I can't help but think that this is pure cynicism. You can't honestly think this way.
"Monarchy is a wise, all-knowing, entirely benevolent philosopher king providing for the safety and needs of each of his subjects. The Saudi Sultan is oppressive and cruel, therefore Arabia isn't a Monarchy.
Define a highly flawed thing as perfect and then deny the realities of that thing because it isn't perfect.
That's what the people in charge do all the time with "Democracy" too. It's literally just rule by the people, demos. But they add qualifiers where a "real" democracy must have:
100% enfranchisement
one person one vote
equality under the law
majority rule with minority protections
fairness and equity
Etcetera, etcetera, attaching whatever qualifiers they need to justify the argument they're trying to make. (such as "democracies don't go to war with each other") If a so-called democracy fails, they can say it wasn't real democracy.
More evidence comes out daily proving that the NPC meme is true. They are fed good-think input by the mainstream, and spout it verbatim no matter what. These robots don't have a single unique thought or show any signs of self reflection, creativity, or questioning of their beliefs when reality doesn't align. Free will, self reflection, ability to change, and creativity are necessary requirements to be an intelligent higher life form, yet these NPCs seem to lack all of them. Thinking about how and why this happens leads to some terrifying possibilities.
Anyway, the reason why I'm replying is that your comment reminded me about something that I believe is inherent to leftist dogma and philosophy, that they don't question their beliefs even when the evidence, history, observation, and experimentation runs contrary to them, repeatedly. When I was a kid I was a lefty, and thought exactly like this, but after some bad depression in my teens I came to realize that my views were shaped by what I thought the world should be, not what it was/is.
Of course it is. They know they are fucking lying.
Leftism is always fundamentally about power. They are simply maneuvering to a better position, and deflecting attacks. Nothing more.
Fascism is totally undefinable and basically means "whatever you're doing" because you're a Nazi. Critical Race Theory is a deeply academic concept that is also mysteriously undefinable. Socialism is this ultra-specific and unreachable thing that has never existed in any Communist or Socialist country, even if they said they achieved it, which is why you can't criticize any form of Leftism.
The problem is they aren't wrong: real Communism can't exist because it's completely antithetical to human nature. It's not so much that communism is evil in theory(it is, just not the main issue), but that attempting to force a utopia that demonstrably brings untold pain, suffering and death is psychotically evil.
The necessary requirement to implement communism is giving absolute power to the government to enforce the communist ideals, in the hopes that after the ideals are achieved the government will disband, or reduce itself to only what's necessary, which is laughably stupid. Giving government absolute power, both theoretically and historically, is a huge mistake that leads to corruption, inefficiency, misery, and death on massive scales. The theory of communism doesn't work in the real world because it ignores basic human motivations. "Real" communism can't get to the end state of theoretical communism, because there's no way to get past total government control.
Cuba is absolutely communist, because they're going through the necessary requirements to implement it. They're just getting what everyone has gotten under communism.
Holy shit, you're actually one of those "it wasn't real communism" people, trying to hide it under a facade of intellectual arguments that are, quite simply, wrong.
Communism always fails because to get to it's "utopia" requires absolute government control, to implement the "will of the people", take control of the private sector, and enact communism, which always leads to corruption (attracting those who would use the power for their own ends), inefficiency, misery, and death, because the power given to government to enact the will of the people is quickly perverted to enact the will of those in power, and often to the detriment of the people. Capitalism has the same failing to a lesser degree, because over time certain companies (capital) becomes concentrated, meaning those companies and the people in charge of them wield more power, often to the detriment of the company, the workers, and the customers. The big difference is that companies exert far less power than governments, meaning the negative effects are much less severe than concentrated governmental power, due to people's ability to leave a company or shop elsewhere, which they don't have the option to do under total despotic centralized control of government, even when the government/country pretends to call itself "communist".
Also note, that none of this is done in a vacuum. Companies and government often become corrupt together, working in tandem to accumulate more power. This is exactly what's happening in the U.S., and many other countries, currently. It's not communism, but it's following the same process toward centralized authority, and will lead to the same thing.
The lesson here is that concentration of power is dangerous, thus governments, corporations, and society in general should be set up to avoid or limit the pitfalls.
Another lesson to explain the failings of communism, socialism, and otherwise powerful centralized government, is that it's based on altruism of the people, which is a self destructive philosophy. Constructive selfishness is the most stable form of being for an individual, group, or country. I'd explain why, but this is already long, and would open a bigger can of worms than this reply deserves.
Sounds a bit like a No True Scotsman logical fallacy being made over and over and over again. One of the definitions of insanity: trying to same thing over and over again expecting different results. How these idiots can see numerously historically repeated results from the same experiment and refuse to accept the results as "not real Communism" is beyond me. It's tantamount to claiming 2+2=5, and being perpetually baffled that every time it's added together it equals 4, claiming "it wasn't real addition". The problem is these morons are dragging everyone around them to hell with them, willingly sacrificing millions of people at the alter of their insanity and refusal to accept reality, that every time this shit is tried, it fails horrifically.
No, he's either a Fascist or a National Socialist, I forget which.
So by definition, he always no other choice but to defend Socialism from too much genuine criticism because it would hurt his version. He also needs to promote the Socialist definition of Capitalism and Liberalism so he can steer people away from human liberty, and back towards his primary objectives.
Let that be 2 lessons to you:
Fascism and National Socialism are Leftist Ideologies
Birds of a feather flock together, and so do Fascist pigs and Communist swine.
Lols, he called it “state capitalism.” The comments below are pretty funny all mocking that “real communism” has never happened! I think my favorite one is this:
Tale as old as time
Song as old as rhyme
Real communism has never been tried
They are right, in fact. In capitalism, whoever owns the means of production, gets the surplus value created by it. In socialism, workers own the means of production, so you could say that socialism is a kind of capitalism where only workers are allowed to own capital. But in actual practice of socialism, it is the state that owns the means of production, so state capitalism. This always happens because workers don't know how to manage the capital and don't care about the capital that they don't own.
So under a capitalist system socialism can exist because the workers can purchase the means of production, but under a socialist system socialism can't exist because the state necessarily owns the means of production. Therefore it is imperative that all socialists support capitalism.
Because your analysis promotes the Marxist concept of Surplus Value, which is based on another Marxist and Socialist set of ideas involving Objective Value of Goods, and the Labor Theory of Value.
The very concept of Surplus Value asserts that there is an objective value to a thing identified by some Socialist Pseudo-Intellectual, and that the Surplus Value gained from that thing (known to the rest of the planet as profit), is inherently exploitative to the Laborers who built that thing. Hence all Surplus Value is exploitation, and all market forces where profit is earned is "exploitation" by "Capitalists" who are hording surplus value.
The US falls to communism and becomes a total shithole. And somewhere in some country that hasn’t been overrun yet, some communist is still bleating that real communism has never been tried.
Whenever leftist say that we should start pressing them for donations to organizations that help those wanting to/ have escaped from communist countries or to programs helping opposition overthrow their communist governments… after all its not real communism so they shouldn’t have an issue supporting the cause.
I can't help but think that this is pure cynicism. You can't honestly think this way.
"Monarchy is a wise, all-knowing, entirely benevolent philosopher king providing for the safety and needs of each of his subjects. The Saudi Sultan is oppressive and cruel, therefore Arabia isn't a Monarchy.
Define a highly flawed thing as perfect and then deny the realities of that thing because it isn't perfect.
That's what the people in charge do all the time with "Democracy" too. It's literally just rule by the people, demos. But they add qualifiers where a "real" democracy must have:
100% enfranchisement
one person one vote
equality under the law
majority rule with minority protections
fairness and equity
Etcetera, etcetera, attaching whatever qualifiers they need to justify the argument they're trying to make. (such as "democracies don't go to war with each other") If a so-called democracy fails, they can say it wasn't real democracy.
More evidence comes out daily proving that the NPC meme is true. They are fed good-think input by the mainstream, and spout it verbatim no matter what. These robots don't have a single unique thought or show any signs of self reflection, creativity, or questioning of their beliefs when reality doesn't align. Free will, self reflection, ability to change, and creativity are necessary requirements to be an intelligent higher life form, yet these NPCs seem to lack all of them. Thinking about how and why this happens leads to some terrifying possibilities.
Anyway, the reason why I'm replying is that your comment reminded me about something that I believe is inherent to leftist dogma and philosophy, that they don't question their beliefs even when the evidence, history, observation, and experimentation runs contrary to them, repeatedly. When I was a kid I was a lefty, and thought exactly like this, but after some bad depression in my teens I came to realize that my views were shaped by what I thought the world should be, not what it was/is.
"I'm not wrong, the universe must be wrong."
Of course it is. They know they are fucking lying.
Leftism is always fundamentally about power. They are simply maneuvering to a better position, and deflecting attacks. Nothing more.
Fascism is totally undefinable and basically means "whatever you're doing" because you're a Nazi. Critical Race Theory is a deeply academic concept that is also mysteriously undefinable. Socialism is this ultra-specific and unreachable thing that has never existed in any Communist or Socialist country, even if they said they achieved it, which is why you can't criticize any form of Leftism.
The problem is they aren't wrong: real Communism can't exist because it's completely antithetical to human nature. It's not so much that communism is evil in theory(it is, just not the main issue), but that attempting to force a utopia that demonstrably brings untold pain, suffering and death is psychotically evil.
The necessary requirement to implement communism is giving absolute power to the government to enforce the communist ideals, in the hopes that after the ideals are achieved the government will disband, or reduce itself to only what's necessary, which is laughably stupid. Giving government absolute power, both theoretically and historically, is a huge mistake that leads to corruption, inefficiency, misery, and death on massive scales. The theory of communism doesn't work in the real world because it ignores basic human motivations. "Real" communism can't get to the end state of theoretical communism, because there's no way to get past total government control.
Cuba is absolutely communist, because they're going through the necessary requirements to implement it. They're just getting what everyone has gotten under communism.
The People's Republic would be great if it weren't for the people!
Holy shit, you're actually one of those "it wasn't real communism" people, trying to hide it under a facade of intellectual arguments that are, quite simply, wrong.
Communism always fails because to get to it's "utopia" requires absolute government control, to implement the "will of the people", take control of the private sector, and enact communism, which always leads to corruption (attracting those who would use the power for their own ends), inefficiency, misery, and death, because the power given to government to enact the will of the people is quickly perverted to enact the will of those in power, and often to the detriment of the people. Capitalism has the same failing to a lesser degree, because over time certain companies (capital) becomes concentrated, meaning those companies and the people in charge of them wield more power, often to the detriment of the company, the workers, and the customers. The big difference is that companies exert far less power than governments, meaning the negative effects are much less severe than concentrated governmental power, due to people's ability to leave a company or shop elsewhere, which they don't have the option to do under total despotic centralized control of government, even when the government/country pretends to call itself "communist".
Also note, that none of this is done in a vacuum. Companies and government often become corrupt together, working in tandem to accumulate more power. This is exactly what's happening in the U.S., and many other countries, currently. It's not communism, but it's following the same process toward centralized authority, and will lead to the same thing.
The lesson here is that concentration of power is dangerous, thus governments, corporations, and society in general should be set up to avoid or limit the pitfalls.
Another lesson to explain the failings of communism, socialism, and otherwise powerful centralized government, is that it's based on altruism of the people, which is a self destructive philosophy. Constructive selfishness is the most stable form of being for an individual, group, or country. I'd explain why, but this is already long, and would open a bigger can of worms than this reply deserves.
Sounds a bit like a No True Scotsman logical fallacy being made over and over and over again. One of the definitions of insanity: trying to same thing over and over again expecting different results. How these idiots can see numerously historically repeated results from the same experiment and refuse to accept the results as "not real Communism" is beyond me. It's tantamount to claiming 2+2=5, and being perpetually baffled that every time it's added together it equals 4, claiming "it wasn't real addition". The problem is these morons are dragging everyone around them to hell with them, willingly sacrificing millions of people at the alter of their insanity and refusal to accept reality, that every time this shit is tried, it fails horrifically.
No, he's either a Fascist or a National Socialist, I forget which.
So by definition, he always no other choice but to defend Socialism from too much genuine criticism because it would hurt his version. He also needs to promote the Socialist definition of Capitalism and Liberalism so he can steer people away from human liberty, and back towards his primary objectives.
Let that be 2 lessons to you:
Ah okay. Thanks for the heads up.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *snort* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*wipes tears away*
Sure... And I am Santa bringing you gifts!
Yes, Communism is antithetical to human nature because equality is antithetical to nature in and of itself.
Beyond that, people don't like having their shit stolen.
Lols, he called it “state capitalism.” The comments below are pretty funny all mocking that “real communism” has never happened! I think my favorite one is this:
Tale as old as time Song as old as rhyme Real communism has never been tried
They are right, in fact. In capitalism, whoever owns the means of production, gets the surplus value created by it. In socialism, workers own the means of production, so you could say that socialism is a kind of capitalism where only workers are allowed to own capital. But in actual practice of socialism, it is the state that owns the means of production, so state capitalism. This always happens because workers don't know how to manage the capital and don't care about the capital that they don't own.
So under a capitalist system socialism can exist because the workers can purchase the means of production, but under a socialist system socialism can't exist because the state necessarily owns the means of production. Therefore it is imperative that all socialists support capitalism.
Exactly. There is no shortage of employee-owned companies, though they are usually less efficient than the usual companies.
Sounds good to me!
Eat shit you fucking Marxist.
Surplus fucking Value.
No, profit. Why? Because there is no objective value, and the value I was given for whatever I did was legitimate if the trade was properly consented.
Fuck you, asshole.
Don't be a fucking Marxist.
I am not. Why would anyone think that I am?
Because your analysis promotes the Marxist concept of Surplus Value, which is based on another Marxist and Socialist set of ideas involving Objective Value of Goods, and the Labor Theory of Value.
The very concept of Surplus Value asserts that there is an objective value to a thing identified by some Socialist Pseudo-Intellectual, and that the Surplus Value gained from that thing (known to the rest of the planet as profit), is inherently exploitative to the Laborers who built that thing. Hence all Surplus Value is exploitation, and all market forces where profit is earned is "exploitation" by "Capitalists" who are hording surplus value.
I am discussing socialism in socialist terms, call it surplus value or profit, the analysis is the same.
Real capitalism has never been tried.
Here's a great video about Venezuela and how Hollywood is covering for the failures of socialism:
https://youtu.be/Wo4V3GaXFBY
i've been seeing two reactions from leftists over this :
or
So the communist are denying that Cuba is communist? What's next, are they gonna' tell us that chinajoe won the election?
I can see it now.
The US falls to communism and becomes a total shithole. And somewhere in some country that hasn’t been overrun yet, some communist is still bleating that real communism has never been tried.
Whenever leftist say that we should start pressing them for donations to organizations that help those wanting to/ have escaped from communist countries or to programs helping opposition overthrow their communist governments… after all its not real communism so they shouldn’t have an issue supporting the cause.