This is the origin of the "not real communism" argument.

And if you want to be strictly orthodox to Marx real communism has never existed. That doesn't mean it's a good thing, it just means it isn't achievable.

The USSR was a socialist state, nominally transitional.

The USSR was communist aswell...

Communism is stateless though. As defined by Marx.

Marxism-Leninism literally defines the USSR as a SOCIALIST STATE, that withers away to be replaced by a STATELESS COMMUNIST SOCIETY.

It's not controversial.

They subscribed to the ideals of communism as that was what they were trying to achieve, and for the purpose of convenience Marxist-Leninist states are referred to as "communist" states.

It's a lot more complicated than it needs to be but it's not really hard to understand either.

You know I've never been a communist but I used to be one of the people that made fun of commie faggots for pulling the "not real communism card". Once I actually learned something, I understood the argument and why from a neutral standpoint it's valid even if people use it as a defense of communism. You guys seem to think socialism=liberalism=communism which is just blatantly incorrect.

You know your talking to yourself...

I'm watching 3AM at the krusty krab

I can explain just from history why it's incorrect in three steps from their origins:
1) John Locke, the original liberal, was at odds with Marx at every level.
2) Marx wasn't the first socialist.
3) Marx defined socialism as the transitional stage to communism. Socialists who do not want communism are called socialists, communists want socialism as a transitional phase.

also 5 am now so goodnight, sleep well fellow debater

Goodnight.

if there is a business you really don't like you can plant black mold spores around their building and they'll have to pay for inspectors

@Rex Colt is it bad that i have some acquaintances who might be in on all the stuff on level 6

@Doctor Anon liberalism is only a stepping stone to socialism if freedom of speech isn't put above other rights.

Hence why libertarians aren't socialist

@Deleted User thanks for that definition I hope you understand that consumption of liquid estrogen or testosterone won't actually place it in your blood stream it would be dissolved by stomach acid otherwise women that eat testicles would grow beards.

@Josh42A soy alert

I don't drink soy milk

I just apparently understand medical science more than the idiots that believe drinking something can upset someone's homorones

Literally if it worked like that drinking a coke would be lethal because of the amount of acid making it too your blood stream.

>believing in medical science

kek

If you don't believe in at least some medical science you are objectively retarded.

You gonna go get a blood letting with some leeches?

only if there is an overabundance of the sanguine humor

lol

morons claiming socialism is this and that

`Socialism calls for a big government`

`Communism calls for a 1984 government`

it is sickening

and leftism = liberalism they say

surely that isn't the case when the gracious liberal bourgeois of 1848 stuffed German revolts or when the Freikorps flatlined the Spartacists

The sad thing (for you) is that most of the "real socialists" are dead and the majority of people who would agree with your politics are just the typical college student.

demoralization

nice jew tactic

That's a blatant fact and you know it

it's not

in fact you can't say college students have typically socialist leanings or that they agree with my politics