300 trillion*

I like how both Natsocs and Commies deny the bodycount of their given ideologies

Despite what cuba and north korea would tell you, communism no longer exists as a governing force in any country.

I know. I exaggerate. Blood for the blood god.

Childbirth is messy.

Globalism has easily killed twice that

But then you get new life.

systems kill, all systems are flawed and cause suffering

North Korea isn't even communist on paper

@degen#8270 It is hard to say how many have been killed under globalism, since death counts are often exaggerated or totally unknown, but I would estimate 200-300 million deaths.

I don't deny that communism kills

there is no utopia

I will however deny that kulaks didn't deserve it

Because

KULAKS

DESERVED

IT

Utopia is for idealists.

All aboard the Siberia Express

Communism is very idealistic

Yhea, let's genocide everybody in ukraine!

>Genocide

>Everybody

Communism is scientific. It doesn't give a fuck about your ideals.

Communism is as materialistic as it gets

If everybody is a Kulak then what a shame get on the train

@Deleted User Scientific? How so?

Joseph "what a shame, get on the train" Stalin

It reduced human beings into thoughtless cattle. Communism is a robotic system

Marx was a misanthrope

@Deleted User Based on historical materialism, social theory.

Can you elaborate?

Frankly I wish I could be a robot

Collectivise me daddy

you people are pretty cringy

communists i mean

you all seem like masochists

Yeah and who isn't cringy?

The salt right? Radical centrists?

LIBERALS?

You want to be the face under the boot for eternity

@PEWEX >No emotions or thought
>You only exist to do one thing, for all of your existance
>When a new model comes out you will be dismantled and thrown into a warhouse for tens of years until you are sold and scrapped or are destroyed

Boi no

Actually

Yes

Sign me the fuck up

@Deleted User To learn about historical materialism, read this: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/

No emotions 😩 😤 👅 💦

Or watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6fy6E4YDvM

You're a fucking cuck though

Also nice ad hominem

textbook ad hominem, but you've provided no actual argument

People who ad hominem are the most powerful race

@Deleted User >56:16

Jesus christ.

you are just being sarcastic

and shitposting

I've not provided any argument because I'm not actually having any argument, innit? But you've gone and ad hominemed anyway.

is it because you have no argument for your position

No it's because I don't argue with classcucks

>classcucks

your memes are shit too

@PEWEX What the fuck are these insults?

This is not an insult m8

It's one statement

What the hell is a classcuck?

tbh homosexuality is a shit choice

A cuck via class

Marxism is serious business. If you are a lazy illiterate you will not get far.

Didn't the Khmer Rouge kill anyone who wasnt an illiterate

Yeah but the Khmer Rouge were propped up by Neolibs so it doesn't matter

Homosexuality isn't a choice because if it were a choice I'd be homosexual

It wasn't TRUE communism

okay

Can my eyes roll harder?

The only cure is electroshock

For this mental illness

Ur a fag tbh

BZZZZTTTTT

@degen#8270 >When you want to reduce the chance of a rebellion happening so you kill everybody who is literate and your government collapses within a few years because nobody can even read or speak properly

seems counterintuitive

@Deleted User >When you're literally propped up by thatcher & co.

>when the governmental "collapse" was actually an invasion by Vietnam

How do you plan to implement widespread communism?

How can you WANT to be gay? Fags are always complaining about being damaged goods.

No one wants to be Communist

We must support the Khmer rouge against vietnamese imperialism!!

Socialism rises via revolutions.

@Deleted User Because you want to be babied to death and have the government give you money.

@Deleted User because I like women more than men but my heterosexuality makes me attracted to men 😤

So after your glorious revolutionary struggle overthrows the ruling class, how would you re-organize society to keep everyone in line?

Just read that response now. Late af
>/pol/ is owned by ecelebs and kekireddistanis
/leftypol/ thinking that is no issue to me. One of the best self defense measures we have is people thinking the place is a cesspit (which it is)

@Deleted User >Eastern europe
>money from government

What is this?

@PEWEX Oh if you are in eastern europe you have bigger things to worry about.

The power structure isn't limited by nation, we live in a Corporatist world.

Gopniks mainly

Define corporatist

There is no way you can achieve this

Not real capitalism

Modern corporation?

@Deleted User Gulag is fine for me. I don't really care. I would probably be killed.

Or Union/Guild Corporation? :^)

A world run by monopolies, a globalist coporate hegemony

I have no problem with being sent to a ГУЛАГ.

Monopolistic modern companies

Gotcha

The GULAG, after all, benefits the state and the people.

You can't go back to the 19th century

One of the biggest problems I can see any fascist having proselytizing to an agitated individual is the distinction of the syndicate from the modern monstrous monopoly capitalism promotes

I feel like it wouldn't be particularly efficient to GULAG me but you know whatever

@Deleted User You would probably die of starvation or disease first.

Gulag is a historical necessity

@Deleted User Sounds like the United States of America but ok

@Deleted User Childbirth has its risks, but it is necessary.

>when someone advocates for a revolution without realizing he'd be a lowly laborer or gulag laborer

@Deleted User How does that fit in with a gulag?

I advocate for revolution knowing I'd be among the poor masses

Why should the masses be poor?

Why should there be a small rich class?

Actually I don't advocate for revolution but I'd be among the masses and not really be against it.

@Deleted User Society is pregnant with revolution. It is a metaphor.

Didn't get it at first.

That's what the revolution is for, to eradicate the rich

Death to the bourgeois.

>rich = bourgeois

See

That's why I despise the production class distinction

Seems like socialism is going great in venezuela, as riots are now very common in cities and the national guard are now shooting rioters on sight.

It's antequated

A prole can hoard

How is that possible

You'd think a bourgeois pig would hoard

@Deleted User >state capitalism
>socialist

ok

>everything that fails isn't mine

Here's a simple check to see if something is socialist

Venezuela didn't have a revolution. They had social reform. It doesn't work.

1. DO THE WORKERS OWN THE MEANS?

2. NO?

3. NOT SOCIALISM.

@PEWEX Try finding any "socialist" country where that happened.

USSR? China? Vietnam?

Means of production espeically now is a narrow qualification

It addresses nothing, and is too vague

The goal will never be reached that way

Stalin was the apex of practical socialism.

Not to mention Venezuela didn't even have a revolution.

>Stalinist Russia

>Workers owning anything

Hah!

@Deleted User He may have killed millions of people and preformed genocides, but at least the country lasted almost 100 years.

Moving towards socialism is just one step.

t. khrushchev

There was also an attempted coup detat a few weeks ago in venezuela where a member of the government was dropping explosives from a helicopter.

*According to the venezuelian government

A coup isn't a TRUE and HONEST revolution maaan you have to murder people for a real revolution!

>smugly implying things are what they aren't via sarcastic flawed logic to prove your point

Over and over, people come here and misunderstand what Communism is supposed to be, and the predictions made by Marx which shows how society must move in this direction. Moving from Capitalism to Socialism is a tendency determine by economic relations and the resolving of the tensions between the classes.

~~I'm not even a leftist I'm just here to shitpost, what's a communism?~~

Otherwise you have to say that Capitalism is the end of history and will continue forever, and the contradictions between classes will continue like this. But nothing is forever, and tensions have to confront one another.

The question I always forget to ask

Is what will replace communism?

Capitalism is going to last for a long, long time, whether or not it will turn out in marx's favor is hard to say.

Space communism

Communism is a new phase of the relationship to production.

Economic freedom.

An end?

No.

@Deleted User I heard that socialism would.

Then the revolution is not a revolution

If it merely ends

But apparently it comes before now.

It just free people to progress without economic constraints and restraints imposed by the centralisation of capital.

But then why is the ideal so restrictive?

If you are going to free the market then what is going to stop capitalism from coming back?

Why are all men forced to live in certain ways in the commune?

Is not their labor capital in its own right?

@Deleted User He's talking the elimination of the market

As well as property

Though land/property still exists but is pooled

Though still, if you are going to free the ECONOMY, then what will stop capitalism from returning?

Capitalism is meaningless without the competition for resources. You will be free to pursue the perfect of yourself and your goals.

You cannot be free to do anything other than your function

Your function? What is my function?

In the hypothetical commune

Who said anything about a commune?

And good question

Who do you even ask in a communist system?

I did. Communism implies there is a *commune*

Socialism prepares society to enter into a communist society.

So, especially in the early phases, you might be required to work certain jobs.

Socialism being a transition state only is bollocks

@Deleted User Though I have heard numerous times that socialism comes after communism.

Is it?

It defeats the purpose of socialism

At least in a practical sense

Whoever said socialism comes after communism is a retard.

Same as it defeats communism

>Socialism
>Practical

No no I meant making it to be simply the state between capitalism and communism

Pick one.

There might as well not be a word for that other than "chaos" if there's nothing behind socialism other than 'muh property'

Why is socialism as a bridge to communism, self-defeating

?

It implies concessions that take away from the end goal and risk departure from it at all

You cannot have communism if there is a king, you cannot have communism if there is a consul

IMO socialism should not be a transition state. Nor should it be related to communism. It should instead be something entirely different but very much similar.

Capitalism must be dismantled on a global stage, first of all. This is no easy feat. But it is necessary in order to solves the contradictions between classes that cannot be imposed forever.

The community/the social ownership of production and its fruits should be the goal of a true socialist society

Of course.

Trotsky, marx, lenin, and stalin all failed at that.

Without the elimination of individual mandate, and without the elimination of property

However property may be relegated by the community

And it is more present than ever.

How do you even believe it is possible to do it with communism?

@Deleted User Can you STFU for a second?

Now that was rude.

@Deleted User I don't understand your criticism. Without addressing exploitation everywhere, outside of your own lands, then it will be a threat and invite the repressive forces of capitalism to return.

Who said others cannot be empowered by a socialist nation or people?

This is why Socialism is authoritarian. Because it requires the focus of the masses in the fight.

I am trying to understand why you think there is a problem with socialism as a means to an ends.

Well, it is not just that, it is a necessary stage.

Have you ever heard of the foreigner volunteers for the wehrmacht. Brave men fought with the Germans against their colonial oppressors.
Socialism can be spread without conquest.

Yes.

And it most certainly cannot be a means to an end

All things decay

All systems decay

Yes.

And all ways of life decay

That's what Dialectical Materialism says, too.

If communism occurred and was stable enough to last, it too would eventually find an end and be replaced

Now you're getting it.

Possibly even by the original slave kingdoms Marx talked about

Hence the revolution

In the future, there will be systems that wil come to exist that we cannot even think of.

Precisely

Socialism is supposed to transform into something else. Just like Feudalism transformed into Capitalism.

https://images.discordapp.net/attachments/323365339242954753/336383574112468992/9903f8a9c9c26050218ba3112e838afef6fbf55e6bf6cdfe19744e0eee7cd6e7.jpg

Yes, I agree 100%.

Feudalism more or less transformed into monarchism, which then turned into capitalism.

RIP fags

Though it is true, capitalism started under monarchism.

I am agreeing with you on this point. The fact that systems change is exactly why Marx predicts Socialism.

According to the relationship to production.

It is a social theory.

Yet with that logic, coulden't every system be temporary, considering they all change eventually?

It is a very specific prediction based on the material relationship people have to the means of production. There is a tension between the classes which is fundamental to material existence, and must come to ahead one way or another.

The only way this can be resolved is with socialism, which is why it is predicted in the future.

@Deleted User everything is temporary.