Post by videogames in [#CommunismIsEvil] - How about you work in the fields.

🤭 Fuck Capitalism Jam 2023 🤭 » Community

Viewing post in [#CommunismIsEvil] - How about you work in the fields.

Whenever you criticize capitalism, that's the first thing they say: "What about communism?" "Communism is just as bad." Then they go on to list all the genocides caused by communism. They'll also include the death count in case the word "genocide" wasn't unpleasant enough. Listen, I don't live under a rock. I know what communism is and how people have given it a whirl, to mixed results. I know how well communism pairs with genocide like the steak and wine eaten so voraciously by some girthy capitalist who made his fortune exploiting his employees. The good news is there are other alternatives to capitalism besides the genocide one.

I think socialism might be ok. I've been watching some videos about socialism by the Second Thought YouTube channel. While at first it seems like some commie propaganda, you start warming up to it when it offers reasonable solutions to all these issues caused by capitalism. Why is American healthcare so expensive yet the quality is the worst out of all other industrialized nations? Because a for-profit healthcare system places profits over people. Always has. Making healthcare to be affordable and accessible to everybody will improve the lives of the nation's people regardless of how profitable it will be for some shareholders. That's just one example of where capitalism fails and where an alternative would be more suitable. Capitalism is not human nature. When you see a person choking on some food, do you think about the cost to profit ratio for saving them or do you Heimlich them? We all know what capitalism would do.

YDrone1 year ago(+2)(-2)

Socialism is the process of building communism. It is a transitional phase. There is still a class struggle, but the state is already in the hands of the working class. You cannot build socialism. You can either build communism or go back to capitalism. Building socialism is like being half pregnant. Building socialism and class peace is a fairy tale for the poor.

"I know how well communism pairs with genocide like the steak and wine..." The Communists never carried out genocides. If you mean the Red Terror, it was a backlash of White Terror under extremely difficult conditions of intervention and civil war. The number of victims of these measures is usually grossly overstated. The capitalists, on the other hand, have no conscience at all. They are willing to destroy millions of people for the sake of their power and their profit.

If you want to delve into this subject, read the classics: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao. Trotsky is a traitor. I suggest you start with someone else. Engels, for example. He writes in an interesting, lucid, humorous way.

All Marxists study philosophy, history, economics as a basis. By the way, this subject is much easier and interesting than it seems. Especially if one does not study alone, but in a Marxist circle.

videogames1 year ago(+1)

Hey I'd love to learn more about communism. What are some things you like about Mao and Stalin (e.g. ideas, theories, policies)? What do you think about Pol Pot?

YDrone1 year ago(+2)(-1)

Stalin and Mao were communists. Their ideas were those of Marx and Lenin: dialectical materialism, working class leadership, social ownership of the means of production, planned economy, internationalism.

Pol Pot was not a communist. He himself wrote that his ideas had nothing in common with those of Marx. Because of this, he made many political mistakes in trying to solve Cambodia's problems. But he was not the bloody dictator that propaganda tries to present him as. The United States dropped a lot of bombs on Cambodia. They destroyed an already weak economy and filled the fields with mines and chemicals. There was a severe famine in Cambodia. Plus Cambodia had great internal conflict between the rich cities and the poor countryside.

Collapse, famine, internal conflicts, and a politician who made mistakes. Hence so many deaths. 170 thousands according to the CIA. And yet the main cause of these victims was the bombings, not Pol Pot.

To briefly describe these people would require a large article or a lecture.

Deleted post1 year ago

Deleted 1 year ago

Wowthatsbad1 year ago (2 edits) (+2)(-2)

stalin and mao are both fighting against genocide in their position if you really know what's going on. mao is the direct reason why china didnt turn into a shithole like cambodia. go read their letters and proposals and stop eating things that invested youtubers vomit out. you're literally one typical brainwashed by the mass media industry of capitalism. ffs at least search "true stalin" or "stalin: what they don't teach you in school" on youtube and read resources that come from another side, then stop being a one-sided maniac like a nazi.

Deleted post1 year ago

Deleted 1 year ago

Wowthatsbad1 year ago (3 edits) (+1)(-2)

go check who actually led the great leap forward and who proposed to stop the national purge. ffs just read. or are you anti-intellectual? does it burn when books touch your hand?

u actually succeed in driving me mad. I want some intellectual discussion on this, not some barbarian kicking down the door and rushing in to show the poop he just scooped from his brains. just block me if you hate reading materials

Deleted post1 year ago

Deleted 1 year ago

Wowthatsbad1 year ago (4 edits) (+1)(-2)

the stalin constitution literally gave the workers power of free speeches to criticize government activities and bureaucrats and even remove them from their position. anyone who dont let the people talk will immediately be purged from the party. there're tons of example cases in history that you can find. mao went even further allowing the people to overthrow local government and party section by fucking force(yeah people organized armies to fight against official troops), waging war against corruption and priviledge by mobilizing a down-top revolution. this is just what cultural revolution was all about. they executing oppositions? here's a historical fact. stalin proposed to strengthen the power of oppositions in the party, so that there'll be more chance for the party to review itself and fix mistakes. the central committe which denied 70% of stalin's proposals, denied it too with a democratic voting. they executing dissidents?what the fuck? are you living in an alternative universe? if you dont read please stop sending nonsense messages. it only shows your ignorance and stupidity.

View more in thread

YDrone1 year ago (1 edit) (-2)

"And you also downplay Pol-Pots genocide, of course"

I don't agree that Pol Pot carried out genocide. Because he didn't. When Cambodia went into famine, people from the villages started arriving in the cities. But there was no food in the cities either. Then people began to be driven back to the villages, where there was little food, but it was there. Many died on the way. Well, what else was Pol Pot supposed to do? Let people starve to death in the cities? And it was the U.S. bombing that caused the famine. Or am I wrong and will you tell us the truth? And what does this have to do with Pol Pot? Where were his policies consistent with Marxist theory?

"And both committed genocide lol""

Give me at least one example of a genocide committed by Stalin.

Deleted post1 year ago

Deleted 1 year ago

Tae Fennec1 year ago

interesting point

who toppled the Khmer rouge?

YDrone1 year ago (2 edits) (-2)

Here is the text from this article:

"The Cambodian genocide was the systematic persecution and killing of Cambodian citizens by the Khmer Rouge under the leadership of Communist Party of Kampuchea general secretary Pol Pot, who radically pushed Cambodia towards an entirely self-sufficient agrarian socialist society."

Now let's read Stalin:

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/03/x01.htm

"Let us first deal with the point that in introducing socialism, the Socialist-Revolutionaries want to begin with the countryside. Is this possible? Everybody knows that the town is more developed than the countryside, that the town is the leader of the countryside, and, consequently, every activity for socialism must begin in the town. The Socialist-Revolutionaries, however, want to convert the countryside into the leader of the town and to compel the countryside to begin introducing socialism, which of course is impossible owing to the backwardness of the countryside. Hence, it is obvious that the 'socialism' of the Socialist-Revolutionaries will be stillborn socialism."

Stalin wrote about the mistakes of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, but it is also true of Pol Pot. Here we see that Pol Pot, with his agrarian socialism, has clearly departed from Marxism. I see no point in digging deeper into the subject now and parsing the whole wikipedia article.

Deleted post1 year ago

Deleted 1 year ago

YDrone1 year ago

Well, yes, the fundamental question here is whether or not a politician who calls himself a communist is building communism. This is the basis of Marxism. Many people call themselves communists, but to understand who is a real communist, you have to study the theory. This is very important, because it determines what kind of policies these people will pursue. Of course, only real communists will fight fully for the interests of the workers. The rest will either start making mistakes, like the Utopian Communists, or limit themselves to half measures and preserve capitalism (Menshevism), or pursue capitalist and sometimes nationalist policies, using Marxism for populist purposes (most current legal Communist parties do this). There are also the more cunning ones. They will mimic real communists until the revolution wins, and after the victory they will engage in power struggles and the restoration of capitalism. This is the most vile kind of politician from the point of view of Marxism. This is called Trotskyism.

MCL Software1 year ago(-3)

While at first it seems like some commie propaganda

That's because it is.

Capitalism is not human nature. When you see a person choking on some food, do you think about the cost to profit ratio for saving them or do you Heimlich them?

If I don't know that person then I have no reason to care about his life or whether he dies, other than potential financial gain.

Tae Fennec1 year ago(+2)

>I have no reason to care about his life or whether he dies, other than potential financial gain.

Yikes

Wowthatsbad1 year ago(+2)(-1)

the original statement was bad anyway, being based on so-called ethics. the most basic reason capitalism isnt human nature is that this system was literally grown just two centuries ago. it wasnt there in the first place, and human has no reason to stop there.

MCL Software1 year ago(-1)

I highly recommend you think about what you would do in a situation like that before judging others.

YDrone1 year ago (1 edit)

The fact that it's communist propaganda doesn't mean it's false.

"When you see a person choking on some food, do you think about the cost to profit ratio for saving them or do you heimlich them?"

Most likely, you will show humanity and save a person choking on some food. But will you save the hungry people who come to your bakery without money?

Why don't they have any money? Their factory was bought by a competitor and closed, for example. All the businesses in town depended on that factory. Now people can't find jobs and they don't have money to go somewhere else or start something new.

Or another example, you built a house. There are 100 apartments in it. You sold 50 apartments, and 50 apartments are left empty. There are 1,000 families in your town who need their own place to live, but they don't have enough money. Will you donate the remaining 50 apartments to the needy in an act of humanism?

Let me put it this way, it's not even about you, whether you're a fair person or not. The capitalist system is set up so that the hungry don't get food, even if there is food. The homeless live on the street, even if there are empty apartments. And workers can't find work even if they want to work.

You might think that people must be saved by the state. There is some truth in that. Under capitalism, the state acts in the interest of the capitalists (national or foreign, or transnational). If the capitalists are interested in saving people, the state will save people. If not, it will leave people to their fate. Of course, the human factor may come into play here, but both in favor of the people and against them. Also, the working class can influence the state by achieving partial improvements for itself, but if it stops fighting, it loses those gains.

MCL Software1 year ago(-1)

The fact that it's communist propaganda doesn't mean it's false.

Never in my post did I say it's false.

Most likely, you will show humanity and save a person choking on some food

No, I won't. If I don't have a financial incentive, then I won't.

You might think that people must be saved by the state.

No, I do not think that either.

Most of your "arguments" are just putting words into my mouth that I did not say.

Blowsta1 year ago(+1)

Maybe you are just a horrible human being

MCL Software1 year ago(-1)

Or maybe I just see things rationally

videogames1 year ago

Would you rather be a game developer or be a male prostitute? Let's say male prostitutes make a higher salary than game developers. If it makes more money to jerk off some punks under a bridge than it does to make a computer game then why not be a male prostitute? It would be irrational not to jerk off punks under a bridge since the financial incentive would be greater. I'm not disparaging male prostitution as a profession - people have to make a buck. I just want to illustrate that there are other factors besides financial incentive which motivate us.

Certanly not Stuff1 year ago(-1)

"Would you rather be a game developer or be a male prostitute? "

Depends on the kinds of clients I get

itch.io

Viewing post in [#CommunismIsEvil] - How about you work in the fields.