it's pretty nice dude try it out sometime

no

communism bad

and gay

communism is good

and gay

atleast compared to the alternatives

No

Its not good

capitalism ftw

Capitalism is flawed and creates great poverty and inequalities, communism wants to fix those

Communism doesnt fix poverty lol

Poverty is destined to happen

no lol

yes

people suffer

thats just life

communism killed 30 million people in the last century

@Deleted User

L mao

lmao

@Firefly "If the population across a yearly scale dosen't drop, that means it never happened."

I think you are forgetting that china at this time was home to hundreds of millions and exploded into over a billion.

This is the same reason why tankies think that the holodomor never happened.

@Zircuits#3013 Communism has thousands of more issues than capitalism.

@Deleted User

Okay.

You lack so much self awareness and your so willing to dismiss me and be something I hate in order to anger me just to get back at me. You're so fixated on me that you literally project on me without realizing and start fighting your own allies while betraying your own beliefs. Pathetic. This is what I expect from someone who is so stupid that he doesn't even believe in morals or emotions. Smh.

Capitalism is responsible for the holocaust and world war 2

Capitalism is a big joke for me

@Zircuits >National socialism
>Capitalist

Nazi's are not socialist

Fascism is inherently capitalist

@Zircuits Wrong.

@Zircuits You tell me how it is.

No

Fascists are just as much at odds with capitolism as they are communism

It's a three way fight

@Kimiko That's an extremely summarized and simplified way to put it, but sure.

Yeah

it's actually a four way fight when you include anarchism

Anarchists work with communists.

but most people don't even consider that a political ideology...

yeah

but they have their peaceful disagreements

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27771569?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Read the abstract

@Zircuits Privatization isn't capitalism.

Capitalization uses privatization for the ultimate sake of profit over everything else.

So privatization is fundamental to capitalism

@Zircuits Yes, it is, but privatization isn't inherently capitalistic.

lol privitazation is inherently capitalist

So somehow giving ownership of the means of production isn't capitalist

*to private individuals

its literaly giving conscesions of state owned industries to capitalists

Privatization came tens thousands of years before capitalism, if a guy uses his factory to make something, that does not make it capitalism.

Capitalism is used for the sake of profit.

@Zircuits What are you confused on?

privitazation is made to increase capitalist profit

and no privitazation dident exist before capitalism

@Heitor That it is, but it is wrong to call privatization inherently capitalist, just because it is the preferred mode of production that capitalism uses.

Oh really? I guess the tribals managed all of their production with tribal officials, and the roman empire also owned all of their factories.

i mean the mode of production in rome is completely diferent

Was it?

yes

Tell me how.

it was slave society

private property woudent have developed fully as concept up untill the birth of modern interprise

that would be in the 1700s

Wrong, slaves were only used as manual labors, and were usually composed of prisoners, captured soldiers, and criminals.

They played a role in the economy still

Private property very much existed in rome since the founding of the city.

@Zircuits A small one at best.

im not sayin private property dident exist but the modern concept that is fully scemented today dident

we are of course talking about bussiness here and industry and state company and that sort of thing

@Heitor Well obviously the modern concept of it didn't, but privatization still exist regardless. Business did exist, it extended to traders, blacksmiths, mercanaries, construction, and shops.

*Extended but was not limited to

Infact carthage actually used mercanaries so much, that their empire went into crippling debt in using them against the romans.

tho privitazation still means the acumulation of profits under the hands of an individual so of course its inherently capitalist

@Heitor Wrong, capitalism is done for the sould purpose of collecting money, while in privatization, they only collect money in the process of using their services, not for the soul purpose of getting money.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/capitalism

>For profit

>using dictionary definitions

@Heitor That's some weak arguing right there, and you know it.

yes capitalism is made out of profit but profit dosent come out of nowhere

it obviously comes from the exchange of good and services

as well as exploitation of labour

Would you honestly expect me to take your word over a dictionary from an university that has existed since the roman empire?

@Heitor Sure profit does come from the exchange of goods, how does that factor into privatization bekng inherently capitalist?

@Firefly Look at who it is.

@Heitor basis of capitalism is not exchange. But the production of goods for the sake of the exchange. Exchange here is secondary.

@Firefly Not for the sake of exchange, but profit.

*Unless you use exchange as another definition for profit

Anybody else?

No?

@Zircuits You have been typing for 15 minutes straight, this better be good.

I'm struggling to see the difference in privatization making profits via service versus capitalism being a system based on profit

@Zircuits In capitalism, the end goal is to make profit, while in privatization, money will be acquired as they give out their services, but money is not their end goal.

So it plays a major role in the existence of capitalism

Is of not based on profit. It is based on the collective mode of production. The goods made for exchange might not bring profit but be an equal barter and still from it capitalism is born.

@Zircuits Wow, it isn't like I said that at the beginning of the argument.

@Firefly The oxford dictionary would disagree with you.

You can't have capitalism without it. I'd be skeptical if a socialist came into power and privatized the roads, for example

@Zircuits You can have private property without capitalism, nazi germany is a good example.

If you need an example of privatization in socialist countries, just take a look at the later soviet union and occupied europe, and south amerika.

During the rise of economical reformism

Lenin actually allowed private property.

During the reforms on the economy because of the civil war

Nope, he allowed it after the civil war.

Stalin was the one who revoked it, and then it ironically came back very soon after his death.

During another rise of economical reformism

@Zircuits Lenin wasn't the reformer, he was the founder.

He allowed privatization under communism, and stalin was the only one who actually ended it.... temporarily.

One of many criticisms of Lenin is his reforms on the economy, but some socialists defended it because of the civil war

@Zircuits What did I say earlier?

He allowed it to stay after the war.

It only ended under stalin.

So it was ended, just not under lenin

Then it came back.

Hell, collectivization lasted shorter than capitalization by almost 100 years.

It led to the fall of the USSR and a rise in poverty

Poverty and starvation was it's worse under stalin actually.

But to be fair, that can be attributed to WW2...... for the most part.

Starvation can also be explained by the massive industrialization effort

Isn't that a reckless maneouver though? Europe managed to do it just fine without the mass starvation.....

Russia was a very backwards country at this time

It had famines all the time also, even before communism, as a result

Hell, it should have been much easier to do at that time, since technology had advanced by 40 years.

@ᵈˢʳ✪ But none so severe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_and_famines_in_Russia_and_the_Soviet_Union#Pre-1900_droughts_and_famines Russia has always had this problem, though

@ᵈˢʳ✪ True, but it only became worse under communism.

The soviet tried to solve it, but while undergoing a rapid industrialisation process

Of course they would have worsened

@ᵈˢʳ✪ And look at how it turned out.

Look at the Great Leap Forward in the PRC

@ᵈˢʳ✪ >Of course they would have worsened

are you sure it worsened?

After a civil war and a push for industrialization which led them to become one of the most powerful countries

@Zircuits Not really, they were inferior in everyway to the west, their only advantage was numbers and territory.

I think ww2 had a greater effect, though @Deleted User

I think we’re forgetting who did most of the fighting

Germany.

Kek

also the space race and the nuclear arms race

@ᵈˢʳ✪ That wasn't a joke.

@Zircuits We are talking about the 1920s.

Oh

Nuclear weapons were not even theorized yet.

industrialization played a huge role in their expansion into other fields

@Zircuits That it did.

And they did it so recklessly that millions starved, and went into poverty.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/heroesvillains/g4/cs1/

Also Russia lost WW1 remember

@ᵈˢʳ✪ Mhm.

But the thing is that starvation only increased as more communist policies were enacted.

In my opinion, I think Russia moved to collectivisation too early

Lenin abandoned collectivization and allowed for capitalism.

Or maybe it was because the kulaks literally burnt their harvest so the soviets couldn't collectavize it.

BWAHAHAHA

After all, it was predicted that revolution would occur in the most advanced of countries

That it didn’t

@maostravelagent We ain't talking about the holodomor, piss off.

Oh

@ᵈˢʳ✪ And that it didn't.

?

Revolution never occured in the advanced cities.

*Or nations

There were no famines under Lenin though, there was a red terror(which was 3 times smaller than the white terror), but no famine.

The common order goes as follows; Feudalism>Capitalism>Socialism>Communism

So why are you talking about famines?

In basic terms

Russia attempted to jump straight from Feudalism to socialism

@maostravelagent Wrong, famine was very present under lenin, but you are too late to comment, we have already moved on.

@ᵈˢʳ✪ Russia wasn't fedual, it was a capitalist and imperialist nation.

most of the country was rural peasantry

Their imperial ambitions were crushed by japan however, who kicked them out of china and actively defended the land from russian presence.

@Zircuits Okay? So was most of the US, canada, and eastern europe.

They had an established urban population for factory development

In other words, they industrialized

@Zircuits And so did russia, it just wasn't widespread.

It may well have been

If russia didn't have any industrial production, they would have not been able to imperialize, or have the massive army it did in WW1 and before.

It was much different to the capitalist countries of the west

@ᵈˢʳ✪ How so?

As zircuits stated, the majority of its population were peasants

And so was the west.

Not so much as Russia

True.

How can I organize a mayday rally in my town?

I need backup in Ultras vs Tankies

on leftbook

what is it about

@TomatoNigga put up a lot of posters. Make a FB account with an alt and then make a group with your fake account. Make a google voice number, make a Signal account, and share your GVoice number with a Signal captcha / link

err @maostravelagent

@htotheizzo "anarcho liberalism" as a new term for the liberals who pretend to be anarchist

it's tumblr ppl VS leftists

hmm

@dunhill If you really need help for a conversation like that, then you really do know nothing.

@Deleted User i don't need support for defending my perspective. it's a numbers game

@dunhill How so.

@Deleted User 8 people vs 1 in a debate, does not matter how right the 8 or the 1 are, what matters is that there are 8 on one side and only 1 on the other

@Deleted User if it's 8 vs 4 or 5 however then the content of the ideas are actually taken halfway seriously

https://youtu.be/d-VVnhwB4Gw

@dunhill Not really, if the person is still good in their argument, I did the same here.

Donald Trump Every time⏱ you see a 🤡Liberal say something childish👶🏻 remember 💭 they left their 🧠brain in 😈Devils hands👼54 million babies 🍼 aborted 🧟‍♂️They act 🎬 like they care about 👩‍👧‍👦kids they really don't🙅‍♀️you know this Trump Lets start with the🤱babies first abortion ✝️#MAGA

Donald Trump Every time⏱ you see a 🤡Liberal say something childish👶🏻 remember 💭 they left their 🧠brain in 😈Devils hands👼54 million babies 🍼 aborted 🧟‍♂️They act 🎬 like they care about 👩‍👧‍👦kids they really don't🙅‍♀️you know this Trump Lets start with the🤱babies first abortion ✝️#MAGA
We gotta 🚫STOP⚠ these sandniggers 👳 from coming to OUR 👥country 🌍so that they don't blow 💥 us 🙎 up I'm very glad 😃 Donald Trump 🐥 is our president 🙏 amen 😏 I thank God 👴 and Jesus 👦 every night before 😪 bed 🛏 I am glad to be a REAL 🎆american 🍻 unlike these 😡 indians 💩 I am in support of the 🏊 pipeline 🌊 and the 🏗 wall 🕋 we will keep counting our💲money 💵 while you are working minimum wage 😂 I am glad Hillary 👵 lost because now we can make America 🗺 great again 🙋
IT IS GETTING CLOSE 🕑🕒🕓 TO THE PRESIDENTIAL 🇺🇸🇺🇸 PUSSY😻 PRIMARY‼️😩💦 SOON MY DADDY 👅👅💦

Don't 👏 call 👏 yourself 👏 an 👏 American 👏 if 👏 you 👏 don't 👏 fap 👏 to 👏 pictures 👏 of 👏 Donald 👏 Trump 👏 everyday 👏

Troll a libtard epic style

le epic

epic

Wat

@everyone

Yes 😍 😍 😍 Trump daddy 😍 😍

@Killmonger#2440 its meme

vote trump

@Comrade Skeltal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaJHvFbDJQQ

Upgraded for you!

got it from /b/ just now

It was an earth is flat thread...

o lol

I've seen it once before, I was tempted to do it then, but I lost the image

Luminati confirm

I also made it a delet this meme

nice

daddies

I offer this image as a counter example to any women who claim that Asian men are weak, effeminate, etc

Cringe

@Deleted User you're a woman, are these men weak?

"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew – not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew.

Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew.

What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money."

- Karl Marx the nazi

Ifunny.cancer

But yeah trump loves his babies

so suck my nut

gayest thing Ive ever said

You have one?

I feel sorry for you.

Im not a chick

Most men have two.

He’s actually Adolf Hitler

He only has one nut

Im not inbred

Stfu u Hapsburger

Rip unironically calling Marx a nazi

I do it trigger you commies

lumping idiots together is my shtick

you're such a huge lump in that yourself

you are like a physical cancer tumour