/lit/ - Literature

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993416]

Why does progressive society praise Marxism and those who agree with it as pilars of justice and equality, even though it has been singularly responsible for more deaths than any other political movement in history, whilst agreeing with Hitler is the most disgraceable of taboos?

[Anonymous No.6993427]

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.6993434]

>>6993416
You forget the death count of liberalism chap.

Progressive society doesn't exist. Marxism isn't praised as a "pilar" of justice and equality.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993435]

>>6993427
Typical marxist argument

Got anything else?

Just using an example. Communism is responsible for over 100 million deaths. Nazis are responsible for 6 million.

[Anonymous No.6993437]

why so many marxist threads?

[Anonymous No.6993439]

>>6993416
For the same reason religion persists

[Anonymous No.6993440]

>>6993435
>>>/pol/

>>6993435
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.6993441]

>>6993416
Did you try reading the sticky, retard?

[Anonymous No.6993444]

>>6993437
It's a hot issue on /lit/. The most hostile threads you'll come across are marxist vs capitalist ones.

[Anonymous No.6993446]

>4 marxism troll threads on the first page
can you keep it to 1, /pol/?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993452]

>>6993441
Welcome to /lit/, if you dont agree with us than you can just like gb2 /pol/ cause we cant think of anything legitamately disfactual with what you're saying

[Anonymous No.6993455]

>>6993446
>4 identifiable tumors in separate regions of the body
can you keep it to 1, cancer?

[Anonymous No.6993456]

>>6993416
Because that was no fault of the philosophy, but the leaders who twisted its message for their own personal gain.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993466]

>>6993455
typical marxist argument, shoving tyrone big black fallacy straight down my throat then straight back up again

[Anonymous No.6993467]

>>6993452
No one cares you jackass, its off topic discussion.

>inb4 losing the argument? yell gb2pol!

There is no argument. No one is arguing with you. Its off topic. Go away.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993482]

>>6993467
inb4 losing the argument? yell gb2pol!

[Anonymous No.6993487]

>>6993466
Fallacies!
Ad hominem!
Strawmen!
You too can spam all these amazing words on other boards where no one wants you around! This, and other things /pol/ taught me through copypasta and image macros available right now for the low low price of getting cucked by a black guy!

[Anonymous No.6993493]

>>6993482
>>>/pol/

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993505]

>>6993487
exactly, you too can completely discredit anything anyones says to disagree with you by assuming they know nothing simply because they disagree with you

[Anonymous No.6993506]

lol guys my high school teacher told me communism was like, sooo terrible

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993520]

>>6993506
i think its the pollution and overpopulation thats draggin em down

[Anonymous No.6993545]

Stalinism was a dictatorship. Its disingenuous to call it communism.

[Anonymous No.6993561]

>>6993506
A dictator demanding industrialization would've gotten the same results though. Maybe communism works just as better as than cult of personality in motivating the people.

sage for not being /lit/

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993569]

>>6993545
Yeah, and even though Marxists use this over and over as evidence that Marx was still somehow right, it should be viewed as "communism is completely impossible to implement without complete societal control which requires nothing less of a police state"

[Anonymous No.6993638]

Again you're sounding like capitalist 'commissar.'

It went bad in Russia. Humanity prospered for hundreds of years in something resembling anarchy / communism.

Just stop with the propaganda here, its so transparent to everyone.

[Anonymous No.6993652]

>>6993638
>Humanity prospered for hundreds of years in something resembling anarchy / communism.

One of the most annoying parts of left politics is its delusional romanticism.

[Anonymous No.6993658]

That's true, its not delusional.

[Anonymous No.6993662]

THEY DO IT FOR FREE

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993664]

>>6993638
You can't write history off as propoganda. You can ignore it if you like, but then you're willfully being ignorant and at that point you should just assume everything you know/believe is a lie

[Anonymous No.6993685]

>>6993664
Yes but to equate those deaths with marxism is false. Communist Russia wasn't marxism, for the third time.

[Anonymous No.6993694]

Once you go far enough left you go full circle from being a gentle pacifist egalitarian to an insane, despotic megalomaniac. 20 to 42 million deaths from starvation later....

[Anonymous No.6993697]

>>6993652
the beginning of sedentary, hierarchical societies very clearly decreased living standards for humans very significantly.

[Anonymous No.6993701]

>>6993662
doing it for free doesn't mean you aren't gaining anything of personal value

[Anonymous No.6993733]

>>6993697
Cool assertion. Agriculture allowed us to make technology which increased the standard of living. Prehistoric bands of humans did have hierarchies of sorts, based on social prowess, dominance, etc. You can't really have a human society without a hierarchy.

[Anonymous No.6993749]

>>6993701
>he's a janitor
>on the internet
>on an anime imageboard
>he does it for free
>he doesn't takes his "job" very seriously
>he does it because it is the only amount of power & control he will ever have in his pathetic life
>he doesn't delete threads he doesn't like because he's so much of a cuck he's afraid he will offend someone
>he deletes threads he doesn't like because they interfere with the large backlog of little girl chinese cartoons he still has to watch
>he will never have a real job
>he will never move out of his parent's house
>he will never be at a healthy weight
>he will never know how to cook anything besides a hot pocket
>he will never have a girlfriend
>he will never have any friends

[Anonymous No.6993770]

>>6993694
>20 to 42 million

Even if these numbers are true (Dikotter and Conquest aren't exactly respected for some reason wikipedia lists them as credible sources) you have to remember the scale of china. This is the same country where a single flood can kill 5 million people.

[Anonymous No.6993786]

>>6993770
Typical Marxist response, reducing humans to numbers

[Anonymous No.6993795]

I'm suspecting my father of being a communist.

He has a large collection of books on and by Marx, Engels and Lenin and, for good measure, some Stalin.
Most of the Russian stuff is in Russian, in fact he went to university in Russia and speaks it fluently as his second language.

His excuse for keeping a huge collection of communist literature in his room is that "he doesn't want to throw it away/it would be a waste to get rid of them".

I found a water bottle sized Lenin statue made of solid metal in his room.
Lenin is sitting and reading a book, it's probably about communism.

At one point in my youth he showed me some left leaning and right out socialist newspapers and told me "You know, some times what they are saying isn't wrong at all."

On another occasion he gifted me a book about how you should tax away all the rich people's money because they keep getting richer and the hard working average man is being left behind.

He right out refused to vote for our country's conservative party and told me about how the big man only cares about economy and how he, as an upper middle class and well off human bean, was, according to him, the "small man" being ignored by the evil big parties and corporations.
Like he is some sort of peasant factory worker, what did Russia do to him?
In this he completely ignored how a strong economy leads to a higher standard of life and not just fatter managers.

What do I do about this?
Did the Soviet Union poison my father's mind with propaganda?

How do I stop dad from being a communist?

[Anonymous No.6993800]

>>6993685
lol fucking disgusting trot

you arent even a real leftist

[Anonymous No.6993802]

>>6993416

"They" don't. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.6993804]

So do you have the figures of communism deaths or are you just guessing they're the highest.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993821]

>>6993802
You obviously do. You're mad because I dissed Marx. I can tell by your wonderful vocabulary. Please anon senpai show me how to debate by using meaningless curse words

[Anonymous No.6993825]

>>6993416
Because killing bourgies is defensible in the name of popular revolution.

Desirable? no.

But the hypothetical outcome justifies the means - the only tragedy is that you must excise the ignorant with the active participant.

Loss of human life is a non-issue in the name of emancipation from capital.

If you stood in my way I'd shoot you myself.

[Anonymous No.6993828]

>>6993795
Are you from a former Warsaw Pact country? Let him think what he wants. He's obviously had more time to think about than you have. You'd probably get rekt if you tried to argue with him about it.

[Anonymous No.6993833]

>>6993795
You join him you fucktard.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993834]

>>6993804
Not hard to find
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993843]

>>6993800
What you fail to realize is that the only way you could ever achieve the idyllic, impossible Marxist state is by having a society that somehow manages itself and agrees to all become equal in the absence of government.

Unfortunately, because we're human, this is actually beyond impossible. The only way to force a mass group of people into accepting communism is by complete authoritarianism. Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.6993859]

Filtered.

[Anonymous No.6993861]

>killings under communist regimes
>Marxist state
>human nature
>prove me wrong
He's pulling out all the stops!

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993873]

>>6993859
Typical Marxist response
>>6993861
>just because communism is responsible for 100 million deaths doesnt mean it isnt bad!!! actually its good fuck the system bro

[Anonymous No.6993900]

So what's capitalism's death toll?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993906]

>>6993900
certainly not many from starvation

[Anonymous No.6993913]

>>6993900

>thinking free markets work
>thinking people are rational or well-informed
>thinking we're not trashing the environment and allowing wealth to accumulate in the hands of 1% as the margin between poor and rich continues to increase

In 50 years the US will be all gated communities and favelas like Brazil or whatever.

[Anonymous No.6993918]

>>6993834
communism sounds good and humane in theory but in practice the mass killings happen again and again

[Anonymous No.6993919]

bump

[Anonymous No.6993920]

Not one single board is free from /pol/ shitposting, what a metastasizing cancer.

[Anonymous No.6993927]

>>6993435
12 million, you retard. 6 million Jews, 6 million additional 'undesirables' including roma people, gays, and political dissidents. I'm not even a marxist, btw, I just hate right wing faggots like you who make capitalism look bad.

[Anonymous No.6993931]

>>6993906
205,000,000 according to Peter

http://www.petersaysstuff.com/2014/05/attempting-the-impossible-calculating-capitalisms-death-toll/

[Anonymous No.6993932]

>>6993913
>thinking people are rational or well-informed

Thanks for the demonstration.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993935]

>>6993913
Wait wut dude? Free markets mean that the economy and quality of life increase as a whole.. America and Japan have free markets and also have the highest GDP/quality of life in the entire world. So when you say "free markets dont work" what you really mean to say is "I am so stubbornly convinced that communism is the only answer that I will discredit all contrary economic evidence"

[Anonymous No.6993950]

>>6993935
Hey man, I'm new on lit so I don't know too much about this liberal Marxist shit lol. What is communism? Why does communism preclude the free market? I need someone to explain to me because I'm dumb.

Pic unrelated.

[Anonymous No.6993951]

>>6993900

Hard to say, really. Do underclass people who die on the street from malnourishment and/or lack of medical care count? Do people who die because of foreign military intervention instigated by big corporations, corrupt government agencies and military weapons complex count?

Not a communist though, just saying.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993952]

>>6993931
>sjw betamale gathering information from other sjw betamales disinffo

[Anonymous No.6993954]

bumppppp

[Anonymous No.6993956]

>>6993935
I'm not a communist but I will say, GDP is not an indicator of anything.

Neither America nor Japan have free markets, and even if they did "quality of life" is a highly subjective thing.

Ask inner city populations in most American urban centers if capitalism is working for them.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993959]

>>6993951
America has the least amount of starving people in the world
Niggerland has the most

[Anonymous No.6993961]

>>6993951
No, they don't count because there's no specific target you can pin all the deaths on. Collateral deaths are kosher.

[Anonymous No.6993962]

>>6993952
Did you see his footnotes?

[Anonymous No.6993963]

>>6993935

Yeah, but part of those free markets and that high standard of living is that you shift a big chunk of your manufacture to countries which shit on human rights and therefore do it cheaper.

[Anonymous No.6993965]

>>6993952

>oh fuck data what do i do
>lol make a weak pass at his masculinity
>fuckin' #rekt mate lol

[Anonymous No.6993967]

>>6993956
The power of capitalism.

[Anonymous No.6993973]

>>6993956
>your statistics are meaningless if I find one anecdote that doesn't support it.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993975]

>>6993956
>america and japan
>no free market
Holy shit are you kidding me? Free market means anyone can buy and sell anything on the market. America is the defintion of a free market. You can go and buy any publicaly traded stock on the market right now. Nothing is stopping anyone from becoming rich.

Ask inner city populations in most American urban centers if capitalism is working for them and they'll say "i dindu nuffin plz obamba send me moe food for my fat black ass, my son tyrone joined a gang because of u capitalist pigs"

[Anonymous No.6993981]

>>6993913
Oh yes, the classic marxist prediction that the system will inevitably end in dystopia or revolution. Even more classic is the moment when the prediction fails to come true, because you idiots forget that liberal capitalism is the only even somewhat functional way to allocate scarce resources that we have, and that we can fix most sources of market failure with legislation.

[Anonymous No.6993983]

>>6993975
I think he means there is over-regulation.

[Anonymous No.6993986]

>>6993959
Fuck you you racist shithead. You're making the rest of us capitalists look bad.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6993995]

>>6993965
>>6993962
This article is putting every death during war (at least that America has been in) into the category of Capitalism

Communists killed their own people because their entire economic system was defunct.

[Anonymous No.6994001]

>>6993959
"Niggerland" is arguably the place that has followed ortodox economics most closely in the world.

>>6993975
Your definition applies to countries you (wrongly) considered not capitalist.
You are by far the stupidest person i've read in /lit/, please go back to /pol/.

[Anonymous No.6994003]

bumporuni

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994005]

>>6993986
It's true, more people starve to death in Africa than any other place because they too stupid to make a agriculture

[Anonymous No.6994006]

>>6993975
>buy and sell anything on the market

This is not true in the United States and has not been true since the Articles of Confederacy. Every single purchase you make is regulated and monitored to a certain degree. Every single thing you buy is vetted and checked and rechecked (often in a faulty manner, but that's beside the point) before it can ever reach the market.

You seriously need to do the reading. Take a few community college courses on micro-and-macroeconomics. You're really just making everyone who advocates for continued capitalism look bad. Modern markets aren't free unless they're black markets, which have their own host of problems.

[Anonymous No.6994008]

>>6993973

GDP only measures the size of a national economy as measured by the total projected monetary value of goods and services. It tells you nothing about distribution, development, or anything else that actually indicates affluence and general well-being.

China is a case in point. Largest economy in the world, yet a third of its population lives in poverty.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994018]

>>6994001
typical Marxist argument

>youre stupid gb2 /pol/

[Anonymous No.6994020]

>>6994005
>they too stupid to make a agriculture

[Anonymous No.6994025]

>>6993973

>making an appeal to statistics for questions about marxism

Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about considering those taking statistics have a vested interest in perpetuating capitalism. .

>>6993975

There is some way in which our set of institutional arrangements are failing people (black or otherwise.)

(inb4 because they're lazy or some bullshit stereotype.)

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994027]

>>6994006
I've taken both courses, at an actual University. A person with 50,000 dollars can go buy 50,000 1$ stocks in any publicaly traded company and unless they have insider information (which is illegal and hard to catch) no one is going to stop them.

[Anonymous No.6994032]

>>6994025
>vested interest in perpetuating capitalism. .

[Anonymous No.6994035]

>>6994001
>"Niggerland" is arguably the place that has followed ortodox economics most closely in the world.
Nice meme. Blatant underregulation, rampant corruption, poorly enforced/ nonexistent property rights, tons of tragedies of the commons, etc. I can really see how African nations have been adhering to the recommendations of mainstream economists.

[Anonymous No.6994041]

>>6994018
Typical 15 year old /pol/tard that doesn't know basic logic. "You are wrong because you are a retard" is a fallacy. "You are wrong because A and B. You are a retard" isn't a fallacy. My arguments are there. But you are too retarded to understand what ortodox economics or capitalism mean.

[Anonymous No.6994042]

>>6994005
Or maybe because trying to grow things there is difficult, the governments take land, the governments regulates the shit out of everything, and the governments are corrupt as fuck in general (you gotta pay bribes to be successful)?

[Anonymous No.6994046]

>>6993416
No progressive politician in the West outside of the PIGS could openly declare themselves a marxist without it being to their careers detriment.

>even though it has been singularly responsible for more deaths than any other political movement in history

50 million indians alone died as a result of mercantilism by the British in India alone. Let alone the rest of the world.

[Anonymous No.6994049]

>>6994025
>perpetuating capitalism

No serious capitalist is in favor of the current crony capitalism. They want the market to be freer.

[Anonymous No.6994051]

>>6993981

I wouldn't necessarily call it a dystopia, but I do believe the gap between rich and poor will continue to increase.

Also there isn't actually a scarcity of resources. That's the illusion of modern capitalism.

[Anonymous No.6994054]

[Anonymous No.6994055]

>>6993416
>more deaths than any other political movement in history
saged

[Anonymous No.6994058]

>>6994046
>mercantilism
>political movement

[Anonymous No.6994059]

>>6994046
See, when someone dies due to poverty, it's not capitalism that's to blame. They just didn't work hard enough in the Nike sweatshop that pays a very generous wage of a few pennies an hour and is liable to burn down at any moment. Just prax it out, bro.

[Anonymous No.6994061]

>>6993416
It's an ideal of the weak. Instead of taking accountability or self responsibility, Marxism says you should instead blame someone else.

[Anonymous No.6994063]

I think its time to retire that trip name, or go back to /pol

[Anonymous No.6994067]

>>6994051
>Also there isn't actually a scarcity of resources. That's the illusion of modern capitalism.
>denying reality this hard

[Anonymous No.6994068]

>>6994054

That graphic convinced me he was pretty based.

[Anonymous No.6994070]

Marx was the greatest genius who ever lived.

He actually managed to write in such a way that required you to be a faggot who will inevitably believe in his bullshit to not fall asleep in the first chapter.

[Anonymous No.6994071]

>>6994005
>they too stupid to make a agriculture

[Anonymous No.6994072]

bum

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994075]

>>6994041
But you didn't provide a legit A and B. You produced some fallacy A and B then called me a retard. And now your counterargument is a fallacy because A and B and C were also fallacy. So now your A, B, C and D are all fallacies. Must feel nice being a lib

[Anonymous No.6994077]

>>6994067

>Pre-industrial revolution: 80% of people working in an agragrian capacity
>modern first world capitalist society: 2% of people work in agragrian capacity
>I'm the one denying reality.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994079]

>>6994059
yeah the people working in those sweatshops, are they under capitalist or communist regime? Maybe its because they're completely disposable to their communist country.

[Anonymous No.6994081]

>>6994068
good that's what it' sposed to do.

[Anonymous No.6994083]

>>6994075
Prove they are fallacies.

[Anonymous No.6994091]

>>6994077
You best be trolling.

[Anonymous No.6994093]

>>6994079

[Anonymous No.6994095]

>>6994079

There are no communist countries, you idiot. There are merely varying degrees of interventionism.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994098]

>>6994083
>niggerland adheres to regulated economic policies
They don't have any real economic policies, they're a bunch of dindu countries ran by dindu people who have had shitty living conditions for thousands of years because they're genetically intellectually inferior

[Anonymous No.6994099]

>>6994035
>Blatant underregulation
A characteristic of orthodox economics.

>rampant corruption
Irrelevant to the discussion, every third world country is corrupt.

>nonexistent property rights
False

>poorly enforced
In some cases, because third world countries have difficulties enforcing laws in general. Shouldn't orthodox economics prescribe the best policies given these issues though?

South east asia had the same problems in the 50's, for example, and managed to develop with other policies. What's holding african countries back?

[Anonymous No.6994100]

[Anonymous No.6994106]

>>6994051
>scarcity of resources is a capitalist lie
Holy shit, are you really stupid enough to believe that?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994110]

>>6994095
China, capitalist autocracy funded by communist slavelabor

[Anonymous No.6994121]

bump

[Anonymous No.6994124]

>>6994110

Stringing some words together doesn't change anything about reality.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994130]

>>6994124
Nig are you retard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_China
>no cumminst cuntries

[Anonymous No.6994132]

>>6994106

How much food and consumer electronics do you really need?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994144]

>>6994132
Some resources are scarce, others aren't The scarcer they are, the more expensive. For instance a bottle of wine from the 1800s. Or a small sack of gold. Or a brain surgeon. Or a pack of Oreos

[Anonymous No.6994149]

>>6994130

>They call themselves communists, ergo they are communists.

And you pretend to believe it.

[Anonymous No.6994152]

>>6994132
>mfw communism pretty much reduces down to my mommy telling me I can't have a toy at the store

[Anonymous No.6994153]

>>6994130
i guess the People's Republic of China is republican and popular then

i like you, you are managing to embarrass the entire right wing of /lit/

[Anonymous No.6994154]

>>6994132
Fun fact: we could feed everyone in the world, but business owners find it more expedient to throw food in the garbage before it expires rather than pay for transportation fees to distribute it somewhere it can be consumed. There are some places where you can go dumpster diving and find dumpsters full of perfectly good food, still in the package and fit for consumption (not yet expired).

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994157]

>>6994149
so whats real communism? abolition of any and all trade? Handing out monthly allowances as the only form of income a person has? You really think that would make the world a better place?

[Anonymous No.6994160]

>>6994154
>distribute it somewhere it can be consumed

It's almost like tariffs are bad.

[Anonymous No.6994162]

>>6994144
>>6994157
this is fucking hilarious
you are literally 10 years old, aren't you?

[Anonymous No.6994165]

>>6993435
There is no perfect system of government. How many deaths is capitalism/imperialism responsible for?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994167]

>>6994154
also, a guy with 7 billion dollars could give every perosn in the world a dollar

why would he want to do that agian?

[Anonymous No.6994170]

>>6994144

I don't disagree with that. Capitalism is pretty effective at giving us better phones, as well as certain advances in medicine (although some of these are just solving problems capitalism created in the first place, it's a bit difficult to parse.)

But in our modern society it's not like there is a scarcity of resources to the point where people should be forced to starve or even forced to work a job they really hate. They should still work a job they like working at obviously, or contribute to their community in some meaningful way (I don't think Marx would disagree with that notion.)

>>6994152

yea basically

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994175]

>>6994162
Nice marxist argument
>fucking hilarious
>lol u so stuuuuupid and immature im not gona even argue with u cuz im right 8)

[Anonymous No.6994181]

>>6994167
But you were talking about resource scarcity. I demonstrated one proof that capitalism is not the best way to allocate resources, because artificial scarcity is being created in this case in order to create profit.

[Anonymous No.6994185]

>>6994170
>in our modern society

If I have to hear this phrasing one more time I'm gonna scream.

[Anonymous No.6994186]

>>6994157

I'm not a communist. I believe a moderately regulated market system is the most efficient means of distributing a great deal of societal resources given our technological devwlopment. I think centralized distribution is both politically and mathematically untenable.

Ivm just irritated by your idiocy.

[Anonymous No.6994187]

>>6994175
You're retarded and all you want is to waste everybody's time.

[Anonymous No.6994190]

>>6994175
keep it up, my young friend, i'll be reading

[Anonymous No.6994191]

>>6994181
The point is tariffs are bad, anon.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994192]

>>6994170
then if you dont want to starve find a job, simple as that

If you cant get a job because u a nig nog who did a robbery, then you probably deserve to starve or are a homeless guy who spent all the money he begged for on alcohol

It all comes down to, get a job and work and you'll be able to eat

Not
>plz white ppl support me and stuff so i dont have to dindu nuffin

[Anonymous No.6994193]

>>6994099
>Blatant underregulation
>A characteristic of orthodox economics.
Fucking lol. Anarcho-capitalism isn't orthodox, you moron. Neoclassical economics mixed with keynsianism and monetarism is orthodox. Orthodox economic policy involves plenty of regulation aimed at stopping sources of market failure.

>rampant corruption
>>Irrelevant to the discussion, every third world country is corrupt.
Highly relevant, as orthodox economists would argue that elimination of rampant corruption is the first step to establishing a functional economy. You can't really expect the markets to work if starting a business takes years of time, countless hours, and thousands of dollars in bribes.

>nonexistent property rights
>>False
That's just wrong. All the corruption in these countries basically makes people's property rights worthless.

>What's holding african countries back?
Certainly a good question. I'd argue that it really all boils down to Europe raping the entire continent in the 19th century and then just abandoning it post WW2. That really fucked everything up nicely.

[Anonymous No.6994195]

>>6994185
In our modern society, one needs to learn to control one's temper. It's a doggy doggy world out there and guys like you are a diamond dozen.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994198]

>>6994187
Nice marxist argument
>youre retarded
>>6994190
Nice marxist argument
>you must be young because i dont like what youre saying

[Anonymous No.6994201]

I have a question, if you remove competition for money with communism don't you just create competition for something else? Like who's the sneakiest backstabbing fag?

[Anonymous No.6994202]

>>6994195

[Anonymous No.6994204]

>>6994198
Nice marxist argument.

[Anonymous No.6994209]

>>6994181
Why do shortages happen in communist systems then?

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994211]

>>6994204
>nice marxist argument
Nice marxist argument

[Anonymous No.6994215]

>>6994193
>Certainly a good question. I'd argue that it really all boils down to Europe raping the entire continent in the 19th century and then just abandoning it post WW2. That really fucked everything up nicely.

No, it's geography. There are no good harbors or shipping rivers. There's no good rain or soil. And sub-saharan Africans were about as isolated from the rest of the world as Native Americans because of an ocean on 2 sides and the Sahara to the north.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994220]

>>6994209
Because people then have no incentive to work/produce and society collapses on itself. If you know you're going to get something for free anyways, why bother working for it?

[Anonymous No.6994224]

>>6994193
>Anarcho-capitalism isn't orthodox
Never said so.

>Neoclassical economics is orthodox
Yes.

>mixed with keynsianism and monetarism
No.

>Orthodox economic policy involves plenty of regulation aimed at stopping sources of market failure.
Not really. Second best theory was orthodoxy at some point, but not anymore. Economic orthodoxy claims that government intervention usually leads to higher inefficiency (due to rent-seeking, information problems, etc.) than leaving market failures be, except in some very paricular cases.

> I'd argue that it really all boils down to Europe raping the entire continent in the 19th century and then just abandoning it post WW2. That really fucked everything up nicely.
Then why is south korea developed, when 60 years ago they were poorer than the average african country?

[Anonymous No.6994226]

>>6994201
Nobody has a motivation to do much spectacular under communism besides a gun being pointed at their head. There is no competition period.

[Anonymous No.6994227]

>>6994192

I think you are misunderstanding the argument.

It's the set of institutional arrangements that make the criminal.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994233]

>>6994227
You can blame "institutions" if you like, but actually it comes down to "free will" and the ability to discern between right and wrong

[Anonymous No.6994237]

>>6994233

Ah.

[Anonymous No.6994240]

>>6994233
You are really stupid. The law defines who is a criminal and who is not.

[Anonymous No.6994242]

>>6994233

>he believes in free will

[Anonymous No.6994248]

>>6994240
Criminality is actually defined by this, there are outliers who break the law.

[AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA No.6994249]

>>6994240
So if law didn't exist, would murder, rape, arsony, and theft still be crimes?

>>6994242
Perhaps it wasn't free will, perhaps it was Tyrones unchangable fault (and the slaveowners from 1800s fault) that he thought it would be a good idea to shoot up a duncan donuts for all the money in the register

[Anonymous No.6994250]

>>6993435
nature is responsible for trillions, therefore blow up the earth

[Anonymous No.6994252]

>>6994220
I expected a response something along the lines of state control over prices and supply causing extreme shortages. That was the case in every communist regime in the 20th century.

[Anonymous No.6994253]

>people still replying to an obvious troll thread
Come now, guys, it had a good run but it's time to stop wasting your breath.

[Anonymous No.6994254]

>>6994248
Laws against murder are the most common laws around. But the law is arbitrary. There could be a law against having brown hair.

[Anonymous No.6994261]

>>6994250
>Tu quoque fallacy

[Anonymous No.6994262]

>>6994249
>So if law didn't exist, would murder, rape, arsony, and theft still be crimes?

No. You might deem them immoral but if there is no legal system they cannot be crimes.

[Anonymous No.6994269]

>>6994262
You still might get killed for it though.

[Anonymous No.6994272]

>>6994224
>Economic orthodoxy claims that government intervention usually leads to higher inefficiency (due to rent-seeking, information problems, etc.) than leaving market failures be, except in some very paricular cases.
Only Milton Freidman argues that. Most orthodox economists don't actually agree.

>Then why is south korea developed, when 60 years ago they were poorer than the average african country?
Because the United States dumped a shitload of foreign aid into South Korea.
http://seoul.usembassy.gov/p_rok_60th_econ_18.html

[Anonymous No.6994273]

>>6994249

Tyrone is really a product of the relations of power

[Anonymous No.6994280]

>>6994269
Yes?

[Anonymous No.6994309]

>>6994272
There's barely anything of significance in that link, certainly not to explain how a country suddenly averaged 8% yearly per capita growth for two decades. In fact, african countries receive relatively a lot more foreign aid today.

Anyway, i'm already bored of this discussion, i'm just here to read the mentally challenged namefag.

[Anonymous No.6994316]

>>6993435
I'm not a Marxist, but the Nazis killed a lot more than 6 million Jews. They did start the war in Europe, after all.

[Anonymous No.6994323]

>>6993452
No, you should leave because you have nothing to contribute to the understanding of history, literature, or philosophy. Your juvenile antics aren't amusing in the least.

[Anonymous No.6994328]

>>6993416
Because you have no fucking idea what you're talking about, just spewing cold war propaganda

[Anonymous No.6994332]

>>6993416
Which ones? I don't know what you call the societies that exist only in your paranoid fantasies.

[Anonymous No.6994335]

bump

[Anonymous No.6994338]

>>6993795
>tfw no communist dad to teach you marxism and bond with over radical labor action

[Anonymous No.6994341]

>>6994323
They are actually pretty amusing.

[Anonymous No.6994354]

>>6994280
When an action generates a retaliatory response, it's already crime even though the law isn't formalized.

[Anonymous No.6994409]

>>6994332
It's not always about you, jew.

[Anonymous No.6994422]

If you're talking about the Soviet Union, then communism and socialism is not responsible for those deaths. Lenin set up the socialist revolution, but was unable to carry it out without a successor. Trotsky actually upheld Lenin and Marx's ideals, but was thrown under the bus by Stalin. Stalin rose to power and turned the USSR into a state-capitalist autocracy. If you cared to study the Soviet Union and its policies, and compared them to Marxism, you'd notice that Stalinism was by definition not socialist or communist. It was still a capitalist society that was ruled by an authoritarian dictator. Stalin came to power not because of socialism or communism, but because of an unstable political environment and a power vacuum he readily filled. This phenomenon has never been exclusive to Marxist politics and actually predates it by millennia.

Every actual socialist or communist society has been successful. Modern socialism is moreover strongly antiauthoritarian and Stalinists are rare to virtually non-existent nowadays. Most socialists advocate for a decentralized state, or no state at all, and virtually all place as radically left-libertarian (Stalin and the USSR was left-authoritarian). The sort of "true" socialism Marx described, however, is currently impossible because it requires technological automation to support a socialist infrastructure. As such, a post-scarcity socialist society is impossible so long as technology is incapable of manual labor automation.

I strongly entreat you to actually study what socialism and communism is, both in its Marxist–Leninist sense and in contemporary thought.

And btw, the death count for imperialism and Nazism—both capitalist in nature—is millions higher.

[Anonymous No.6994430]

>>6994422
>le not true communism

[Anonymous No.6994445]

>>6994430
It literally wasn't by definition. Communism as Marx described it was unfeasible because it was based on a post-scarcity, automation model. Marx knew this. Current socialism, and the socialism Marx advocated before this could be achieved, is an intermediary state between capitalism and communism.

It a bit more complex than you think. Economics always is.

[Anonymous No.6994455]

>>6994430
-hey dude, i bought a dog
-what the fuck, those animals kill thousands of people in africa every year man
-what? those are hippos, not dogs
-le not true dog
-just open a biology book and you'll see they are completely different ani...
-LE MY MAGICAL TRUE DOG

[Anonymous No.6994484]

>>6993435
*Six Million Jews in the holocaust, not counting deaths of military men fighting against the Nazis. Five million others died in holocaust that weren't just Jews, they were slavs, gypsies, etc...

[Anonymous No.6994510]

>>6994484
>not counting deaths of military men fighting against the Nazis

those were white goyim collectively responsible for the antisemitism that led to the 6 million

[Anonymous No.6994518]

>>6993795
kool pasta

[Anonymous No.6994526]

>>6993435
Almost all of which was a result of Stalin

Lenin also fucked it up too because he threw a hissy and did a violent takeover of Parliament when his party didn't win in Parliament, the USSR could have had a Parliamentary system which could have allowed some level of Civilian voice in the government and leaders would be democratically elected.

The death count of it was because of Stalin being a irresponsible-murderous asshole who loved satellite nations and Lenin not being able to tolerate not being at top

[Anonymous No.6994538]

>>6994445
You haven't addressed why you're applying a double standard in judging communism and capitalism. I could argue that capitalism that's practiced today isn't true capitalism using your logic.

>It a bit more complex than you think. Economics always is.

You can make anything complex just by adding definitions and expanding on the theory ad infinitum. Economics isn't a science. Science is complex because it has to be. Economics is complex because people deliberately made it complicated. As far as I'm concerned, the only economic theories are relevant are those that can be applied in the real world. Many people have tried to implement communism but failed. What does it tell us? It doesn't work. Too many necessary requirements that could never be fully met.

[Anonymous No.6994563]

>>6993795
>tfw your shibe starts reading gommunist manipesto

bad doge >:DDDDD

[Anonymous No.6994565]

>>6994005
Yeah bro it's so easy in Somali to just plant some corn. Don't delve into agricultural debate when you barely grasp economic ideas.

[Anonymous No.6994571]

>>6994538
I legitimately want a paper that studies why people like to talk out of their assess so much. It's baffling.

[Anonymous No.6994692]

Was was great as a critic of capitalism. I do think he came onto the world stage in regrettable circumstances as he was a political ally (in his early years) of bloodthirsty revolutionaries who were pretty much precursors to the genocidal 20th century communist and fascist regimes. I don't think he WAS one of those people, but many of his associates and collaboraters definitely were, and it has tainted his reception in some circles.

[Anonymous No.6994717]

>>6994571
I'm disappointed by the fact that so many people like expound on theories and philosophical ideas but actively avoid debate and discussion whenever disagreement arises.

[Anonymous No.6994783]

>>6994565
Yeah dude the soil in Zimbabwe suddenly became fertile when Cecil Rhodes gained power then suddenly became infertile when Mugabe gained power, completely by coincidence.

[Anonymous No.6995335]

>>6994538
No double standard is being applied. True communism—as in technologically advanced communism on a global scale—is literally impossible without automation because that is how it is defined and capable of working. Without automation, socialism is the best one could achieve. "True capitalism" has already been tried and lazzais-faire policies have always lead to amplified corruption, monopolization, and inequality. Unless you're operating under some esoteric version of capitalism with no established foundation in political theory, then it would be absurd to argue that the socioeconomic inequalities today are a result of us not engaging in true capitalism, which is the likely corollary of your point.

Your other paragraph just sounds like an argument against any and all theoretics and metaphysics. Care to dismiss the entirety of philosophy and the social sciences as well while you're at it? Your "argument" effectively does so with only a few changes in terms. If you seriously don't believe economics isn't naturally complex, then I'm not sure what to tell you. In case you weren't aware, economics is the field dealing with all trade, capital, finance, commerce, and the conditions of all the aforementioned. Economics is complex because the aforementioned—and the societies in which they are found—are complex. Regardless, that's not my point. My point was that people are oversimplifying broad socioeconomic theories because they are ignorant of what they are.

Communism has worked many times in small groups, such as the Paris Commune and many Jewish kibbutzes. It has failed to work in the large-scale because the leaders were either corrupt or special conditions precluded its success.

Go to /leftypol/ and ask them to explain why communism works. They've studied this stuff for years. Alternatively, do some reading yourself (you're on /lit/, after all) and stop basing your beliefs on your ignorance of the alternatives.

[Anonymous No.6995339]

>>6995335
>lazzais-faire
laissez-faire

I knew it didn't look right. I always spell that stupid term wrong.