/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10480838
no. at best it's "political science" which is a perfect example of humanities majors trying their darnedest to larp as scientists and not even doing it as well as psychologists

JOSEPH STALIN ON THE SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OF MARXIST, LENINIST THOUGHT:
____________________________________

Similar processes take place in nature. The history of science shows that the dialectical method is a truly scientific method: from astronomy to sociology, in every field we find confirmation of the idea that nothing is eternal in the universe, everything changes, everything develops. Consequently, everything in nature must be regarded from the point of view of movement, development. And this means that the spirit of dialectics permeates the whole of present-day science.
* * *

Everybody knows that Hegel was the father of the dialectical method. Marx purged and improved this method. The Anarchists are aware of this, of course. They know that Hegel was a conservative, and so, taking advantage of this, they vehemently revile Hegel as a supporter of "restoration," they try with the utmost zeal to "prove" that "Hegel is a philosopher of restoration . . . that he eulogizes bureaucratic constitutionalism in its absolute form, that the general idea of his philosophy of history is subordinate to and serves the philosophical trend of the period of restoration," and so on and so forth (see Nobati, 2 No. 6. Article by V. Cherkezishvili.)


We affirm that in this way they can prove nothing but their own ignorance. Pascal and Leibnitz were not revolutionaries, but the mathematical method they discovered is recognised today as a scientific method. Mayer and Helmholtz were not revolutionaries, but their discoveries in the field of physics became the basis of science. Nor were Lamarck and Darwin revolutionaries, but their evolutionary method put biological science on its feet. . . . Why, then, should the fact not be admitted that, in spite of his conservatism, Hegel succeeded in working out a scientific method which is called the dialectical method?

Diamat is literally evolution theory applied to ideas. There's zero original work behind it and it makes no sense either.

>>10480838
No. Marxism is anti-scientific.

>>10480838
No statements,no method science,no theories, no data.

Every M-List had own M-L theory, but not real M-L if fail!

>>10480902
That is completely wrong. Diamat is a methodological approach to science, not a theory in itself.
Marx worked on dialectical materialism way before Darwin published his theory, and his intent was not to "make an evlution theory of ideas" but to take what was good in Hegel's thought and put it into the real world, so to speak. That's not to say that Marx did not admire Darwin's work, he sent a volume of Das Kapital to him, signed "a sincere admirer, Karl Marx." But the evolution theory for Marx is not the foundation, it is the confirmation that he was on the right track, as he sees the same mechanisms in Darwin's theory that would arise from a dialectical approach to life.

Dialectics is a method of creating knowledge that acknowledges the interconnections that are inherent and necessary for the understanding of everything. The division of whole concepts in separate, connected yet antithetical opposites is the core of the theory, from which we can udnerstand the hostilities and therefore forces (contradictions) that are generated by the object of study.

Dialectics have the great advantage over classical analysis of being able to manage qualitative differences without a dramatic increase in complexity, though of course they do not offer the same compatibility with mathematical analysis.

>>10480968
>That is completely wrong. Diamat is a methodological approach to science, not a theory in itself.
It's a philosophy that makes predictions about nature, making it an attempt at science as well.

>>10480968
Diamat is literally a rhetorical device

>>10480982
Diamat is not a science, it's a methodology. Historical materialism is said methodology applied to human history.

>>10480998
And that's literally meaningless

>>10480838
Those are 19th century prole larpers who pretend to read original German texts and use "science" in place of wissenschaft.

>>10481013
A methodology that seeks to model reality is a science. A methodology that claims to model reality but does not is pseudoscience. See >>10480998

>>10481018
Just like diamat. Sounds neat, means precisely nothing.

>>10481020
Wissenschaft is the German word for science, fag

>>10481023
>A methodology that seeks to model reality is a science.


Horseshit.

>>10481038
So what is science?
>inb4 scientific method

>>10481023
What even is a methodology that models reality? By definition a methodology is a theoretical structure that serves as a unifying interpretative tool and epistemological device for a set of theories. Of course it contains assumptions about reality (the materialism part may give it away) but it is not by itself a science no more than positivism and fenomenology are.
>>10481026
We are reaching level of "no u" that should not be possible.
>>10481042
>science is the scientific method
I dunno, sounds debatable.

>>10481020
lmao, idiot

>>10481055
>What even is a methodology that models reality?
Going out into a unexplored jungle and simply listing the plants and animals you encounter would be a methodology that models some aspect of reality. Looking through a telescope and recording the motion of a celestial body for a very long time and simply extrapolating the data would be another method that generates a model (like Tycho Brahe and Kepler). Taking some mathematical premise for granted and testing it repeatedly against expirement would be another method (like Newton).

>>10481033
>>10481063
What I meant to say that those people use science in a way that is more proper to how Hegel and people around his time used science, not how contemporary speakers of english use science to mean natural science.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wissenschaft
>Wissenschaft is the German language term for any study that involves systematic research. The term is sometimes roughly translated as science, although Wissenschaft is much broader and includes every systematic academic study of any area, for example, humanities like art or religion.[1] Wissenschaft incorporates scientific and non-scientific inquiry, learning, knowledge, scholarship and implies that knowledge is a dynamic process discoverable for oneself, rather than something that is handed down. It did not necessarily imply empirical research.

>>10481083
I add that synthesizing from a thesis and antithesis is NOT method, more a linguistic game

>>10481083
>Going out into a unexplored jungle and simply listing the plants and animals you encounter would be a methodology that models some aspect of reality
That's neither a methodology nor a theory (which is a model of reality). It's building a catalogue.
>Looking through a telescope and recording the motion of a celestial body for a very long time and simply extrapolating the data would be another method that generates a model (like Tycho Brahe and Kepler)
Yes. You are right, but you missed the fundamental step I was trying to make you understand: from the data and some epistemological assumptions (such as said data actually represents reality and not some made up number), you create a model, or a theory, that is able to represent and predict the movement of stars. That's the theory, the methodology part comes before that.
>Taking some mathematical premise for granted and testing it repeatedly against expirement would be another method (like Newton).
Yes, a method from which you create a theory.

Thanks for agreeing with me. We can finally conclude that methodology means "the set of epistemological and methodological assumptions used to interpret and interconnect different theories" and a theory instead "a model of (part of) reality".

>>10481107
Good thing then that Marx never actually used those terms.
Also I am pretty sure you would find more than one epistemologist ready to say that science is nothing else than language.

>>10481115
Why are leftist so fucking verbose? Your entire post is "I agree." Now tell me why you think diamat is any more valid at finding true statements than "brainstorming"
>some epistomologists
have their head in their ass

>>10481115
You have no understanding of the scientific method

>>10480838
Marxism-Leninism is a branch of philosophy and economics. It's more related to the humanities than it is to science.

>>10480838
It's cancer

If it's a science, it's a science with 0 (zero) working theories

Politics as a whole is more of a humanity than a science, saying otherwise empowers people to just label humanities "social" science. Gender studies anyone?

Commies aren't people

The printing press was a mistake. It allowed for a collection of sophisticated, nefarious actors to convince European plebs to destroy their benevolent monarchies and empires, and in their place we got anti-human committees and bureaucracies that do nothing but engineer ways to create as much human suffering as possible.

>>10480838
I find this shit harder to understand than the hard sciences tbqh. I guess I'm just a fucking turbo brainlet

>>10481521
Marxism is literally the ideology of subhumans who are envious of anyone more successful than them. Whats so retarded is the ideology is literally used by the elite ruling class, and these dumb retards think by destroying the middle class and creating even more class divide, that they are elevating people.

>>10481103
I see, i misread your comment because I read the other reply to your comment first, my bad. Hegel is based.

>>10481549
>pointing out the major flaws and contradictions of capitalism means you're a subhuman
I see you haven't read more than one sentence of the Communist Manifesto

>>10481703
>pointing out the major flaws and contradictions of capitalism
Such as

>>10481703
*calls for a global, violent revolution that will never arrive*
*even LENIN abandons orthodoxy because the economics are so fucking retarded*

>>10481710
One major flaw is that wages are going down and people are working longer over time despite technology allegedly increasing the standard of living
Another being that the global poverty rate is rising over time in capitalist countries despite the liberalization of markets
Another being that the tendency of the rate of profit to fall basically makes it harder and harder to become successful over time, requiring the average person to work harder and harder to even maintain their class and also forcing the capitalist class to horde wealth to maintain it since investments stop becoming as profitable

I mean if you're a masochistic Calvinist this would sound like paradise so I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion
>>10481711
Elaborate on the economics being "so fucking retarded"

>>10481739
>economics
>Marx assumes, for some fucking reason, that value is not subjective
>Calls for the destruction of all incentive that people have to work in the first place
Let me guess: you see yourself as a champion of the working class, but you yourself have never worker or been a member of a labor union.

>>10481759
You're right anon, literally no one ever worked before the dawn of capitalism in the late 1700's
Amazing how humans even got that far just sitting on their asses

>>10481765
What in the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about YOU specifically, fag

>>10481774
So communism would destroy my incentive to work, but no one else's
I don't know that seems like a pretty moot point

>>10481103
Wow, it's almost as if ther is no real meaningful difference between humanities and STEM and its really just autismal americlaps that differentiate them, likely due to having morphed their institutions for hiring learning into wagecuck factories.

>>10481739
Stagnating wage rates are concerning I'll agree with you there, but your second point is a bit of a non-sequitur. Technology isn't allegedly increasing the standard of living, it objectively is. Unless of course you only measure your standard of living through hours worked against leisure time, which then of course you'd come to your conclusion.

I'm not very well informed on poverty rates so I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's all true. I'm not sure what you mean by liberalization of markets though.

The tendency of profit to fall is simply a fact of life and is the result of diminishing returns from any particular venture. Obviously decreasing profits in a particular field makes it harder for newcomers to become successful in that field, but this showcases the power of allocative efficiency that capital markets have. It isn't a negative thing. If profits reach 0, then it's clearly a better thing for society if we stop having people enter that market. There are better ways to use those resources.

Also your point about hording wealth is nonsense. Unless people are storing all of their cash under their mattress their wealth is being invested by banks.

>>10481780
No, it destroys everybody's will to work. Why is your reading comprehension so shit?

>>10481793
>I'm talking about YOU specifically, fag

>>10481798
>communism removes incentive to work. Let me guess, you dont work.
>so ur sayin noby worked before 1700????
>what are you talking about retard, i said you dont work
>so ur sayin it only makes me not want to work????
The only explaination is that you think competative markets did not exist before 1700, which equally makes you a retard

>>10481789
>Unless people are storing all of their cash under their mattress their wealth is being invested by banks

they store it in rent-seeking assets, which is a dead weight in economy.

>>10480838
It is like gender studies, but came earlier: basically pseudoscientific bullshit.

>>10481831
>rent seeking assets
Such as

>>10481835
land, immovable property, loans, etc. Basically risk-free investments.

>>10481855
All of those transfer his money to someone else, who will then use the money elsewhere. How does risk-free = dead weight?

>>10481855
>when somebody buys land, the money they bought it with disappears from circulation
?
The fact you said loans is an even bigger giveaway you do not know what you are talking about.

>>10480902
No it isn’t
>>10481129
high verbal, low inductive/logical-mathematical iq

>>10480838
Making a science out of political ramblings. What's next? Trumpism? Bernieism? Clintonism?

>>10481879
Not an argument. Can you answer a simple question? What predictions does diamat make/why is diamat any different from literal brainstorming?

>>10481823
Wait I do work though
Also competitive markets barely existed, unless you count a feudal lord having a monopoly over land a competitive market

>>10480838
People who don't work in the sciences but want to make themselves feel special or ad a veneer of legitamacy or dignity to their fields will append it with "Science" to make it sound good.
For instance, Political "Science", Gender Theory "Science", things like that.
Yes that is you too computer "Science"

>>10480919
cringe and furry (double cringe)

>>10481886
>Trumpism? Bernieism? Clintonism?
Only if they are as critical and dialectical as Marx is.

>>10481960
>dialectical
Meme

LMAO, Marx literally thought he was living in peak human technology. Dude was technically incompetent but thought his opinions on industry were relevant.

Marty Lenin?

>>10481521
Communism advocates for a classless and moneyless society. There are various different communist ideologies. Marxism-Leninism was the most popular communist ideology during the 20th century, and it believed a large and powerful central government was necessary for implementing communism.

it isn't a science because it killed so many people, if anything it's a science of getting the masses to kill each other in the most efficient way possible

>>10481916
>Big O complexity autism is gay communism
CS is as far removed from programming as statistics is from measure theory.

>>10481781
based
>>10481129
reread his post. you're literally retarded. constructive discussion can exist without disagreement
>>10481879
there is a reason individuals in both STEM and Humanities, i.e actually educated people opposed to pseudo-intellectuals like you self, are majorly left-leaning. you're simply wrong.
>>10481428
>pic related
>>10481549
>t. retard who has zero knowledge of Marxism.
Many of the heaviest players within Marxism actively working against their class interests as aristocrats you fucking retard. What were they wanting to take?
>envious of anyone more successful than them
What a loaded sentence. I am envious of my boss who is able to take a portion of the money my work generates merely because he owns the company I work for. Is he more successful than me? While, I'm certainly contributing more to society than he is, so that's easily arguable. Tell me this: why should we have a class that is literally useless to society exist? Is being a leech really what we should define success as? inb4 he build the company and manages it haha!!
>destroying the middle class
There isn't a middle class you fucking moron. Economic classes have nothing to do with Marxism.
>>10481521
You're not anon. Modern leftists have done a pathetic job at making it easily digestible, and original marxist texts simply weren't meant for readers today. Look into summaries of the Labour Theory of Value as a start and unironically lurk leftypol. They'll be a good way into understanding.
>>10481759
>Marx assumes
>The best-known advocates of the labor theory were Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl Marx.
(https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/labor-theory-of-value.asp))
>Calls for the destruction of all incentive that people have to work in the first place
>Commubism is when evreyone shares and u dont ahave to work LOL! Ideot idea!
>>10481710
Falling rate of profit and the contradictions it implies that have yet to be solved are a big one. See pic.

>>10482348
u literal commie bastard, stop trying to get kids into this shit

>>10482348
pic related is the extent of Marxism-Leninism "science"

>>10482530
But you have the holy clothes

you have it all

giive me some.

>>10481549
Holy shit, what a brainlet.

Every communist country gulaged/executed/exiled their elite ruling class

Why would the ruling class support an ideology completely opposed to them - an ideology that wants them at best completely stripped of all their wealth and power, and at worst hanging by a lamppost?

If they support it, why do they keep smearing it 24/7, portraying communists as Satanic demons and pure evil incarnate (muh 9999999999999999999 trillion poor innocent landlords/kulaks/bankers etc)?

>>10481521
It's not hard to understand at all. A handful of literally evil (psychopathic) billionaires pull the strings. They say "jump", and their bought politicians ask "how high?". Through their control over the media, they brainwash people with capitalist and imperialist propaganda to justify endless war and increasing exploitation. Most people in the richest country in the world are living paycheck to paycheck, yet they tolerate it because they are brainwashed with the notion that "maybe I'll be rich myself someday". Billions of people in the "third world" live lives of utter misery and hopelessness, with no hope of anything getting better, as the billionaire parasites continue amassing ever greater sums of capital.

The only solution is the liquidation of this parasitic caste, and the liberation of all of humanity. This can only be accomplished through planetary-scale armed proletarian revolution.

I'm a STEM major and it's fucking depressing how little most STEM majors know about history, philosophy, economics, political theory, etc.

Without grasping Marxist theory on a very deep level and without having a deeper purpose behind studying STEM other than impressing mom and dad, it's impossible to be a decent scientist.

If you're still a communist after age 18 it means your emotional development and mental capacity was severely stunted.
This typically goes hand-in-hand with other childhood and adolescent interests never being left behind, e.g. cartoons and video games.

>>10482603
Almost every brilliant scientist in the past 100 years was a socialist or communist.

>Albert Einstein
>Nikola Tesla
>Noam Chomsky
>Marie Curie
>Bertrand Russell
>Richard Feynman (FBI file called him "very strongly pro-Communist")
>Richard Levins (founder of modern ecology)
>William James Sidis (highest IQ ever recorded)

Can you name a single famous right-wing scientist?

>>10480838
If you like. Really they claim it as a science to siphon off the prestige of sciences like physics and chemistry. It doesn't actually matter because it's a vague word when taken broadly, and pretty much meaningless even in a specific context as it cannot be defined in a concrete, exceptionless manner. Take the content of something as it is, don't fuss over a label as a roundabout way to legitimise a fairly questionable and silly ideology.

>>10482603
>>10482615
leftwing and socialism doesn't mean muh liberal progessivism, you tard. You could easily spin many of them as 'rightwing', indeed, many unabashed socialists are rightwing overall but it doesn't even matter anyway because you're omitting context and specificity in favour of a dumb dichotomy.

>>10482615
>Literally all dead people from the early to mid 1900s and a fucking linguist
Gee I wonder why all the geniuses that favored communism were around before the whole 80,000,000 corpses and failed states

>>10482633
>muh 999999999999999999999 quadrillion poor innocent bankers and landlords

>>10482636
>kills tens of millions of illiterate peasants
>hehe...nothin personnel...Bourgeoisie

>>10482638
>kills tens of millions of illiterate peasants
Didn't happen

>>10482615
>notable chosenshitz

That's because it's easier to think freely when you have nothing binding you to the status quo. In fact, it doesn't imply anything political other than the fact that you want to be social and see equality between all kinds because they primarily don't understand why inequality has to be maintained for a net gain scenario. Right wing on the other hand implies that you have to stand for republican (at least in the US) ideals, because they're deeply rooted to the historical development of the country and its balance of powers all the way from its inception when the constitution was made. A person with liberal ideals wants some sort of equality or a way out of a situation that's bad. The reason why those jews you pointed out like these things is because they wanted to see their ideas thrive out of their uselessness, i.e. having so many ideas that they indeed get all the recognition and the result was that only the prominent ones did. If any of those scientists actually bothered doing hard labor or non-jew shit, they would switch real quick because then you're working for the system and not against it.

>>10482643
Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ, so it's no surprise they are more likely to be socialists or communists. They are also more likely to be capitalists and billionaires.

>>10482642
Oh ok
Historians = wrong
Picture made by unemployed manchildren = right
Mao: "1/10th of the peasants have to be destroyed"
You: "they simply moved to the city :^]"

>>10482651
>Mao: "1/10th of the peasants have to be destroyed"
lMao if you actually believe he said this

>>10482642
ah yes, the kulaks simply burned their own grain and went on a hunger strike to stick it to the man

>>10481862
>>10481863
These assets all carry interest or rent, which someone else has to pay for.
Whether that is consumers, employee's or employers someone has to pay the premium. By design the total interest/rent payed on the asset will be greater than the initial investment (in real terms) after x amount of years, so this represents a net drain.

You might think that this all balances out, but you have to remember that we have created globalised markets for capital.
This means that rent seeking assets represent a net flow of wealth from local economies to financial centres in a select number of countries. E.g. Wall-street, City of London, Frankfurt etc. These centres have specialised in maximising the roi (i.e. the rents/interest), so even local capitalists try to invest there instead of at home.

The transfered wealth is largely reinvested in those select economic centres and a few favored sectors (tech) in which profits (and hence roi) are still high. This creates repeated bubbles in those sectors while it becomes more expensive for other sectors to get capital.

If you want an example: (local) profits from southern Europe are being reinvested in Northern Europe, increasing competitiveness in the north and therefore increasing their trade surplus.
The lack of local capital reinvestment means that the southern countries have to apply for loans with northern banks, further draining their wealth towards the north in a vicious cycle. This kills the Greek economy.

>>10482709
tf you chauvanistic pig stop polluting this entire thread with your toxis masculinity. you go around calling people retarded but don't even care about their feelings. We could just all live in a world without money and there would be plenty of vegan and vegatable food for everybodyto trade amongst themselves but no. Nazis like you have to go around promoting genocide and mass rape in the name of science which is actually blasphemy? don't take it out on the rest of the world just because you can't grasp the idea of basic equally and even economics.

>>10482582
I'm still a student, but I'm studying for a research career in AI and statistics partially because of the good job opportunities, partially because of intrinsic interest, and partially because of what it can do for the proletariat, specifically with advancing planned economies. Marxism is one of the things that keeps me going in such a depressing field.

>>10482633
>implying Marxism-Leninism is the only form of socialism
>implying Marxism-Leninism as an ideology was at fault for the deaths that took place
Wow anon, you look really smart citing statistics that literally include Nazi deaths from when they invaded the USSR. Spend 15 minutes looking into history and theory and you'll see how incredibly misguided you are on these issues.
t. ML who was once hard right

>>10482651
>Mao: "1/10th of the peasants have to be destroyed"
And what benefit would this bring to China or Mao?

>>10482766
Fame points I guess.

>>10482662
You say this as if it isn't currently happening again https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Venezuela-Protesters-Set-40-Tons-of-Subsidized-Food-on-Fire-20170630-0017.html

>>10482766
Commies are inhuman and bloodthirsty. What more explanation do you need?

>>10480919
source

>>10482642
lol

>>10483893
malware

>>10482348
>Falling rate of profit and the contradictions it implies
Elaborate.

>an ideology know to supress science if they not conform their world view

>is scientific?

Fuking brainlets...

>>10484174
Applies to modern day liberalism more than it does the former USSR.

>>10484190
>whataboutism

>>10484229
>le meme response

>>10484255
>no argument

>>10484190
>liberalism supresss science

My fucking God, that the level of "ntelect" of a lefty minded people.

>marxists

>>10484329
Is know fact (and have studies to back that up) that people from left wing suffer from more mental illness that the avegare joe or center dude.

>>10484333
Source?

>>10484340
Do you know that furries are famous for being lefty and extreme liberal, after all, how come people can accept a dude that wants to fuck a animal in extreme conservative society?

>>10482760
Based

>>10484340
www.aryanwarrior1488.blogspot.com

>>10484347
I don't doubt that, but I actually like to see research before I believe random claims I see on this furry image board.

>>10484390

>>10484442
>commies think that guy looks cool

>>10484174
Which country got to space first I forgot

>>10484476
The first suborbital spaceflight was by Americans

>>10484442

>>10484503

>>10484390
>>10484442
>>10484503
Any more cringy leftists?

>>10480899
Dialectics is a field of study for people with a lot of time in their hands but no useful skill that allows them to be productive. It very much like memetics.
It's something for people who aren't good at math or physics or any other real science, to spend hours thinking, theorizing and doing thought experiments about, so they can convince themselves they are first grade thinkers, but that doesn't require any extraordinary talent or intellect.

No, it's a part of social science at best.

A lot of economists have written about Marx's works and most of their conclusions line up that his ideas are unfeasible and not very relevant any more. Which should be obvious to anyone thinking logically, Marx his work and statements in regards to workers owning the means of production was when we were living in a production economy. Now 70% of work is service industry, and most people owe the means by which they deliver a service. His arguments are largely irrelevant and there are better writers when it comes to attacking capital if that's what you're interested in.

Now if you want to know more about that I'd suggest to take a study in economics it's far too much to explain in a reply.

WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE

>>10480838
Karl Marx is regarded as great sociologist so if you count that as science I guess it is.

>being a commie in 2019

>>10484783
It's honestly hilarious,but then you start feeling bad for them.

>>10481549
Based poster. Why is /sci/ filled with retarded, pie-in-the-sky commies? Is it because they're mostly broke college students living on a wing and a prayer?

>>10485190
I don't know, why are so many scientists and professors in favor of socialism? May it be that it actually makes sense, since they are generally a pretty intelligent bunch?

No, says the right winger, it must be a conspiracy against the hwite man to collapse western civilization.

>>10484636
>A lot of economists have written about Marx's works and most of their conclusions line up that his ideas are unfeasible and not very relevant any more.
I believe some sort of validation is in order.

>Marx his work and statements in regards to workers owning the means of production was when we were living in a production economy. Now 70% of work is service industry
I want you to think very well about what you just wrote... Do we really not live in a production economy anymore?
Let's make a quick mental experiment: what would happen if we stopped producing shit? Would it be just a dip in the overall growth or a species ending event? Can any society, capitalist or not, survive on lawyers, teachers, physicians, office workers and costumer service alone? Or do they actually need to eat as well?

The service sector does not produce anything of value (in the economic sense, not in the sense that they are not useful), because it does not leave behind any actual product beyond the service provided. If your commodity dies the moment you produce it, you cannot accumulate it, you cannot sell it, you cannot industrialize its production. Look at the music industry, how did musicians go from the poor rejects of society and street artists to superstars? The answer is simple: recording technology, which allows musicians to "produce" in the traditional meaning.
Let's make another example: why is the healthcare industry dominated by the pharmaceutical companies and not the hospitals? Why is the former the one able to dictate policy and not the latter? Why is the power in the hands of the drug producer and not the doctor that actually administers it? Because the work of the doctor is not a commodity, it does not produce (economic) value.

>His arguments are largely irrelevant and there are better writers when it comes to attacking capital if that's what you're interested in.
Please enlighten us.

>>10484812
>>10484783
>>10484563
>>10484514
>>10484458
>>10484347
>>10484333
>>10484329
For a board dedicated to science, y'all seem content to just spew shit without any argument or evidence.

>>10485274
>scientists
yeah, the ones who died before communism failed everywhere it was implemented
>>professors
lmao, if I took some feminist liberal arts professor's opinion as meaningful i'd be sucking cock and marching for BLM right now

>>10485281
The communist experiment already happened, and it failed every time it was tied, capitalism is still going strong. It doesnt get any more scientific than that.
Meanwhile the US and other capitalist countries are doing so well that even our poor people are fat.

>>10485282
>yeah, the ones who died before communism failed everywhere it was implemented
Lol what even is this argument? "You have not lived to see the Soviet Union collapse, checkmate leftist!"
>lmao, if I took some feminist liberal arts professor's opinion as meaningful i'd be sucking cock and marching for BLM right now
Sure, in academia there are only liberal arts professors. Nothing else. Literally nothing else.

That's a whole lot of ad hominem attacks you got there. Do you have any actual argument or are you just talking to refresh your throat?
>>10485285
>The communist experiment already happened, and it failed every time it was tied, capitalism is still going strong.
The communist experiments (that did fail) were made to fail. They did not fail on their own incompetence and even if so was true, they did far more in their short existence than their capitalist counterparts did in their corresponding conditions in the same time frame.
It took a century for capitalism to bring any kind of improvement to the lives of common people, counting the dip in quality of life that immediately followed its establishment (during the wild years of the enclosure of the commons). It tood decades to communist countries to bring medieval societies into the modern world with enormous gains in quality of life, gains that in the capitalist countries workers had to fight tooth and nails to match.
>It doesnt get any more scientific than that
Do you want to get a minute to think this again?
>Meanwhile the US and other capitalist countries are doing so well that even our poor people are fat.
Yeah, the economic system that is literally destroying the capacity of the environment to support human life is going super strong, like... the strongest my dude.

>>10480838

This thread remains up while my comment >>/sci/thread/S10484619#p10484943 was pruned.

>>10485285
Nope. There were never any classless, currencyless, stateless societies founded in the 1900’s.

>>10485288
>They did not fail on their own incompetence
lmao
>even if so was true, they did far more in their short existence than their capitalist counterparts
>uses forced labor to build railroads, forces city-dwellers to work assembly lines for 12 hours a day, imposes unrealistic food quotas on the farmers, shoots them when they fail
"haha! look at how much we're accomplishing!"

>do you want to get a minute to think this again?
No. Capitalism won, communism lost.
>the economic system that is literally destroying the capacity of the environment
Soviet russia and china definitely gave a fuck about the environment, right?
spoiler: no one gives a shit about the environment except for Starbucks socialists

>>10480902
You're confusing diamat with neitzsche's genealogical method.

>>10485294
and there never will be, because it's a fairy tale ;)

>>10485302
>uses forced labor to build railroads, forces city-dwellers to work assembly lines for 12 hours a day, imposes unrealistic food quotas on the farmers, shoots them when they fail
"haha! look at how much we're accomplishing!"
Hello, where is proof?
>No. Capitalism won, communism lost.
I ain't denying it. That does not mean one is more legitimate or better than the other. Unless you have the mentality of a child.
>Soviet russia and china definitely gave a fuck about the environment, right?
The Soviet Union died before this could become mainstream issue and China is actually making a lot of progress in this regard, in fact it is fighting a severe cut in its growth rates because of their envirmonmental efforts.

But the point is not in who did what. The point is that a planned economy guided by the democratic effort of the whole population has a chance to fight climate change, because they are able to recruit and manage all of the resource of society, without internal antagonism.
A capitalist society instead, with its inherently anarchic production and profit driven logic cannot, structurally, mobilitate and coordinate the same amount of resources if not through heavy government action, which I do not believe you are for.

>spoiler: no one gives a shit about the environment except for Starbucks socialists
Sure. Remind me of this when in 20 years from now, food riots will be friday's entertainment segment.

>>10484636
"Unfeasible" is irrelevant. Most of his ideas were descriptive, not prescriptive.

>>10485319
>Hello, where is proof?
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Forced_labor_in_the_Soviet_Union
>a planned economy
lol
>guided by the democratic effort of the whole population
LOL
>has a chance to fight climate change
l o l
>because they are able to recruit
kek
>without internal antagonism
of course not, wouldnt want to get shot
>food riots will be friday's entertainment segment
this isnt a communist country, we dont fight over food, we fight over 50 inch televisions on Black Friday. Try Venezuela instead.

>>10485282
>communism failed everywhere it was implemented
imagine believing this

>>10485323
Wikipedia as source. How cute.

Anyway I like how you argue that climate change is not real, but capitalist is better at fighting it than communism. It almost mirrors the usual mental gymnastics of "I am a nazi, but I am not a Nazi, Hitler was a socialist. The holocaust did not happen and it was self defense anyway."

>this isnt a communist country, we dont fight over food, we fight over 50 inch televisions on Black Friday. Try Venezuela instead.
Sure. You fight over that now, but unregulated capitalist exploitation already caused massive damage to the ecosystem and now we are starting to feel the pressure. All major crops are dropping in productivity like flies.
As I said, 20 years from now, food riots will be the regularly scheduled friday's appointment, right after thursday's flood and wednesday's tornado.

>>10485302
>uses forced labor to build railroads, forces city-dwellers to work assembly lines for 12 hours a day, imposes unrealistic food quotas on the farmers, shoots them when they fail
You're actually describing capitalism. Since you're obviously a retard (can barely string a sentence together), you've never even heard of the enclosure of the commons, the early industrial revolution in Britain, the man-made famines in Ireland and India, etc.

>>10485334
>Wikipedia as source. How cute.
The ultimate, last resort excuse of a corner animal

^ "The Soviet Forced Labor System: an Update" (PDF). CIA.
^ a b H., Haimson, Leopold (2005). Russia's revolutionary experience, 1905-1917 : two essays. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0231132824. OCLC 56058046.
^ a b c d Hewes, Amy (1920-11-01). "Labor Conditions in Soviet Russia". Journal of Political Economy. 28 (9): 774–783. doi:10.1086/253301. ISSN 0022-3808.
^ Drascoczy, Julie (January 4, 2012). "The Put' of Perekovka: Transforming Lives at Stalin's White Sea‐Baltic Canal". The Russian Review. 71: 30–48. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9434.2012.00641.x.
^ Ellman, Michael. "Soviet Repression Statistics" (PDF). Soviet Information. Carfax Publisihing. Retrieved 20 April 2018.
^ a b Barnes, Steven A. The Gulag and the Shaping of Soviet Society. NJ: Princeton. pp. 20–23.
^ Conquests, Robert (1997). "Victims of Stalinism" (PDF). Soviet Information. Retrieved 13 April 2018.
^ a b Shearer, David R. (Summer 2015). "The Soviet Gulag—an Archipelago?". Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. 16: 711–724.
^ Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr (1973). Arkhipelag GulagAr. Paris: Seuil.
^ Barnes, Steven A. (2011). Death and Redemption: The Gulag and the Shaping of Soviet Society. Princeton, NJ & Oxford: Princeton University Press. p. 11.
^ "Collectivization". Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. 2015-06-17. Retrieved 2018-04-08.
^ Grigor., Suny, Ronald (2011). The Soviet experiment : Russia, the USSR, and the successor states (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195340556. OCLC 423388554.
^ Davies, R W. The Soviet Collective Farm 1929-1930.
^ Levesque, Jean. Exile and Discipline: The June 1948 campaign against Collective Farm shirkers. p. 13.
^ Mandelstam, N. (1971). Hope Abandoned. London: Collins Harvill. p. 301.

>>10485323
>this isnt a communist country, we dont fight over food
lmao

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/13/americas-dirty-little-secret-42-million-are-suffering-from-hunger.html
>America’s dirty little secret: 42 million people are suffering from hunger

>>10485335
>"Y-you're ackshually describing c-capitalism
pathetic

>>10485338
>Communist nations: population forced to live there, attempting to escape is illegal and will get you shot
>people still escape by any means, willing to die just for a chance to leave the shithole and go to western europe or america, will make life rafts out of fucking waterbottles to cross an ocean
>Capitalist nations: you can leave literally whenever the fuck you want, please, BE OUR FUCKING GUEST and just go to whatever communist place you want
>people stay
hmmmmmmmmm

>>10485337
>CIA
>Conquests, Robert
>Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr
>Davies, R W.
lmfao

>>10485341
>Can't refute
>Resorts to cope
Hilarious

>>10485341
Nice argument ;)

>>10485346
Pic related.

>>10485347

>>10485348
when was the last time our government put a production quota on farmers?
when was the last time you were held at gun point at the local factory?
when was the last time your entire family was sent to go build a railroad?
:D didnt think so, sweetie

>>10485350
80 year old Russians:
>I love Stalin and Communism and I wish the USSR was still around. Capitalism is terrible and destroyed our country. [literally every elderly person in Eastern Europe feels this way]

Retard 4chan NEET/boomer who's never talked to an Eastern European in their life:
>80 year old Russian: The communist regime in my country was horrific. My husband and 3 children were taken away by the secret police and I never saw them again.

>>10485354

>>10485357
>"Everything was so much better in the country I fled" says woman that fled to capitalist country

>>10485357
>violent crime was virtually nonexistent
Thanks to all of the "criminals" mysteriously disappearing overnight

>>10485356
You damn right they do.stalin murdered the shit out of anyone who didn't believe hard enough.he was literally communist Santa Claus,except everyone was naughty.

>>10485360
She fled the country when it became a shithole - the same time it switched from socialism to capitalism.

>>10485366
They became shitholes in the 70s and 80s, then panic switched to capitalism in the 90s. Take a look at a textook ;)

>>10485366
Communist countries were always shitholes.

>>10485368
>I know this because I didn't live there!
>Read this American book for proof!

>>10485366
"Although Hungary enjoyed one of the most liberal and economically advanced economies of the former Eastern Bloc, both agriculture and industry began to suffer from a lack of investment in the 1970s, and Hungary's net foreign debt rose significantly—from $1 billion in 1973 to $15 billion in 1993—due largely to consumer subsidies and unprofitable state enterprises. In the face of economic stagnation, Hungary opted to try further liberalization by passing a joint venture law, instating an income tax, and joining the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank."

>>10485370
I'm surprised you can even read.americas awesome by the way comrade.

>>10485347
This. If you think those are valid unbiased resources you are either dumb as a rock or arguing in bad faith.

>>10480838
Leninism is same science as modenr feminism a progress.

>>10485319
>in fact it is fighting a severe cut in its growth rates because of their envirmonmental efforts.
It's actually because they have a credit bubble and their yeads on the money pumped into the provinces are declining.

>>10485366
>Just 46% of hungarians approve moving from communism to capitalism
>42% disapprove of the move away from communism
>Just 46% approve
>42% disaprove
>Just
46 > 42

>The public is even more negative toward Hungary's integration into Europe; 71% say their country has been weakened by the process.

So they blame the EU, you moron. An organization that severely restrains the market with their trillions of laws in the books for the most innocuous things, like pillows and toothpaste.

Yes.

>>10485331
where did it not fail?

>>10485357
Is that why they would send people to gulags if they had been outside the Iron Curtain? So they wouldn't be able to scare people with the horrors of capitalism?
Is that why many defectors who were about to be send back to the Soviet Union often chose to kill themselves before it happened?

>>10485347
I actually know people who lived under Stalin's government. They are not very endearing about it.
Their families wanted to move as far away as possible from the URSS.
In many cases they had to fake their nationality, saying they were from Poland instead of Russia, in order to not be sent back.

>>10482348
>Economic classes have nothing to do with Marxism.

You are wrong.

>>10482603
>If you're still a communist after age 18 it means your emotional development and mental capacity was severely stunted

Propose a better economic model than "Das Kapital". You can't, because you are dumb, and Marx/Lenin were not.

>>10480838
As much as bible is proof of anything.

>>10485706
By the way, some of them have some really tragic stories.
The adoration that some people show for the Stalin regime is either out of ignorance or straight up in bad faith.

>>10485302
>No. Capitalism won, communism lost

Such a childish way of thinking.

>>10485682
Russia before 1991 revolution.

>>10485288
I have never met a hard STEM professor who was a communist.

>>10485319
>Sure. Remind me of this when in 20 years from now, food riots will be friday's entertainment segment.
>c-capitalism will collapse one day! I s-swear!
okay retard, we are all waiting

>>10485706
Tankies literally cannot respond to this
>>10485714
>Propose a better economic model than "Das Kapital"
liberal capitalism with some government oversight
*becomes the most resilient system the world has ever seen*

>>10485365
You say this as though you forgot that 1/3 of the Supreme Soviet under Stalin were not members of the Communist Party

>>10485889
Source?

>>10485904
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Soviet_Union_legislative_election
I was a little off but still is a pretty large amount of supposed dissidents in government

>>10485923
>independent
Mean they weren't affiliated officially with any party. I don't know what this is supposed to prove. Is this seriously your evidence that the USSR was not an autocratic, one-party state?

>>10485928
It was a one-party state, but the existence of independents means it wasn't autocratic
You know unless you think capitalist Russia today is autocratic too considering the overwhelming majority of the Kremlin is composed of the United Russia party

>>10485889
See >>10485687
They literally killed or imprisoned anyone with any insight on an alternative system.

>>10485941
>faced with evidence that contradicts claim
>no my claim is still right
lmao

>>10485936
>Russia today is autocratic too
Yes, it is. And it most definitely was in the 1930s, you retarded tankie

>>10480838
no ofc

>>10485951
You didn't post any evidence

>>10485951
>>no my claim is still right
It wasn't a claim. I'm simply telling you facts. I know a lot of diaspora russian people who had first hand experience with this.

>>faced with evidence that contradicts claim
I was about to refute that as well.
After the end of the empire in 1917 an interin government was instated. The idea was to have elections right then, but instead the bolsheviks took control of the government. As your source points out. The first ellection were held only 20 years after that. There were still people outside the bolshevik party in the government though. The relationship of the bolsheviks with them was one of making concessions in order to keep rivals at bay. One evidence of this is the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church was instated under the Patriachate of Moscow which is different than the traditional Russian Orthodox Church introduced by the Tsar at the time (I forgot his name).
The thing is, the bolshevik government raplaced the traditional Russian Orthodox Church (who supported the empire) with one that had allegiance to them, in order to avoid a potential population uprise, since most of Russian was Orthodox christian.
Your claim that the government had a large number of dissidents is very misleading. They were people whose insterests were, to a significant extent, aligned with the government, and who were simply playing politics in order to hold their position.

>>10485752
It didn't even last 100 years and was only kept going through brutal widescale repression, like every communist country we've seen. The collapse of the Soviet Union happened because Gorbachev toned down the repression a bit, emboldening Soviet citizens to call for democratic reforms, which Gorbachev capitulated to. That doesn't sound like a "success" to me.

>>10482582
>The only solution is the liquidation of this parasitic caste, and the liberation of all of humanity. This can only be accomplished through planetary-scale armed proletarian revolution.
That's the biggest problem with Communism; communists are never realistic about their goals. A world wide revolution will never happen. There will always countries that don't want to be communist, and then all of the capital flight that happens every time a communist revolution takes place will fly to those countries. Now the "world wide" communist union will have to invade those countries (or maybe nuke them if you don't care about the lives and resources lost). If you leave those countries be, then you will lose because Communism has always lost when in competition with capitalism. And even if the communist union succeeded in destroying the capitalist countries, they would be forced to opress their populations to prevent counter-revolutions, like every communist country in history had to.

>>10485790
>liberal capitalism with some government oversight
>*becomes the most resilient system the world has ever seen*

You didn't even answer my question.

>>10486063
>propose a better economic model than [marxist economics]
Liberal capitalism

>>10486024
>Gorbachev

Sponsored by the west to re-establish a burgeouis democracy, turning slavs into slaves (for oil export and surplus profit) once again.

Pic related, I'd call this 90's vally "population cleansing", and it is backed up by literally millions of living contemporary witnesses who saw the "free market economy" starve half the country.

Why does NATO still exist if the warsaw pact has dissolved?

Why does the US have the highest military budget on earth, more than all other countries combined?

Why is every western country billions in foreign currency debt but unwilling to pay back any?

>>10486095

Pic.

>>10486095
>Why does NATO still exist if the warsaw pact has dissolved?
Because Russia and China still exist
>US military budget
But that isn't true?
>why are western nations in debt
Because debt is an extremely useful tool. If you weren't underage and in control of of your personal finance, you would know the power of a loan.
>unwilling to pay back
? but they do pay back. Name a single time the US government didn't pay off a debt.

>>10486095
>I'd call this 90's vally "population cleansing", and it is backed up by literally millions of living contemporary witnesses who saw the "free market economy" starve half the country.
>I'd call this 90's vally "population cleansing"
You gotta be an intellectual authority to make statements like that. I can tell you are neither.
Let me dismantle your bullshit.
>pic related

>>10486063
Capitalism and nationalism.

>>10486140
>For the first 40 or so years of its existence, the USSR enjoyed a remarkable improvement in health conditions... By the early 1960's, life expectancy had caught up with that in the United States.

>tfw you post an image which actually supports the other person's argument

>>10486169
Why do communists always claim that they are the ones to bring industry? Do they really think capitalism does not ignite the growth of industry?

>>10486067
>Liberal capitalism
This is a joke, right? Most people in the richest country in the world are living paycheck to paycheck. 30 million people (10%) don't even have health insurance, which means they can die of preventable disease at any time.

>>10486185
>Most people in the richest country in the world are living paycheck to paycheck
But that isn't remotely true. The rate of poverty is decreasing globally.

>>10486095
Lmao redditor commie scumbag, off yourself

>>10486189
>The rate of poverty is decreasing globally.
Only thanks to Communist-run China. If you remove them from the equation, the poverty rate is actually increasing globally.

>>10481026
Pretty words do have meanings behind them

>>10480982
>It's a philosophy that makes predictions about nature,

Science is not just trying to understand the nature of reality, it is dong so using a specific methodology.

>... making it an attempt at science as well.

You could say that, but an attempt at science which does not utilize the scientific method is a failed attempt at science. Whether or not it is a successful attempt to understand reality using tools other than science is another question, and one not on-topic for /sci/.

>>10481042
>Anser my question, but no fair using the actual answer.

>>10481549
Like why’d you even right this? Have you read any theory ever? Go back to /pol/ for fuck sakes

>>10486169
>>tfw you post an image which actually supports the other person's argument
No it doesn't. You are not a very smart person, i'm afraid. Your reasoning skills seem to be limited to reading and interpreting one paragraph at a time, and predicating it's information on being completely dissociated from anything else.
You read one line or hear one sound byte and think you understand the whole thing.

>By the early 1960's, life expectancy had caught up with that in the United States.
>had caught up with that in the United States.
>with that in the United States.
They caught up, meaning they were trailing the capitalist world and for a brief period of time managed to catch up, no surpass.
You also forget that they had just gotten out of a war. Wars tend to strain resources and consumer's options as well as imposing a toll on the countries involved.
Also penicilin was discovered in 1928 and the first successfull treatment of a civilian using penicilin only took place in 1942. You'd assume it would take some time for it to become widely available in a country that isolates itself economically from the rest of the world.
There is also the medical discoveries that were accomplished through the nazi experiments. That would also contribute to the increase in life expectance and would only be available after the end of WW2, obviously.

>>10481855
This is why you will never be allowed to manage my investments.

>>10481549
my fucking sides

>>10486198
So what is diamat? In less than 3 paragraphs, please.
>>10486205
The scientific method is something taught to middle schoolers. Listing plants and animals you find in a new place is science, yet it does not follow the scientific method.

>>10486193
>thanks to Communist-run China
Thanks to their corporatist economic system that doesn't even remotely resemble marxism.

>>10481549
>"If I can't be rich and successful, then no one will"
That's marxism in nutshell.

>>10481759
>>10481774
>>10481793
>t. Red scared brainlet

>>10486220
>t. red

>>10486169
Also you decided to mention the one paragraph that can be misrepresented to fit your narrative while ignoring 90% of the text, including the highlighted part.
This is why your ideology only appeals to brainlets.

>>10481855
I don't see how rentseeking apply to any of those.

I also don't see how they're risk-free.

>>10486227
>This is why your ideology only appeals to brainlets
Brainlets and edgy/disenfranchised "intellectuals"

>>10484154
Still waiting on you to elaborate on your nonsense btw

>>10486210
Holy moly the mental projecting.
Your anima truly amazes me.
Is this burgeouis intelligentia at it's best?

Going back on topic, the picture clearly supports my statement multiple times, and this is because I am a personal witness. Hard to argue against reality comrades.

>>10486214
>The scientific method

Predict my next statement using the scientific method. You couldn't? You lack data and information? Oh wow welcome to the real world, I hope school was fun.

This is where diamat is strong. The very thing we do right now is already dialectics. The whole imagebord is based off of free public writing (not as a theoretical right but a public practice), which is a communist tradition compared to corporate newspapers run in the interest of capitalists in the west.

Pic related, a datzibao, newspaper written first time by ordinary workers and hanged on house walls. Would be considered "vandalism of public property" in capitalist countries.

>>10486519
What are you talking about?
What mental projecting?

This is your argument:
>Burgeouis (French word spelled wrongly)
>Intelligentia (Latin word)
You are not even competent enough to spell "bourgeois" correctly.

>Going back on topic, the picture clearly supports my statement multiple times, and this is because I am a personal witness. Hard to argue against reality comrades.
It really doesn't. In fact, the article in that pic is a literal rebutal to your statement. You just took one paragraph that doesn't even support your argument but you could spin it in a way that favors communism (if you ignore the remainder 90% of the text). As I pointed here >>10486227

>>10486214
>So what is diamat? In less than 3 paragraphs, please

Learn by yourself lazy. Some things cannot be done in 10 minutes, but only in 10 years.

>>10486550
>You are not even competent enough to spell "bourgeois" correctly.

Бypжyй. Here you are, be my guest.

>In fact, the article in that pic is a literal rebutal to your statement.

And the picture supports my statement. Words can be altered, but history itself can't. Contradictions...

>>10486169
>What are you talking about?
>What mental projecting?
>>10486169

>>10486576
>can't even answer a simple question

>>10486599
>Can't even use a search engine.

>>10486592
Is meant for
>>10486550

>>10483893
literally any marxist criticism of science

>people ITT unironically defend this

Some people are just born slaves. They will give their own life to defend their masters.

Others will risk their own life to break free of bondage, and do everything they can to free others as well.

>>10480968
Here is why this is retarded.
You observe something in nature and then you make the leap that social structures are ruled by the same laws. Then you make all kinds of convoluted points that can be corroborated or not depending on the spin you give.
One of the comparisons to science is how you can change the state of matter by applying heat. It makes a parallel to society that by creating havok you can make society change to another state. The problem is that this is not equivalent to a change in matter, since when dealing with matter you can create the precise conditions to yeald the desired result, while in a sociology framework you can't predict the results in a precise manner, and over a long timespan, the consequences become even more unpredictable.
In society, you can change the "state" in that sense with economics, engineering, but not with sociology. You can't manipulate the social dynamics the same way you can manipulate temperature and pressure to obtain the precise result you want. Sure you can cause chaos to destroy trust and make society more divided. Sure you can promote hedonism and nihilism to make people more degenerate and decrease birth rates, but you'd be just catalyzing entropy, while the aim of science is precisely the opposite, to control entropy.

>>10486583
>And the picture supports my statement. Words can be altered, but history itself can't. Contradictions...
No it doesn't.
You argument was that the change from communism to capitalism cause starvation and increase the death rates (>>10486095)

Tell me where in this picture >>10486140 that is corroborated.
Protip: The highlighted sums up the argument that directly contradicts your claim.

>>10486637
The existence of wealth inequality is not validation for your meme system

>>10486629
Still not making any sense. Why can't you be clear about what you are trying to say? I'm not gonna make your point for you.

>>10486683
Comparing dialectical materialism to science is the same as comparing the demolition of a building with a bulldozer, engineering.

>>10486695
Except it doesn't. The collapse of socialism resulted in the dismantling of the Soviet universal healthcare system, resulting in massive increases in preventable diseases. This is corroborated by your own article.

>>10486732
>demolition of a building with a bulldozer, engineering.
*to engineering.

>>10486735
No this is a claim that you are just now making.
That article points the notable success in Gorbachev's anti-alchohol campaign. Then it points that the collapse of the campaign, of the government and the break up of the Soviet Union coincided in 1988 and 1989, and progress was quickly lost. Then the decline in public health that was ALREADY occurring before Gorbachev's efforts was resumed and continued until the mid-90s.
This is corroborate by your own picture here >>10486097
You can see that life-expectancy was already declining prior the 1980s. Then in the 1980s Gorbachev lauched his anti-alcohol campaign, which increased the life expectance. Then his gov't collapsed along with the campaign and the regime, then the decline was resumed.

Here is your original claim
>Pic related, I'd call this 90's vally "population cleansing", and it is backed up by literally millions of living contemporary witnesses who saw the "free market economy" starve half the country.
You blamed the deaths on free market economy, which is precisely debunked by the article I posted.

>>10486758
>Here is your original claim
forgot to link the post >>10486095

>>10486119
>Because debt is an extremely useful tool

It is a direct sign of living off someone else's money, inassuch you could aswell argue a butler to be a very useful tool, because this is where the debt money is spent on: other people's limited labor force.

>>10486698

If science is about finding truth in the physical world, why do political "scientists" disagree on everything.

>>10486698

It is precisely what Marx has predicted in "Das Kapital". Rich getting richer by the extraction of surplus labor.

>>10486766
Yes, and?

>>10486711
Read this post again:
>>10486169

>>10486773
He reached the limit of his intellectual capabilities with posting that image.

>>10486773
The only science behind Communism is that a small group of wealthy individuals will desire to impose their own crazy tyrannical regimes upon the populace. If you want to live in a Multicultural DisneyWorld Capitalist-Communist society, be my guest

>>10486735
>The collapse of socialism resulted in the dismantling of the Soviet universal healthcare system

Lol no, it was just dismantled by liberal forces from within, paid by US capital.

It's not even a disputable question, but historical fact.

>>10486758
>You can see that life-expectancy was already declining prior the 1980s

You seem to have poor eyesight. The sharp fall of life expectancy correlates with the introduction of пepecтpoйкa politics and reaches a valley under Gorbachev/Yeltzin rule.

>>10486776
In an argument, if you wanna be taken seriously, you have to commit to your point and explain it clearly.
You can't be vague and hope people will guess what you are trying to say.

>>10486773

"Imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism" - V. I. Lenin

What you see is the right hand, the left hand is the military-industrial complex that destroys everyone it can who dares to oppose this.

Unless of course you have no problem living in a fascist nation.

>>10486799
Holy, are you mentally impaired?

Let me quote the other guy again:
>tfw you post an image which actually supports the other person's argument

What do you do on a sci board if you are unwilling to read?

>>10486773
I guess it comes down to a fundamental philosophical disagreement. If everyone in the world was able to live a decent life, I would have no problem with income inequality or even millionaires/billionaires. But that's not the world we live in today.

If you look at the graphs, you see that as the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, which indicates a hostile relationship between classes even today in the 21st century.

Hundreds of millions worldwide, and tens of millions in the US, live in poverty, without decent healthcare or education. If you don't believe in morality, think about it from a purely scientific utilitarian perspective. So many more people could increase their usefulness to the progress of civilization/humanity if they were raised out of poverty and given free college. But this can never be accomplished as long as capitalists keep rigging the system so they pay literally 0 taxes (Amazon) for example.

>>10486796
Coincides, not correlates.
This is precisely the point of the article that I posted here >>10486140
To debunk the assumption that the decline was a result of changing the system. I also, thoroughly, went over it in my previous reply.
Like I said. It was not a result of changing to a free market economy, otherwise you'd seen something similar in other countries under communism, which is not the case (see pic).

>>10486816
>>tfw you post an image which actually supports the other person's argument
Why are you still insisting on this when I already explained that it doesn't several times in these posts:
>>10486210
>>10486550
>>10486695
>>10486758

>>10486637
>” the top 1% of the 1% has more wealth than the bottom 50%! The inequality in income is awful and is killing us!”
Okay we’ll put Gates, Bezos, the Kochs and a few of their friends along with all their wealth on a boat and send them away.
>redo the math
>income inequality is now low
>America is now a utopia
Thank god retards like you can never be in charge of anything

>>10486835
You post pictures that contradict whatever you write. How am i supposed to argue against opposite opinions in unity, except for pointing at diamat rules for predicting exactly this, 130 years ago.

>>10486827

Google russian's opinion about perestroika or the 90's, most will disagree with you because they lived through liberalisation, democratisation and all the other buzzwords used to rob the people.

>>10486842

Are you implying if one king dies, the whole monarchy dies? Ever heard about heirs?

New people will replace the old, thus the problem is the system, not necessarily the current actors.

>>10486858
>system remains in place
>every time income inequality starts to rise, you send the top 1% along with their wealth away
>redo the math one more time
>income inequality is back to a low number
Hurray!

>>10486849
>You post pictures that contradict whatever you write. How am i supposed to argue against opposite opinions in unity, except for pointing at diamat rules for predicting exactly this, 130 years ago.
Then tell me what in the picture in question contratics anything I said (especially since I was relaying the point that the article itself was making).

>Google russian's opinion about perestroika or the 90's, most will disagree with you because they lived through liberalisation, democratisation and all the other buzzwords used to rob the people.
So now you entire argument is hanging on the opinion's of a group of people?
Are we also assuming that they are just gonna be upfront and blame the deaths of their love ones on alcoholism, right?
All that's left is for you to explain why the same did not happen in the other countries who made the transition from communism to free market economy.

>>10486849
>>10486872
And by the way. I don't doubt they would be discontent about the state of the economy since it led to the consolidation of a lot of Oligarchies, which were purged by putin when he got into power.
I wouldn't be happy about that either. But I wouldn't call that liberalization.

>>10486827
>to a free market

You make logical mistakes, like this one, so you naturally arrive at the wrong conclusions.

Suppose there was a free market somewhere. This would imply that supply and demand were negotiable, thus also prices.

Now when was the last time you could negotiate prices in any market in the western world?

Pay only half the price and not be arrested for theft? It does not happen, because the market is not free, nowhere.

The left argue that prices are determined by the capitalists to extract as much surplus value (not necessarily profit) as possible. This is a disputable claim, but at least it allignes much better with reality than a "free market" that capitalism is supposed to represent, according e.g. to Adam Smith.

Do you agree?

>>10486868

You seem to lack understanding of what I wrote. Income inequality is, according to left economics, a consequence of the capitalist system of production, not a consequence of a few greedy rich. Thus it continues even when the greedy rich die.

Please re-read my post.

>>10486872
>All that's left is for you to explain why the same did not happen in the other countries who made the transition from communism to free market economy.

US money. This is easy.

>>10486879
>But I wouldn't call that liberalization.

Putins politics is a step back against liberalisation as done by Yeltzin as far as I understand.

>>10486893
You seem to lack understanding of what I wrote. I said you send the rich and their wealth away when inequality rises. Then redo the math and now everyone is more equal and everything is fine and dandy.

>>10486872
>Then tell me what in the picture in question contratics anything I said (especially since I was relaying the point that the article itself was making).


>>10486872
>Then tell me what in the picture in question contratics anything

"You gotta be an intellectual authority to make statements like that. I can tell you are neither.
Let me dismantle your bullshit." is what you wrote. However, your picture starts with the sentence "(April 2000) There is good news and bad news for Russian men. The shocking increase in mortality of Russian men has reversed in the last few years. But Russia would need years to catch up [...] to levels [...] in the early 60s."

See, you are either trolling me, have not read your own source, or are mentally impaired. Your own picture disagrees with you (as other posters have pointed out).

Are you happy now?

>>10486882
This is not what the post or the picture was about but I guess I can give you my take.
I had a discussion about this topic /biz/ the other day.
The green posts are my replies.

>>10486909
Yes. But that doesn't solve the problem of wealth inequality.

>>10486607
>dude thesis antithesis lmao

>>10486923
>This is not what the post or the picture was about

This statement is wrong.
You previously wrote in >>10486827
: "It was not a result of changing to a free market economy,", to which I responded in >>10486882

Why all the lies and obfuscations?

>>10486920
How does it disagree with what I said?
Let me take you through argument, since you clearly lost track of it.
the anon >>10486095 posted:
>Pic related, I'd call this 90's vally "population cleansing", and it is backed up by literally millions of living contemporary witnesses who saw the "free market economy" starve half the country.
Then I posted >>10486140
>Let me dismantle your bullshit.
Along with pic related in that post.
Then our discussion ensued with this post of yours >>10486169

In summary, the other anon said the toll in life expectancy was due to starvation as a result of changing to a free market. The article that I posted debunks this theses. My subsequent posts rebute it further, based on what was posited in the article.

If you still think I contradicted myself then post the excerpt from the article where it corroborates the argument that the decline in life expectancy was due to starvation.

>>10486944
>Why all the lies and obfuscations?
What?? You are clearly upset by me correcting you. You don't need to be this easily offended or emotionally invested. It's usually a sign of weakness.

What I meant is that the post was not about free market in and of itself. I simply used that term because it was the term this anon >>10486095 used to describe the new system after the end of the USSR, since it was part of the same discussion.
You, then, went on to argue about question whether or not it has the foundations of a free market. And I was happy to entertain that debate, but instead of addressing my response, you decided to throw a fit.

Imagine being 21st century westerner defending a backwards, oriental authoritarian regime from the 1920s on an Argentinian spear fishing discussion channel.

>>10486988
>Along with pic related in that post

This pic related disagrees with what you wrote, stop lying and pretending it doesn't. Read again:

You gotta be an intellectual authority to make statements like that. I can tell you are neither.
Let me dismantle your bullshit." is what you wrote. However, your picture starts with the sentence "(April 2000) There is good news and bad news for Russian men. The shocking increase in mortality of Russian men has reversed in the last few years. But Russia would need years to catch up [...] to levels [...] in the early 60s."

>Then our discussion ensued with this post of yours >>10486169 #

Not posted by me.

>>10487011
They unironically think it makes them look smart and like they have some sort of secret info on how society should function

>>10487002
>What?? You are clearly upset by me correcting you.

Here is your picture again, for the n-th time.

Red: correct statements.
Blue: imaginary fairy-tale.

I am stopping here, feels like arguing with a six year old.

>>10487039

And here >>10486097 is the picture that supports the thesis of perestroika = demographic catastrophy.

Just for the special reader: when, statistical mortality goes up, statistical life expectancy goes down.

>>10487039
Ok, now i'm convinced you are ON drugs.
I said that in this post >>10486923 that was accompanied by a picture.
I was refering to THAT picture in THAT post, not one from several posts ago. But you are too much of a moron to keep up with simple things like that, aren't you?

>>10487035
>secret info on how society should function

No secret info, it's all free and public, that's the fun bit.

>>10487015
Man, you are an idiot.
No it doesn't. My entire argument was about the causes of the health decline. If you read the article beyond the point that interests you, you'd see that they mention a deterioration in public health before the 1980s, which was still during communism. Then it goes on to explain the measures taken by Gorbachev, during the regime, to reverse that. Then it shows that there were they had great results, but then the collapse of the regime precluded it from going further.

>>10487060
>I was refering to THAT picture in THAT post, not one from several posts ago

You lost all credibility right here as you are desperately trying to obfuscate the pictures.

Your post in >>10486827 links to your post in >>10486140 which contradicts your whole "let me dismantle your bullshit >pic related"

Seems like you actually met the intellectual authority for once. I don't do drugs. Good night.

>>10486772
"Surplus labor" is a service that's rendered willingly in exchange for short term payoff (in contrast to the employers long-term investment).

>>10487082
You wouldn't have problem with that if you worked a little more on your reading comprehension.
You are responding to this post >>10486923 addressing my correction of this anon's >>10486169 wrongful assessment, in a completely different discussion about a different matter (i.e. >>10487002)

When I asked if you were on drugs, I was throwing you a bone.
I thought there was a chance you were not just some slow retard.

>>10487128

1) You posted a picture that clearly supports what I claimed: Gorbachev and Perestroika reforms = hidden starvation of russians, (although with the opposite intention), starving whoknows how many people, despite stating the opposite.

2) You got called out on it.

3) You started posting random stuff and derailing this thread intentionally so as not having to admit that Gorbachev reforms starved Russias population. The reforms of perestroika can be summarized as privatisation, democratisation, libaralisation - western capitalist values applied in a short timespan led to the starvation and death of millions of Russians.

Now stop posting, you are dealing with a nuclear nation that's almost been as badly ruined as during ww2 from foreign threat, not afghan cavemen you can educate in your "reading comprehension" with cruise missles.

Here, argue with 90's Russia pictures. Soviet union gone, "free market" working wonders.

>>10487128

More 90's pictures. Endless lines for bread. Come on argue more, defend starvation for the sake of abstract foreign values.

>>10487128

Yet another pic from 1990's Russia.

>>10487173
Yes comrade, there were no food shortages in Soviet Utopia until the capitalists forced transparency ))))

>>10487128
Lines for goods, probably alcohol.

>>10487184

None postwar (afaik) until the 90s.

Pic related, probably 70-80s. Normal soviet store. Nothing great compared to western standards but pretty awesome for postwar russia.

>>10487128

I'm having "reading comprehension" problems of western postings painting a picture of 90s russia, of course better than... photography of 90s russia.

>>10487184
>transparency

Transparency as an euphemism I guess.

They had to issue food stamps again for basic goods in the 90's. The soviet union abandoned food stamps post ww2, even years before great Britain did.

>>10487169
>>10487173
>>10487181
>>10487206
We already went over this.
I bet even jerking off confuses you.

>>10487190
>Lines for goods, probably alcohol.
LOL!!!!
Reverse google search that picture and this comes up (pic related).
This was over the government passing a DRY LAW.

I swear to God. You guys are beyond shame.

Gorbachev signed a treaty for the unification of Germany and the approval of full Nato membership - an alliance against primarily the Russian people and socialism during that time, which has absolutely nothing to do with any reforms on socialism, but everything with treason.

>>10487244
Here is the source btw.
http://englishrussia.com/2015/05/07/dry-law-in-russia/

>>10487190
Pls don't delete the post, ok? I wasn't expecting this >>10487244 but it's too damm funny.

>>10487128

This is the quintessence of perestroika: Replace a highly functional government, peaceful nation leading in science, exploration of space, based on egalitarian principles (similar to France), human rights and worker's dignity... with a drunk president and a starved population, pillaged oil fields and disillusioned old ww2 veterans wondering what they defended.

>>10487252

Laugh at other people's misery as long as you have funtioning lungs.

>>10487173
>reverse search
https://pikabu.ru/story/ocheredi_v_sssr_kak_yeto_byilo_5989322

This WAS in the USSR.

>>10487169
>>10487181
>>10487190
With this one screencap your entire rhetoric falls apart.

>>10487328
The pictures were all under communism

>>10487181
Man, you truly are a joke.
Literally all sources for that pircture tells you it's from the Soviet Union.
Then you find one forum full of commie shills telling your wonderwise (https://historum.com/threads/russia-in-the-90s.100044/)) and you eagerly gobble it all up.

>>10487389
>wonderwise
otherwise*

Imagine following an ideology that would make your parents ashamed

>>10487401
That didn't stop fags.

>>10487406
>implying it's more embarrassing to be gay

>>10485357
My dad who lived under communism (hoxhist albania) described it exactly the same way ie low unemployment, guaranteed healthcare, no crime at all since they publicly hung criminals (and only required 1 policeman for every town). He missed all those things even to this day. However he also described the downside of the regime like poor food supply, virtually no cars (except for party officials), no diversity in the marketplace since the state promoted 'self sufficiency' etc. He told me that while dissidence and civil liberties were curtailed, most people didn't have as much of an issue with it as it seems now since they were mostly law abiders and were more worried about their material needs rather than critiquing the government (which would've improved their situation if not for the state imprisoning them). Even though he had moments of happiness in his life under communism, the society he lived in was utterly dejected and he was better off moving out of that shithole and into a modern capitalist economy.

>>10485729
a childish way of thinking is pretending you won the game and mommy agreeing with you because she doesn't want to see you cry and grief about being a loser
a childish way of thinking is resorting to excuses when confronted with the reality that you lost the game
a childish way of thinking is repeatedly challenging the winner because that last time 'wasn't fair' or 'I wasn't trying'

>>10485729
This post demonstrates that commies don't care about real life results, proving their worldview is antithetical to science.

>>10487516
Leftism is just is an outlet for the weak to exercise their yearning for autonomy in this world. They are not after truth or the best outcome.

>>10484442
>>10484503
>>10484514

"Proponents of your ideology are ugly, and therefore incorrect."

""""""""/sci/""""""""

>>10487573
>t. some ugly faggot who clings to edgy politics
Only failures are drawn to the far left/right

>>10487573
This thread doesn't even belong on /sci/ anyway. I bet every poster here is a /pol/ crossboarder trying to spread their bullshit around the site.
t. /k/ommando. You learn to spot them pretty well when your board is constantly under siege by them.

>>10487578
It actually started pretty IT, but then the conversation, as always, degenerated.

it's an art comrade

>>10486931
The triad is a meme that hegel called schematic and kant got mad at fichte for doing

>>10487482
He would only be better off in a modern capitalist economy if he had some valuable skills, like medicine. Otherwise, he would join the million of minimum wage slaves that make up the underclass in capitalist society.