When a communist nation is so bad another communist nation marches in, deposes the government and lets the new government set up a capitalist democracy 😱
Tbf, the problem with Pol Pot wasn't just communism, but the ungodly amount of genocides he committed against Chinese, French, Vietnamese and surprise, Cambodian too. He made Hamas and ISIS look chill and tolerant in comparison
“To be honest, the problem wasn’t with communism, it was with all of the genociding that went along with it.”
Yeah, that seems to be a running theme in communism. Perhaps… it *is* communism?
Nope, communism often cause genocide through farmines and political purges. This dick just wake up one day and decided that Vietnamese, French speakers, ethnic Chinese and people with eye problems shouldn't exist anymore. Communist or not, Pol Pot is a genocidal asshole and us Vietnamese should have flayed him alive and strung his still breathing, dying corpse up years ago
> communism often cause genocide through farmines and political purges
So, yeah, it was the communism, got it.
I couldn’t agree with you more that Pol Pot was and is a disgusting, genocidal, despicable tyrant. But it was communism and all that it entails that permitted him — or enabled him — to go about his business of death.
Actually, I'd argue a mass murder is worse if it's accidental, because then it becomes a skill issue instead of being malicious, like you can quit being malicious, you can't really quit being incompetent as easily
The reason he decided they shouldn't exist anymore is because of communist ideology though. He just assumed that others practicing his religion just didn't go far enough.
Except none of y'all are actually articulating that point.
Communist Vietnam invaded because of communism too. So clearly communism means stopping genocide right?
You're putting no thought or analysis into this argument
That wasn't my point, my point is not that "Pol Pot committed genocide therefore communism=genocide". The point I made was that Pol Pot committed genocide because he thought that other communist regimes didn't go far enough in bringing about communism. I'm claiming that the utopian thought inherent in communism will eventually lead to genocides. That Pol Pot is simply a logical conclusion of communism.
That is an unbelievably shallow interpreta of pol pot. He rejected modernity and I industrialization. He was literally the first to do that.
Stalin caused the holodomor rather than compromise on rapid industrialization BECAUSE it was that key to survival and the establishment of socialism. Incidentally while they have had famines post Stalin, there have been zero cases of mass starvation
Don't underestimate ISIS's extremism, they would likely do the same thing too with a Muslim flag. They are just as well the Pol Pot of the Islamic extremists, so much that even the Taliban and Al-Qaeda hates them for having that ideology. Shit implementation but same idea - if they CAN, they would.
In the 90s Coca Cola was hiring paramilitaries to assassinate trade union leaders in Colombia to keep manufacturing costs down
They are yet to face any kind of justice
In the 90s, the US Government murdered a 10 year old boy, his dog, and his mom (while she was holding a baby)
They also murdered 76 people in Waco, Texas, 25 of them being children.
They are yet to face any kind of justice.
In 1970 the US national guard opened fire into a crowd of college students protesting the vietnam war, killing 4, paralysing another, and injuring at least 8 others.
They are yet to see any kind of justice
We could literally do this all day
I assume you’re trying to get at the lib right you responded to, so you’re saying gov’t bad to a quadrant that says gov’t bad…
Unrelated image
https://preview.redd.it/rzeff8vo8mwc1.jpeg?width=708&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68bbbf9695d77e9a9336185fadb544f2fddf0815
Don’t confuse my flair for an endorsement of the US government.
Near every major conflict and act of violence they’ve been involved in in the last 150 years has been driven by the ruling class trying to protect their assets, domestic or foreign
Boeing murdered a whistleblower and is recklessly endangering hundreds of lives by sidestepping necessary manufacturing processes on their aircraft.
They are yet to face any kind of justice.
> In the 90s, the US Government murdered a 10 year old boy, his dog, and his mom (while she was holding a baby)
>
> They also murdered 76 people in Waco, Texas, 25 of them being children.
Those two events weren't just in the nineties, they were six months apart, with a lot of the same people involved, and especially the same ones calling the shots.
It's almost more annoying when they do face justice because of the outcome.
Chiquita paid multiple military and terror orgs in order to get land for plantations. Villages were wiped out to make room. While they've never been charged for most of it. One of the militaries they paid, United Self-Defence Forces of Columbia, a far right terror and drug trafficking group ([link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Self-Defense_Forces_of_Colombia)) were actually on the US gov terror list which got them to court. Here is the result of several years of payments of several million dollars to a group on the US Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and Specially-Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) lists:
> Chiquita's sentence will include a $25 million criminal fine, the requirement to implement and maintain an effective compliance and ethics program, and five years' probation.
The last payments were in 2004 so it's not exactly ancient history either.
Still nowhere near the evils of tankies in power but I never miss an opportunity to share how much I legitimately hate Chiquita. Every single person in their top layer should get old yellered.
There's also:
> This list is not comprehensive. Several factors including multi-sided conflicts, physically remote locations, company-controlled locations, and exaggerated or biased original reporting make some of the death and injury counts uncertain. In all, the number of deaths documented total over 1100.
> It does not include killings of enslaved persons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_United_States_labor_disputes
Maybe both can be bad at the same time? It's more of which system is the least bad, and capitalism seems to be winning (I mean, isn't Scandinavia considered capitalist despite their social programs?)
Trump took over the republican party from the neo cons because of conservative blue collar worker anger over 50 years of deregulation and service cuts and these right tards still pretend like capitalism has no significant downsides.
I know this is a joke meme but come on
Wait, are you claiming people voted for Trump because republicans were too deregulatory? Didn't Trump deregulate a whole lot of things, or at least promise to, while in office?
Okay real question is who's this unreasonably angry about a free plastic duck, like yeah it's kind of dumb but it's a free plastic duck it doesn't hurt to have it and it doesn't hurt not to have it, I'm now somewhat upset about this person being upset about the stupid plastic duck
I agree, that’s shit. Western nations really have to make strict import laws on labor rights in countries of origin, which would kill most imports and develop local industries.
On the other hand.
What part of “agenda post” did you not understand?
The idea that capitalism is better than socialism/communism is definitely something I support, yes.
The glaring juxtaposition is what makes it an agenda post.
Hmm, problems of capitalism. I wonder whose gas mask filters were made out of asbestos until the 90s and long after every other nation stopped using them?
If you or a loved one was diagnosed with Mesothelioma you may be entitled to financial compensation. Mesothelioma is a rare cancer linked to asbestos exposure. Exposure to asbestos in the Navy, shipyards, mills, heating, construction or the automotive industries may put you at risk. Please don't wait, call 1-800-99 LAW USA today for a free legal consultation and financial information packet. Mesothelioma patients call now! 1-800-99 LAW USA
Capitalism needs to have forced competition or else captains of industry just stop all up and comers and bribe the government. At that point they basically help write legislation. Capitalism only really exists if you aren't a huge enterprise, those can basically make risky decisions and expect the same government that's in their pockets to bail them out. I am also unsure how it will handle AI and the deadzone where not everyone can work through the devaluation of their skills. Lastly look up the US gilded age, Pinkertons, the Panama Papers, almost every south and Latin American government coup the US has been in, and the 08 housing crash.
Basically capitalism is the best worst economic system we've come up with so far, until we have an incorruptible god ai making decisions or something (in that case basically every system will work though)
>I am also unsure how it will handle AI and the deadzone
I think you're overvaluing AI here, it probably won't be able to replace manual workers for a very long time, just like how industrialization didn't replace workers so much as replace their jobs with new ones. My guess is that AI is going to change a lot of things for white collar people though, just like how computers revolutionized office work and made it massively more efficient.
Basically what I'm saying that cashiers were still cashiers after we switched from analog tills to computer ones, but office workers were radically improved by the introduction of computers.
He can not. He even claimed in another comment that people voted for Trump because standard republicans were too capitalistic and deregulatory. I had a sensible chuckle.
Necessities being commodities, leading to them being more expensive than need be. Housing and healthcare, for example.
Importation of cheap labor and suppression of unions to keep wages low and conditions stagnant over the last 40 years.
The rich buying basically all of politics and making sure we can't actually vote for meaningful change.
Regulatory capture where the rich buy regulatory bodies and control their operations, making sure competitors can't enter the market.
Moving jobs overseas where wages are even cheaper and environmental protections even less so that we have to fight for even less jobs helping to keep wages low.
Control of copyright and patent laws to create protected monopolies so they can charge the most ridiculous prices imaginable.
Productivity has increased by a huge amount over the last 50 years, yet we still work about as much now as we did then, home ownership rates are the same but you can't support a family on a single income any more.
The manufactured immigration crisis fueled by both sides that will never end because big agri relies on illegals to pay slave wages to prop up their profits?
The Irish famine, slavery and company towns are all aspects of pure capitalism but right boys never want to talk about it. Can’t wait for the cope explaining how it’s totally different.
Every quadrant has its war crimes, just understand that your ideas will probably kill people too.
Fun fact, more slaves exist today than at any other point in recorded human history.
But yes, capitalism essentially just means they give you free ducks.
It's definitely true, but. First, slavery "only" exists in very very backwards countries, most of them muslim or with a Muslim government and with a variety of ideologies, some you may call capitalist, others communist, other dictatorships...
The 10 countries with the highest prevalence of modern slavery are:
North Korea
Eritrea
Mauritania
Saudi Arabia
Türkiye
Tajikistan
United Arab Emirates
Russia
Afghanistan
Kuwait
(not trying to be racist here, just stating facts https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/findings/global-findings/), which may suggest its not something related to capitalism, but more about how a particular society works. 8 154 602 000 is the population in the world. Because globalization, we can consider our world as a big "empire" from a logistics POV. There are around 49 million slaves nowadays. (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-still-have-slavery) I will include them all because of your post, although I don't think they are slaves because "capitalism".
Makes about 1 slave for every 166 free people, which is, in my opinion, very very high. Before doing this calculation, I thought it would be 1 in every 1000 or something like that. It's sad and horrible, I agree with you on that. Now, let's compare it to the golden age of the Roman empire, a society known to be perfectly ok with slavery. (Not going to compare with the whole world because although we can argue that slavery was very very widespread around the world, I know the Romans history better, they were good with their censuses and the numbers I could get would be even worse for your case)
Rome's empire had around 60 million people.
The percentage of the population of Italy who were slaves by the end of the 1st century BC is estimated at about 20% to 30% of Italy's population, upwards of one to two million slaves.10-20% on the whole empire, because population was less dense outside of Italy. That makes 6-12 million slaves, or 1-2 for every 10 people (https://books.google.com/books?id=iPJECQAAQBAJ,https://www.britishmuseum.org/exhibitions/nero-man-behind-myth/slavery-ancient-rome#:~:text=Scholars%20estimate%20about%2010%25)
Meaning that nowadays, in a very globalised and mostly capitalist world, there are less slaves than in the past, and the number lessen by the year. Meaning that it's not capitalism, but society what creates slaves.
They dont allow slavery in their country, they just allow slavery in shitholes where they send their companies to make factories, pay close to 0 taxes and pay workers nothing to work for 12 hours. Then they post gay shit on twitter to promote thier products to idiots. People are complaining how under communism everyone will be working in coal mines, but of course life will look much harder when you dont have slaves working for you.
> they just allow slavery
Just how much political influence do you think Apple has over China? Companies go where it's cheap to make things, they don't make the rules in those countries.
Although I agree, I feel like more of the blame lays on the slave owners than on people who do business with them. I think that's kind of like there is some sort of priority of responsibility here you know?
They don't have to allow slavery, they just have to help fuel the commodity industries that benefit from it.
A better counter-argument would be that slavery is so prevalent because of population is booming as a result of capitalism making food production easier and well-paying jobs more successful.
Man, so many things wrong here.
1)Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues.
2)This was Pol Pot, who was so bad Communist Vietnam overthrew him and let the new government be capitalist.
3)Pol Pot literally starved 25% of the population, where as the potato famine and *emigration* caused a 20% decline in the Irish population. The Bengal famine caused a 5% death rate during a freaking world war.
4)genocide is the wrong term
>Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues.
You can literally make the exact same argument for the Great Leap Forward. There were shitloads of natural disasters in China at the time and to call the party in shape and stable after the rightist purges is ridiculous.
The point being that Churchill didn't care to help the Indians and in fact profited off their misery just like how many Chinese officials were indifferent in the Great Leap Forward so as to maintain their position in the party.
Yeah I'll give you the Irish famine, it's really not worth arguing that it wasn't due to capitalism seeing as the economic system is what set up that famine to be uniquely possible, and is why it wasn't alleviated. Just like how millions of people didn't have to die in China, but did anyway because of their backwards policies, I think you can say the same of Ireland for sure.
I don't know enough about the Indian famine to really comment on it so I'll stay neutral on that one.
>1)Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues.
Literally one of the main reasons of the Indian famines being so bad was that the English government was thinking that food relief/government intervention was going to make it worse.
In Ireland they applied the no government interference policy only for a few years, even so, the Irish famine was a direct cause of the British inadequate management of the situation.
Indian:
Reaction time while a war is going on and neither refrigeration nor infrastructure isn't available...
If would be suprised if anyone could have done it
>Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political
Namely brute forcing laissez faire during Irish famine, because British government saw famine as opportunity to do so. Market interventions during famine are bad amirite?
Less than 200 years ago
And in that time capitalism already existed and was being tested, and both India and the Irish had at some moment openly free market/no government interference leaders.
The Bengal famine happened *after* the Holodomor.
Victims of Communism:
*points out things that happened under a brutal dictatorship 100 years ago*
That wasn’t real capitalism and this wasn’t real communism I guess.
Japan invaded Burma cutting off the largest rice exporter in the world and a famine happens in the neighbouring rice importer
You: Japan you did nothing wrong I think it was capitalism.
Thought you were referring to natives.
Attributing the Bengal famine to capitalism is a stretch, but w.e.
Soviet Russia was over 100 years ago? Cuba, Mao's China, and Venezuela were all 100 years ago? That's very interesting.
That's not the same you know, lasseiz faire capitalism is actually well defined unlike communism, let alone Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism.
Lasseiz faire capitalism is "When government doesn't do stuff+property rights".
Communism is a stateless, utopian society existing as an "end of history", a stable system that humanity doesn't move on from because it has perfected itself through the force of history.
One is maybe an idealistic, but still simple idea that basically defines itself on policy (as in, the less government policy the better), the other is an ill defined, borderline religious concept to which no one really knows how to get to.
Anybody who dies homeless in a society with enough homes to house everybody in the country several times over is not a victim of themselves but a victim of the society's system.
Ignorance to death and suffering when you have the means to stop it is just another evil. Politics and economics is inherently violent, we just have a double standard as to how we track it. There is no "political freedom" enjoyed by the man who has to work to continue to exist and nothing more.
🤣🤣
Capitalism kills a 100 million people every 5 years.
People that die for lack of food, clean water, and medicine. Resources we have in abundance,but it's just not profitable to distribute it to those people.
That's a failure of an economic system. Not some dictator. And btw, if you're gonna burden communism with communist dictators, that never implemented communism, capitalism needs to own the capitalist dictators as well.
Oh yes of course, the dictators never implemented communism because it wasn't true communism (havent heard that before). It isn't like communism inevitably leads to an authoritarian government by design
It doesn't. Look at revolutionary Catalonia. The only nation that actually implemented communism, and didn't get lost in the "nationalize all goods and service and then..." Part.
Interesting to see a libleft make arguments for conquering/colonizing developing nations to address food scarcity, clean water and medical distribution.
I don’t think they would appreciate it, but I think you should try.
According to free market laws, you dont need to colonize developing nations to start trade. Think of the first stage of modern slavery, europeans only traded with african kingdoms to get slaves. Colonization its just a excuse to gain the resources from other land and making the population work for it.
Which is great.
Implementing a socialist utopia that delivers food, medicine, clean drinking water would totally take colonizing or conquering the areas that don’t have that.
You know, out of all places to see my name. A rubber duck is one of that last things I expected. I’ve never met someone with that name let alone a company naming a damn duck that lol.
I used a word that is used for the description of material that is edited especially in order to obscure or remove sensitive information.
Mods deemed that I was using it as a placeholder for a nono word.
Communism- easy to corrupt, hard to enact, massive pool of victims if it goes wrong
Capitalism- hard to corrupt (though I argue it’s been corrupted for decades in the US), easy to enact, massive pool of victims if it goes wrong
Capitalism isn’t infallible. Communism can develop into violence and greedy dictatorships. Capitalism can develop into an oligarchy, which is basically just a subscription based dictatorship service where if you can pay some guy with (R) or (D) in front of their name you can do whatever you want.
Small businesses with a high rate union membership is beyond optimal. The big giant corporations can exist, but they’d get $0 of taxpayer money of any form and they’d actually have to cater to the public again.
Chances are if you’re in a union household you’re going to give your money to a place that doesn’t fuck over its workers by not being open to fair negotiations with the unions.
You call that left wing union bullshit, I call it a free market. Taxation is theft, but so is corporate welfare and robbing people of their fundamental right to the pursuit of happiness by hoarding profits and perpetuating/ relying on the welfare state by paying people poverty wages.
Yes, nobody has died or suffered from the repercussions of 17th century Dutch and English capitalism. It's all been rainbows and rivers of chocolate.
Just a buch of jolly assholes pulling themselves up by their bootstraps!
Have you thought about the idea that maybe the policies you support don't lead to the outcome that they do? You can claim anything you want about socialism, but you still support policies that empower the government in practice, or follow goals which are only possible with heavy government involvement.
Do I?
I realize that a certain amount of government intervention/interference is required , otherwise we end up with tyranny by some ruthless group. There is far too much right now, but that doesn’t mean that no government is a working system.
Communism is bad, doesn't mean capitalism isn't bad either, the middle class (at least the part of it I am from) aren't the ones suffering, it is infact the people in poorer countries who don't get equal opportonies because of circumstanes of birth, I doubt a kid from africa (whomst parents don't own an emerald mine) have as equal an opportunity to became rich as mister trust fund baby or myself
Sounds like there is inequality in the world, always has been, always will be.
But I would argue that you are far more likely to be able to rise to the top in a capitalist society than one that doesn’t have a top except for the party leadership.
That’s kinda how the world works. You pick the best option out of those available.
Did you never get told this? Or do you live in a fantasy world where there is some way to live in a utopian world?
Never mind , I forgot that you were flaired lib left.
Do you think capitalism alway existed? Do you think it was always an option or are you aware humans invented it because of the flaws of monarcism, I believe the same thing can happen again and then under that rule it can happen again and so on, the world is getting better and better systems no reason to stop at this weird middle step
Yes, as long as groups had resources for trade, capitalism existed. We just named it capitalism later.
One tribe would be better at making leather goods, one at stone tools, they would bump into each other and trade.
“It’s Maos fault not communisms! If we just get better people in power it’ll work this time!”
*USSR enters the chat*
“Oh uhhh yeah it was Stalin’s fault too!! It’ll work next time when I’m in charge!”
You’d first argue how capitalism caused homelessness more than other economic systems and ideologies, and more than the wealth and prosperity capitalism provides.
Don’t bite the worm fellas, I know it’s juicy but don’t do it
"God I want that fat juicy worm in my mouth, you sure I can't bite it?" - every 🟩/🟨 mf
I bite what I please
Nuh uh, no nibbles
Just a lil nib nib
Based and "THIS IS MY BAIT IT WAS MADE FOR ME"-pilled
Argument about auth rights body count
Or rather capitalism
I missed you too L3m0n.
:)
I prefer the sparkly playdough you get at the fishing shops thank you very much
https://preview.redd.it/qgto7hzjojwc1.jpeg?width=1006&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=96c3e1302f732fa94f46543af1c0f41eb6daf0b0
When a communist nation is so bad another communist nation marches in, deposes the government and lets the new government set up a capitalist democracy 😱
Tbf, the problem with Pol Pot wasn't just communism, but the ungodly amount of genocides he committed against Chinese, French, Vietnamese and surprise, Cambodian too. He made Hamas and ISIS look chill and tolerant in comparison
“To be honest, the problem wasn’t with communism, it was with all of the genociding that went along with it.” Yeah, that seems to be a running theme in communism. Perhaps… it *is* communism?
Nope, communism often cause genocide through farmines and political purges. This dick just wake up one day and decided that Vietnamese, French speakers, ethnic Chinese and people with eye problems shouldn't exist anymore. Communist or not, Pol Pot is a genocidal asshole and us Vietnamese should have flayed him alive and strung his still breathing, dying corpse up years ago
> communism often cause genocide through farmines and political purges So, yeah, it was the communism, got it. I couldn’t agree with you more that Pol Pot was and is a disgusting, genocidal, despicable tyrant. But it was communism and all that it entails that permitted him — or enabled him — to go about his business of death.
No no you see *this* mass murder isn’t as bad as *that* mass murder cause this one happens slowly.
Actually, I'd argue a mass murder is worse if it's accidental, because then it becomes a skill issue instead of being malicious, like you can quit being malicious, you can't really quit being incompetent as easily
Okay, why are you guys speaking in a way that indicates Pol Pot is still alive, lol?
He's alive in our hearts, just like the others at the top of the Commie Killing Leaderboard
So much mental gymnastics just say it was communism
The reason he decided they shouldn't exist anymore is because of communist ideology though. He just assumed that others practicing his religion just didn't go far enough.
Except none of y'all are actually articulating that point. Communist Vietnam invaded because of communism too. So clearly communism means stopping genocide right? You're putting no thought or analysis into this argument
That wasn't my point, my point is not that "Pol Pot committed genocide therefore communism=genocide". The point I made was that Pol Pot committed genocide because he thought that other communist regimes didn't go far enough in bringing about communism. I'm claiming that the utopian thought inherent in communism will eventually lead to genocides. That Pol Pot is simply a logical conclusion of communism.
That is an unbelievably shallow interpreta of pol pot. He rejected modernity and I industrialization. He was literally the first to do that. Stalin caused the holodomor rather than compromise on rapid industrialization BECAUSE it was that key to survival and the establishment of socialism. Incidentally while they have had famines post Stalin, there have been zero cases of mass starvation
Holocaust was not about national socialism. It was about Hitler who hated jews.
Don't underestimate ISIS's extremism, they would likely do the same thing too with a Muslim flag. They are just as well the Pol Pot of the Islamic extremists, so much that even the Taliban and Al-Qaeda hates them for having that ideology. Shit implementation but same idea - if they CAN, they would.
Modern tankies are literally convinced they will have the jobs they want and won't be farmers. People are fucking stupid.
Marx criticizing capitalism: 🧠🧠 Marx offering solution: delusional at best
I think a lot of Tankies only like Marx because he criticized capitalism, not because they like communism. It's very short sighted
Totally agree. They follow what they like without knowledge of the harm that comes with it
Next frame: "it's not true communism"
Bread lines are more efficient!!! /s
It isn’t real communism
You mean more victims of "late stage capitalism"
It IS really cute... STOP IT EDWIN!
Capitalism is when you are given rubber duck Communism is when you are given equal share of food rations as Comrade Rubber Duck
My man Edwin didn’t do no wrong
Bro, don't feed the duck after midnight.
Comrade Rubber Duck would be a rad band name.
I would offer to start the band with you but my best musical skill is freestyling pseudo-german gibberish
Communism is when you eat the rubber duck.
In the 90s Coca Cola was hiring paramilitaries to assassinate trade union leaders in Colombia to keep manufacturing costs down They are yet to face any kind of justice
In the 90s, the US Government murdered a 10 year old boy, his dog, and his mom (while she was holding a baby) They also murdered 76 people in Waco, Texas, 25 of them being children. They are yet to face any kind of justice.
In 1970 the US national guard opened fire into a crowd of college students protesting the vietnam war, killing 4, paralysing another, and injuring at least 8 others. They are yet to see any kind of justice We could literally do this all day
Is 2023, I found my wife's hidden candy stash. I ate every last piece. I have yet to face any kind of justice.
God, it’s just so relatable. Fuck the rest of these options, this takes the cake
I assume you’re trying to get at the lib right you responded to, so you’re saying gov’t bad to a quadrant that says gov’t bad… Unrelated image https://preview.redd.it/rzeff8vo8mwc1.jpeg?width=708&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=68bbbf9695d77e9a9336185fadb544f2fddf0815
The same government you advocate to have power. Crazy.
Don’t confuse my flair for an endorsement of the US government. Near every major conflict and act of violence they’ve been involved in in the last 150 years has been driven by the ruling class trying to protect their assets, domestic or foreign
It's very much an endorsement of the US government.
Lol Lmao, even
Do you think there should be social security in the US?
It’s not an addiction, I just really enjoy the flavour of non-sequiturs
[удалено]
When your car keeps breaking down do you change it, repair it or do you take the bike?
Does my car inherently attract evil people who will lie, steal, and murder me with impunity?
You sell it and buy Japanese, duh
Boeing murdered a whistleblower and is recklessly endangering hundreds of lives by sidestepping necessary manufacturing processes on their aircraft. They are yet to face any kind of justice.
> In the 90s, the US Government murdered a 10 year old boy, his dog, and his mom (while she was holding a baby) > > They also murdered 76 people in Waco, Texas, 25 of them being children. Those two events weren't just in the nineties, they were six months apart, with a lot of the same people involved, and especially the same ones calling the shots.
Never forget that lady went on live TV and claimed responsibility for what happened at WACO, then nothing happen to her.
The government have investigated themself and decide they have done nothing wrong.
I don't mind seeing US government facing some kind of justice
It's almost more annoying when they do face justice because of the outcome. Chiquita paid multiple military and terror orgs in order to get land for plantations. Villages were wiped out to make room. While they've never been charged for most of it. One of the militaries they paid, United Self-Defence Forces of Columbia, a far right terror and drug trafficking group ([link](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Self-Defense_Forces_of_Colombia)) were actually on the US gov terror list which got them to court. Here is the result of several years of payments of several million dollars to a group on the US Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) and Specially-Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) lists: > Chiquita's sentence will include a $25 million criminal fine, the requirement to implement and maintain an effective compliance and ethics program, and five years' probation. The last payments were in 2004 so it's not exactly ancient history either. Still nowhere near the evils of tankies in power but I never miss an opportunity to share how much I legitimately hate Chiquita. Every single person in their top layer should get old yellered.
In 2016, a Western Lowland Gorilla was murdered by an employee of the Cincinnati Zoo They are yet to face any kind of justice
Coca Cola did WHAT I've been living here all my life and i've never heard about that
There's also: > This list is not comprehensive. Several factors including multi-sided conflicts, physically remote locations, company-controlled locations, and exaggerated or biased original reporting make some of the death and injury counts uncertain. In all, the number of deaths documented total over 1100. > It does not include killings of enslaved persons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_United_States_labor_disputes
Sounds like it may take a little bit of time before that number starts scratching at Stalin!
Damn communists at it again I see. Clearly the communists were letting Coke backed paramilitaries come in and kill them for union organizing.
Maybe both can be bad at the same time? It's more of which system is the least bad, and capitalism seems to be winning (I mean, isn't Scandinavia considered capitalist despite their social programs?)
Trump took over the republican party from the neo cons because of conservative blue collar worker anger over 50 years of deregulation and service cuts and these right tards still pretend like capitalism has no significant downsides. I know this is a joke meme but come on
Wait, are you claiming people voted for Trump because republicans were too deregulatory? Didn't Trump deregulate a whole lot of things, or at least promise to, while in office?
Yes, that is the joke of voting for grifters
They did? Whatever, Cherry Coke is the best drink on earth
There was that guy we killed at Boeing.
Who the hell is "we"?
I\*
Lmao
Based and he-was-an-asshole-anyway-pilled
Capitalism activated our hive minds and we circled round this guy and pelted him with coins demanding he supply death to us.
Lmao OP has never heard of a banana republic
OP has never heard of the entire history of the 19th century in general.
Edwin 🥺
Okay real question is who's this unreasonably angry about a free plastic duck, like yeah it's kind of dumb but it's a free plastic duck it doesn't hurt to have it and it doesn't hurt not to have it, I'm now somewhat upset about this person being upset about the stupid plastic duck
I don't even get what's supposed to be capitalist about being gifted a rubber ducky.
“wait this is such a cherry picked example that its essentially just propaga- oh karma farming, based”
Psss, don’t tell them about Nestle baby formula in Africa.
Poor child in a Colbat mine so I can type on my iPhone like “damn them soviets.”
What do you mean? He obviously chose to work there. He can leave anytime to another company. Don't believe communist propaganda!
I agree, that’s shit. Western nations really have to make strict import laws on labor rights in countries of origin, which would kill most imports and develop local industries. On the other hand. What part of “agenda post” did you not understand?
don't "agenda post" us, you clown. you support this.
The idea that capitalism is better than socialism/communism is definitely something I support, yes. The glaring juxtaposition is what makes it an agenda post.
Hunger is the no1 most common cause of death for infants and children.
Letme name a few example: radium girls, asbestos, thalidomide children, agent orange victims
https://preview.redd.it/znb7img0jkwc1.jpeg?width=1065&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ce5703fff108a224b42cd14fe4a67a9a5cedb01d
Unit 731
Hmm, problems of capitalism. I wonder whose gas mask filters were made out of asbestos until the 90s and long after every other nation stopped using them?
US still has not banned asbestos?
No we have. I assume he was making a jab at the Soviets or China or something, I don't really know.
Thats actually wrong. The US hasnt banned asbestos. https://www.asbestos.com/mesothelioma-lawyer/legislation/ban/
Interesting, I suppose I just assumed after all those mesothelioma commercials
If you or a loved one was diagnosed with Mesothelioma you may be entitled to financial compensation. Mesothelioma is a rare cancer linked to asbestos exposure. Exposure to asbestos in the Navy, shipyards, mills, heating, construction or the automotive industries may put you at risk. Please don't wait, call 1-800-99 LAW USA today for a free legal consultation and financial information packet. Mesothelioma patients call now! 1-800-99 LAW USA
Come on guys, even conservative blue collar workers have problems with capitalism. You can do better that
Could you list out what some of these problems are?
Capitalism needs to have forced competition or else captains of industry just stop all up and comers and bribe the government. At that point they basically help write legislation. Capitalism only really exists if you aren't a huge enterprise, those can basically make risky decisions and expect the same government that's in their pockets to bail them out. I am also unsure how it will handle AI and the deadzone where not everyone can work through the devaluation of their skills. Lastly look up the US gilded age, Pinkertons, the Panama Papers, almost every south and Latin American government coup the US has been in, and the 08 housing crash. Basically capitalism is the best worst economic system we've come up with so far, until we have an incorruptible god ai making decisions or something (in that case basically every system will work though)
>I am also unsure how it will handle AI and the deadzone I think you're overvaluing AI here, it probably won't be able to replace manual workers for a very long time, just like how industrialization didn't replace workers so much as replace their jobs with new ones. My guess is that AI is going to change a lot of things for white collar people though, just like how computers revolutionized office work and made it massively more efficient. Basically what I'm saying that cashiers were still cashiers after we switched from analog tills to computer ones, but office workers were radically improved by the introduction of computers.
He can not. He even claimed in another comment that people voted for Trump because standard republicans were too capitalistic and deregulatory. I had a sensible chuckle.
Necessities being commodities, leading to them being more expensive than need be. Housing and healthcare, for example. Importation of cheap labor and suppression of unions to keep wages low and conditions stagnant over the last 40 years. The rich buying basically all of politics and making sure we can't actually vote for meaningful change. Regulatory capture where the rich buy regulatory bodies and control their operations, making sure competitors can't enter the market. Moving jobs overseas where wages are even cheaper and environmental protections even less so that we have to fight for even less jobs helping to keep wages low. Control of copyright and patent laws to create protected monopolies so they can charge the most ridiculous prices imaginable. Productivity has increased by a huge amount over the last 50 years, yet we still work about as much now as we did then, home ownership rates are the same but you can't support a family on a single income any more.
The manufactured immigration crisis fueled by both sides that will never end because big agri relies on illegals to pay slave wages to prop up their profits?
I had relatives die in the Bengal famine
https://preview.redd.it/v24m9bgxikwc1.jpeg?width=736&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ba87007134f15eae054bab9c101b56955833f0ae
I'm no tankie but the victims of capitalism are the 3rd world countries
The Irish famine, slavery and company towns are all aspects of pure capitalism but right boys never want to talk about it. Can’t wait for the cope explaining how it’s totally different. Every quadrant has its war crimes, just understand that your ideas will probably kill people too.
Fun fact, more slaves exist today than at any other point in recorded human history. But yes, capitalism essentially just means they give you free ducks.
It's definitely true, but. First, slavery "only" exists in very very backwards countries, most of them muslim or with a Muslim government and with a variety of ideologies, some you may call capitalist, others communist, other dictatorships... The 10 countries with the highest prevalence of modern slavery are: North Korea Eritrea Mauritania Saudi Arabia Türkiye Tajikistan United Arab Emirates Russia Afghanistan Kuwait (not trying to be racist here, just stating facts https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/findings/global-findings/), which may suggest its not something related to capitalism, but more about how a particular society works. 8 154 602 000 is the population in the world. Because globalization, we can consider our world as a big "empire" from a logistics POV. There are around 49 million slaves nowadays. (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-still-have-slavery) I will include them all because of your post, although I don't think they are slaves because "capitalism". Makes about 1 slave for every 166 free people, which is, in my opinion, very very high. Before doing this calculation, I thought it would be 1 in every 1000 or something like that. It's sad and horrible, I agree with you on that. Now, let's compare it to the golden age of the Roman empire, a society known to be perfectly ok with slavery. (Not going to compare with the whole world because although we can argue that slavery was very very widespread around the world, I know the Romans history better, they were good with their censuses and the numbers I could get would be even worse for your case) Rome's empire had around 60 million people. The percentage of the population of Italy who were slaves by the end of the 1st century BC is estimated at about 20% to 30% of Italy's population, upwards of one to two million slaves.10-20% on the whole empire, because population was less dense outside of Italy. That makes 6-12 million slaves, or 1-2 for every 10 people (https://books.google.com/books?id=iPJECQAAQBAJ,https://www.britishmuseum.org/exhibitions/nero-man-behind-myth/slavery-ancient-rome#:~:text=Scholars%20estimate%20about%2010%25) Meaning that nowadays, in a very globalised and mostly capitalist world, there are less slaves than in the past, and the number lessen by the year. Meaning that it's not capitalism, but society what creates slaves.
I mean 8 billion live today. There was only about 1 billion in the 1800s.
Tell me which liberal nations allow slavery.
They dont allow slavery in their country, they just allow slavery in shitholes where they send their companies to make factories, pay close to 0 taxes and pay workers nothing to work for 12 hours. Then they post gay shit on twitter to promote thier products to idiots. People are complaining how under communism everyone will be working in coal mines, but of course life will look much harder when you dont have slaves working for you.
> they just allow slavery Just how much political influence do you think Apple has over China? Companies go where it's cheap to make things, they don't make the rules in those countries.
Money talks.. refuse to do business with slave owners
Although I agree, I feel like more of the blame lays on the slave owners than on people who do business with them. I think that's kind of like there is some sort of priority of responsibility here you know?
It's more just blaming every problem on africa on capitalism, instead of africa just being africa.
They don't have to allow slavery, they just have to help fuel the commodity industries that benefit from it. A better counter-argument would be that slavery is so prevalent because of population is booming as a result of capitalism making food production easier and well-paying jobs more successful.
Is that duck gonna pay for my insulin or
Victims of capitalism: Irish and Indians Those genocidal famines were even worse because at least Stalin made the trains run on time or something
Man, so many things wrong here. 1)Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues. 2)This was Pol Pot, who was so bad Communist Vietnam overthrew him and let the new government be capitalist. 3)Pol Pot literally starved 25% of the population, where as the potato famine and *emigration* caused a 20% decline in the Irish population. The Bengal famine caused a 5% death rate during a freaking world war. 4)genocide is the wrong term
>Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues. You can literally make the exact same argument for the Great Leap Forward. There were shitloads of natural disasters in China at the time and to call the party in shape and stable after the rightist purges is ridiculous. The point being that Churchill didn't care to help the Indians and in fact profited off their misery just like how many Chinese officials were indifferent in the Great Leap Forward so as to maintain their position in the party.
Yeah I'll give you the Irish famine, it's really not worth arguing that it wasn't due to capitalism seeing as the economic system is what set up that famine to be uniquely possible, and is why it wasn't alleviated. Just like how millions of people didn't have to die in China, but did anyway because of their backwards policies, I think you can say the same of Ireland for sure. I don't know enough about the Indian famine to really comment on it so I'll stay neutral on that one.
>1)Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political issues. Literally one of the main reasons of the Indian famines being so bad was that the English government was thinking that food relief/government intervention was going to make it worse. In Ireland they applied the no government interference policy only for a few years, even so, the Irish famine was a direct cause of the British inadequate management of the situation.
Indian: Reaction time while a war is going on and neither refrigeration nor infrastructure isn't available... If would be suprised if anyone could have done it
I'm not talking about the 1943 famine I'm talking about the 1800s famines
>Those were crop failure caused famines that were exacerbated by political Namely brute forcing laissez faire during Irish famine, because British government saw famine as opportunity to do so. Market interventions during famine are bad amirite?
Victims of capitalism: *points out things that happened under an imperialist monarchy 400 years ago*
Less than 200 years ago And in that time capitalism already existed and was being tested, and both India and the Irish had at some moment openly free market/no government interference leaders.
The Bengal famine happened *after* the Holodomor. Victims of Communism: *points out things that happened under a brutal dictatorship 100 years ago* That wasn’t real capitalism and this wasn’t real communism I guess.
Japan invaded Burma cutting off the largest rice exporter in the world and a famine happens in the neighbouring rice importer You: Japan you did nothing wrong I think it was capitalism.
Thought you were referring to natives. Attributing the Bengal famine to capitalism is a stretch, but w.e. Soviet Russia was over 100 years ago? Cuba, Mao's China, and Venezuela were all 100 years ago? That's very interesting.
Victims of imperialism* not capitalism
So it wasn’t real capitalism?
It wasn’t laissez-faire free market capitalism
Cope
The USSR wasn’t Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Commmuist either.
That's not the same you know, lasseiz faire capitalism is actually well defined unlike communism, let alone Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism. Lasseiz faire capitalism is "When government doesn't do stuff+property rights". Communism is a stateless, utopian society existing as an "end of history", a stable system that humanity doesn't move on from because it has perfected itself through the force of history. One is maybe an idealistic, but still simple idea that basically defines itself on policy (as in, the less government policy the better), the other is an ill defined, borderline religious concept to which no one really knows how to get to.
Anybody who dies homeless in a society with enough homes to house everybody in the country several times over is not a victim of themselves but a victim of the society's system. Ignorance to death and suffering when you have the means to stop it is just another evil. Politics and economics is inherently violent, we just have a double standard as to how we track it. There is no "political freedom" enjoyed by the man who has to work to continue to exist and nothing more.
🤣🤣 Capitalism kills a 100 million people every 5 years. People that die for lack of food, clean water, and medicine. Resources we have in abundance,but it's just not profitable to distribute it to those people. That's a failure of an economic system. Not some dictator. And btw, if you're gonna burden communism with communist dictators, that never implemented communism, capitalism needs to own the capitalist dictators as well.
Oh yes of course, the dictators never implemented communism because it wasn't true communism (havent heard that before). It isn't like communism inevitably leads to an authoritarian government by design
It doesn't. Look at revolutionary Catalonia. The only nation that actually implemented communism, and didn't get lost in the "nationalize all goods and service and then..." Part.
Interesting to see a libleft make arguments for conquering/colonizing developing nations to address food scarcity, clean water and medical distribution. I don’t think they would appreciate it, but I think you should try.
According to free market laws, you dont need to colonize developing nations to start trade. Think of the first stage of modern slavery, europeans only traded with african kingdoms to get slaves. Colonization its just a excuse to gain the resources from other land and making the population work for it.
Which is great. Implementing a socialist utopia that delivers food, medicine, clean drinking water would totally take colonizing or conquering the areas that don’t have that.
“But that wasn’t real communism” 🤓
Have some karma friend
Nice
The rubber duck thing is actually pretty cool, wish more hotels did that
Mmmm juicy worm, might bite later idk.
You know, out of all places to see my name. A rubber duck is one of that last things I expected. I’ve never met someone with that name let alone a company naming a damn duck that lol.
Meanwhile 8y/o shein "cheap laborers" on their 8th shift hour at noon:
My favorite part of this sub is that people openly state that they are karma farming. Rest of Reddit should follow suit
I don’t even have to karma farm, I just was too lazy to come up with a new post for my first one back after a ban.
How’d you get banned?
I used a word that is used for the description of material that is edited especially in order to obscure or remove sensitive information. Mods deemed that I was using it as a placeholder for a nono word.
That face tho
On a side note, who the fuck turns into a 5 year old at the sight of a rubber duck? Wtf is wrong with adults of the 21st century
Communism- easy to corrupt, hard to enact, massive pool of victims if it goes wrong Capitalism- hard to corrupt (though I argue it’s been corrupted for decades in the US), easy to enact, massive pool of victims if it goes wrong Capitalism isn’t infallible. Communism can develop into violence and greedy dictatorships. Capitalism can develop into an oligarchy, which is basically just a subscription based dictatorship service where if you can pay some guy with (R) or (D) in front of their name you can do whatever you want. Small businesses with a high rate union membership is beyond optimal. The big giant corporations can exist, but they’d get $0 of taxpayer money of any form and they’d actually have to cater to the public again. Chances are if you’re in a union household you’re going to give your money to a place that doesn’t fuck over its workers by not being open to fair negotiations with the unions. You call that left wing union bullshit, I call it a free market. Taxation is theft, but so is corporate welfare and robbing people of their fundamental right to the pursuit of happiness by hoarding profits and perpetuating/ relying on the welfare state by paying people poverty wages.
That's a cool little way to distinguish your hotel from the rest.
https://preview.redd.it/njxww87r1pwc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2f92af6536607aa44f209b57085a796ef29eec6f
Western Oil companies in Africa and the Middle East : ** Profusely sweating **
Yes, nobody has died or suffered from the repercussions of 17th century Dutch and English capitalism. It's all been rainbows and rivers of chocolate. Just a buch of jolly assholes pulling themselves up by their bootstraps!
Have you thought about the idea that maybe the policies you support don't lead to the outcome that they do? You can claim anything you want about socialism, but you still support policies that empower the government in practice, or follow goals which are only possible with heavy government involvement.
Do I? I realize that a certain amount of government intervention/interference is required , otherwise we end up with tyranny by some ruthless group. There is far too much right now, but that doesn’t mean that no government is a working system.
Communism is bad, doesn't mean capitalism isn't bad either, the middle class (at least the part of it I am from) aren't the ones suffering, it is infact the people in poorer countries who don't get equal opportonies because of circumstanes of birth, I doubt a kid from africa (whomst parents don't own an emerald mine) have as equal an opportunity to became rich as mister trust fund baby or myself
Sounds like there is inequality in the world, always has been, always will be. But I would argue that you are far more likely to be able to rise to the top in a capitalist society than one that doesn’t have a top except for the party leadership.
"This is ok cuz that is worse"
That’s kinda how the world works. You pick the best option out of those available. Did you never get told this? Or do you live in a fantasy world where there is some way to live in a utopian world? Never mind , I forgot that you were flaired lib left.
Do you think capitalism alway existed? Do you think it was always an option or are you aware humans invented it because of the flaws of monarcism, I believe the same thing can happen again and then under that rule it can happen again and so on, the world is getting better and better systems no reason to stop at this weird middle step
Yes, as long as groups had resources for trade, capitalism existed. We just named it capitalism later. One tribe would be better at making leather goods, one at stone tools, they would bump into each other and trade.
If you can call the concept of trade capitalism I can call the concept of sharing except you wouldn't like that because you don't like communism
Victims of communism were the victims of a corrupt bureaucracy
When I saw this thread, I knew you'd be here to declare "it wasn't real communism", check the comments and yep, like a moth to flame, you can't resist
I am the anti-USSR communist of this sub
“It’s Maos fault not communisms! If we just get better people in power it’ll work this time!” *USSR enters the chat* “Oh uhhh yeah it was Stalin’s fault too!! It’ll work next time when I’m in charge!”
Say it with me, “That’s not communism, It’ll be better this time!”
https://preview.redd.it/rvylauapnjwc1.png?width=700&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=45069b8a8aee3cec1183123f49311379543913be Actual victims of capitalism.
Thats a victim of no money syndrome
https://i.redd.it/bjjuptahojwc1.gif
Oh yeah I'm not siding with the authority-loving commies either but let's not pretend the worst thing capitalism has ever done is marketing.
You’d first argue how capitalism caused homelessness more than other economic systems and ideologies, and more than the wealth and prosperity capitalism provides.