appreciate the effort.

go eat your stale salo, filthy communist

Nazis and Commies both a subhuman filth to me

okkk time to debate libertarianism

Cool a libertarian.

lets go

Remember to join the Anglosphere Fascist Party

1984 was about oligarchal collectivism.

Done.

@WildRooHuntingTutorials that sounds about right

libertarianism relies on the idea that you have to have freedom in order to prosper

I tend to disagree

I think that freedom as a concept relies heavily on hedonism, which is in of itself not freedom

libertarians want freedom from the state, i want freedom from urges and desires

once you are free from your own weaknesses, only then are you actually free.

>1984 borrowed themes directly from the soviet union
>orwells works are defined as being critical of the soviet union, as a socialist he was immensely critical of them
>"b-but its not as obvious as animal farm so it must be broad"

Smallbrain hours?

having the ability to smoke meth and get fucked by trannies is so wonderful, but i'd rather live without it

The bantu claim that they were the same as the nomadic black tribesmen who SOMETIMES wander into southern africa because they are both african tribes.

I'd say liberation from vice is preferable to liberation to fuck whatever you want or pump whatever substances in your body

absolutely

@GucciToiletSalesman any comments?

In terms of which is the better result for the common man and woman

i guess not

at least the communist tried

So what are we talking about in here?

Hello

Sorry at a family function

Im not a die hard libertarian but I'd love to talk to you more @Adoring Fan

who a libtard