The richest 1% emit as much planet-heating pollution as two-thirds of humanity. Eliminating capitalism and billionaires it produces is the only way to start meaningfully addressing the crisis.
The richest 1% emit as much planet-heating pollution as two-thirds of humanity. Eliminating capitalism and billionaires it produces is the only way to start meaningfully addressing the crisis.
You're viewing a single thread.
Okay, and replace it with what, exactly?
What do you mean 'replace them with what'? What vital role do you think they're playing now?
They're nothing but parasites.
You said replacing "capitalism," okay, with what? Other have responded with their take, already. So you do not have to.
Are you going to answer my question or not?
It's not up to you to decide how many people can reply to your comment. Don't post on a public forum if you don't want to be interacted with.
Initially socialism, and then communism in the long run. The only sane approach is to have worker ownership of the means of production.
Is there an example in history where this has attempted and implemented as such and not devolved into straight up persecusion, authoritarianism, cult of personally or tens+ of millions dead? And general lower standards of living to most, outside the party or political class like the Politburo? Could not find any. The Nordics and Canada are capitalistic with some social services. They seem to have a good valance but that is only because the USA military protects them out of geopolitical interests.
I am all good with say, limiting wealth of the rich, they can be rich but not stupifyingly rich and some socialised healthcare and the like. Coming from a third world, I have seen that abolishing private property is just oppression with extra steps, overtime. Most 1st world people have no idea of what they are asking and of how it devolves, in practice.
In your mind, how would workers "own" the means of production? Shares? Votes?
Is there an example in history where this has attempted and implemented as such and not devolved into straight up persecusion, authoritarianism, cult of personally or tens+ of millions dead?
That's literally every single example in the real world example of communist revolutions. Standard of living improves for the majority as people get jobs, education, food and housing as a right. It's incredible that people continue to repeat these tropes that have been debunked many times without a hint of embarrassment.
Could not find any.
Then you obviously haven't bothered actually looking.
The Nordics and Canada are capitalistic with some social services. They seem to have a good valance but that is only because the USA military protects them out of geopolitical interests.
Not only is this blatantly false, but the meager standard of living the working majority in these countries enjoys is built on brutal colonialism and exploitation of the global majority.
In your mind, how would workers “own” the means of production? Shares? Votes?
In my mind, the workers would own the means of production through a combination of state owned enterprise and cooperative ownership of the private businesses. This is not rocket science. How cooperatives and state owned enterprise work in practice is well documented.
They are tropes because they literally happened. How many millions died due to famines or ideological persecutions say, Russia, China or Khmer Rouge? Please, provide a number.
Are you going to claim that current China is not a surveillance State, on top of that? With property that can only be owned for 50 years and homeless outside main cities? I mean, I could go on and on, video does exist of this. The point is that I have looked. To say that some of these regimes did not have at least some positives is silly, simply put, the positives in most cases do not outweigh the oppressive, propaganda State negatives.
Dude, I lived in Canada, know people in the Nordics, I know what I am talking about. You are wrong. Saying it is "false" does not cancel reality. Most Canadians enjoy a standard of living higher than 90% of the rest of the world in the aggregate. I lived in a major city and got tired of the cosmopolitan living and moved a small city, I look into a river every morning. I am not rich, albeit a bit lucky.
In general, the Nordics have it better. You should go visit Iceland, albeit it is expensive, but at least you are not going to risk getting robbed as you would in many parts of Mexico or Honduras. Colonialism is a silly claim, all human beings, and most civilizations have done this since the beginning of time, just colonizing each other over resources. You think the while folk invented this? It has been done by all, often brutally. Did you think the Mongols, the British of the Muslims during the early Islamic conquests got where they get through hugs and kisses? Alexander the Great got to India by whispering sweet nothings into the armies they destroyed along the way? Surely. Africa and the Americas were killing each other all the time and had slaves before any white person got there. Who do you think sold black people to the Europeans? Other black people.
My point is that the Nordic countries can afford to have socialized services because they enjoy the protection of USA imperialistic or militaristic hegemony. Never said that was a good thing, nevertheless, that is just the current reality. They do not have to worry about paying for large standing armies because the USA would not allow it. Since it is simply not in their best geopolitical interest. Same reason why Costa Rica or Panama do not need large armies, either.
In a true Communist state, as in like what Stalin wanted and aimed for, there was no room for private enterprise. Mao and current China has their fingers into all so-called private companies. Not really private, really. What if your name is Jack Ma, and are a full blown billionare, and get a bit lippy in the wrong think, you just disappear for 3 months to be, straighten out. So, not sure if that is really "private."
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64781986
Cooperatives operating in a capitalistic environment, is very different than one existing under a Marxist or Communistic one. I mean, I cannot believe that this has to be stated. So, no, your answer is as vague as every other communist/marxist/socialist/etc that I have honestly asked, who themselves usually throw all the tropes of some type of communist paradise that has never existed in the form they suggest, while ignoring major aspects of history, the human condition and how said humans actually work and exist because we are all very different people. With different abilities, and qualities and many do not like to play communism or Marxism. I mean, Marxist and more specifically Leninists do know this, otherwise, they would not have invented the underhanded concept of Vanguard parties in order to manipulate the populace in a particular direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism
What is not rocket science is what has been done historically, and of how badly treated and persecuted people who did not want to LARP with their communist-minded citizens or who were found guilty of wrong-think. These stories can be found throughout most of the 20th century in Russia and Eastern Europe and, behind what we would call the iron curtain and China and elsewhere.
I was honestly asking a question, which you could have answered in good faith, rather than coming off defensively as if I had not done my homework. You do not know what I know, so you should perhaps not assume, friend. Keeps conversations better. Would you wager to try again?
They are tropes because imbeciles keep repeating them. Both Russia and China had massive famines happening before the revolution, and these famines were the very reason why revolutions happened. However, life expectancy rapidly improved after revolution both in Russia and China.
USSR doubled life expectancy in just 20 years. A newborn child in 1926-27 had a life expectancy of 44.4 years, up from 32.3 years thirty years before. In 1958-59 the life expectancy for newborns went up to 68.6 years. the Semashko system of the USSR increased lifespan by 50% in 20 years. By the 1960's, lifespans in the USSR were comparable to those in the USA:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Soviet_Union
- https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB5054/index1.html
Quality of nutrition improved after the Soviet revolution, and the last time USSR had a famine was in 1940s. CIA data suggests they ate just as much as Americans after WW2 peroid while having better nutrition: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp84b00274r000300150009-5
Between 1950 and 1980, China experienced the most rapid sustained increase in life expectancy of any population in documented global history. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25495509/
So right out of the gate we've already established that you're just regurgitating nonsense here, and spreading misinformation.
Are you going to claim that current China is not a surveillance State, on top of that?
Are you going to claim that Canada is not a surveillance State, on top of that?
With property that can only be owned for 50 years and homeless outside main cities?
The fact that people aren't allowed to hoard property is the very reason why 90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes
Seems like a far better situation than we have in Canada to me.
Most Canadians enjoy a standard of living higher than 90% of the rest of the world in the aggregate.
Ah yes, a standard of living built on the genocide of the local population and brutal colonialism around the world. Go read up on what horrors Canada is responsible for in Africa as an example. Yet, despite that, over half the population in Canada is living on subsistence wages https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/more-than-half-of-canadians-200-away-or-less-from-not-being-able-to-pay-all-of-their-bills-1.6473939
In general, the Nordics have it better.
In general, Nordics are colonialist nations exploiting the global south. I guess people like you don't give a shit about the suffering that goes into propping up your life style. Fuck everyone else as long as you got yours.
Colonialism is a silly claim, all human beings, and most civilizations have done this since the beginning of time, just colonizing each other over resources.
That's the dumbest attempt to try and justify the fact that your lifestyle is built on repression and exploitation said without a hint of embarrassment.
My point is that the Nordic countries can afford to have socialized services because they enjoy the protection of USA imperialistic or militaristic hegemony.
They can afford it because US imperialism allows them to plunder the global south today at gunpoint.
My point is that the Nordic countries can afford to have socialized services because they enjoy the protection of USA imperialistic or militaristic hegemony.
LMFAO imagine thinking that's a bad thing.
Cooperatives operating in a capitalistic environment, is very different than one existing under a Marxist or Communistic one.
That's true, it's an inferior model to have cooperatives within the deplorable system of capitalism.
So, no, your answer is as vague as every other communist/marxist/socialist/etc that I have honestly asked, who themselves usually throw all the tropes of some type of communist paradise that has never existed in the form they suggest, while ignoring major aspects of history, the human condition and how said humans actually work and exist because we are all very different people. With different abilities, and qualities and many do not like to play communism or Marxism. I mean, Marxist and more specifically Leninists do know this, otherwise, they would not have invented the underhanded concept of Vanguard parties in order to manipulate the populace in a particular direction.
How to say you've never read a book in your life. Here are a couple of more books you'll never read that describe in detail the things you claim never existed.
- https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/130389319-this-soviet-world
- https://redletterspp.com/products/the-east-is-still-red
What is not rocket science is what has been done historically, and of how badly treated and persecuted people who did not want to LARP with their communist-minded citizens or who were found guilty of wrong-think. These stories can be found throughout most of the 20th century in Russia and Eastern Europe and, behind what we would call the iron curtain and China and elsewhere.
Meanwhile, the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, far higher than China and on top of it practices literal slavery https://indi.ca/how-america-still-has-slavery/
I was honestly asking a question, which you could have answered in good faith, rather than coming off defensively as if I had not done my homework. You do not know what I know, so you should perhaps not assume, friend. Keeps conversations better. Would you wager to try again?
You ask a question in bad faith, and you've exposed yourself to be aggressively ignorant on a subject you're attempting to debate. The factually wrong statements you've made very clearly show what you don't know, and the fact that you have absolutely no interest in actually learning or understanding the subject. It's pretty obvious that this discussion isn't going to go anywhere as you'll just keep repeating the same talking points. You're not being very original here. All of you anticommunists use exact same script.
And general lower standards of living to most, outside the party or political class like the Politburo?
Do you actually, literally believe that the standard of living was lower for regular people in the USSR (the world's first spacefaring nation, at the time the second most powerful country in the world, a country that eliminated famines completely once they'd dealt with the consequences of WW2, a country where by the 80s, people were twice as likely as a modern American to take a vacation away from home) than for peasants in the Russian Empire?
Are you being deliberately dishonest or are you just completely ignorant about the topic in spite of speaking so authoritatively about it?
What "I" believe is irrelevant. History is the point. So yes, tens of millions died during Communism. If you are focusing on Russia, sure, let's go there. First and foremost, during the later part of the 20th century until the Fall, Russian was essentially a corrupt, authoritarian State. This is widely known. Plus, I have old Russian friends who lived there, so I will certainly trust them over some possible ideologue on the internet. You know that living while you are concerned of being on the States radar over wrong think is not necessarily something that I would call a quality life. I have Romanian friends whose parents lived under the shadow of communist, oppressive propaganda and forced group think. Russia is not unique but they were one of the most forceful. One of the things that many pro-Communists never like to talk about was what happened to the people who society who did not want to LARP along. Generally they were re-educated or considered traitors or enemies of the State. Feel free to look it up.
Regarding vacations, makes sense that since you were seen like a cog in a machine, that for most, vacations, mandated by the State would be given generally, all at once and time off depended on a number of factors. https://www.rbth.com/history/334213-soviet-union-month-vacations Worth noting that the above is a Pro-Russian site, so there is bound to be some bias.
Found this person who claims that some type of vacations given to workers would be booked, group vacations. Not my idea of a vacation, however, if you ask me.
https://reddit.simo.sh/r/AskHistorians/comments/pejfni/i_am_an_average_soviet_citizen_who_wish_to_go_on/ So, no, more time off is not necessarily the only metric that should matter.Secondly, millions died due to political persecutions, like in the Great Purge, at least 1.2+ million Kulaks, just to mention one. Their crime being only slightly better off plebs. On top of that millions of others died of famines, in order to get the USSR "going." Same happen under Mao, in fact way more died under Mao as they too played the class game as to label citizens into different bins. They called them the 5 different black categories, partly borrowed from the Russian approach. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Black_Categories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge https://allthatsinteresting.com/how-many-people-did-stalin-kill https://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/world/major-soviet-paper-says-20-million-died-as-victims-of-stalin.html https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2010/09/naimark-stalin-genocide-092310
The presumption that I would be dishonest is silly and reeks to bad faith. Do not just try to cherry pick a time period for what seems to be benefit. How many millions dead over governmental ideology shift does the US have? Also, would you not say that the standard of living in say, the USA was superior in the aggregate to Russia's during the same time period, or would you deny that?
Friend the ignorant here seems to be you. Cheers.
Plus, I have old Russian friends who lived there, so I will certainly trust them over some possible ideologue on the internet.
The vast majority of Russians who actually lived in the Soviet Union regret its fall, your friend's are outliers. This information is easy to find if you do literally any research.
One of the things that many pro-Communists never like to talk about was what happened to the people who society who did not want to LARP along. Generally they were re-educated or considered traitors or enemies of the State.
Oh wow, the state imprisoned people that didn't follow laws and otherwise threatened it? That might be uniquely concerning if every single human society in history didn't do that.
Feel free to look it up.
Regarding vacations, makes sense that since you were seen like a cog in a machine, that for most, vacations, mandated by the State would be given generally, all at once and time off depended on a number of factors.
Most Americans do not get a vacation at all, which group is getting treated like a cog in a machine again?
Worth noting that the above is a Pro-Russian site, so there is bound to be some bias.
"Here's a source I am using to make an argument, but if you find anything contradictory to my argument in this source, it doesn't count."
Then don't link the site.
Found this person who claims that some type of vacations given to workers would be booked, group vacations. Not my idea of a vacation, however, if you ask me.
The sort of vacation I take, and that most Americans take, is that we either can't afford to travel even domestically so we take a few days off here and there to catch up on housework or we work somewhere that doesn't even offer vacation time and we just take zero days off through the year.
Your idea of a vacation sounds like pampered shit that has only even been available to the most privileged. Of course you prefer this highly stratified and brutal society, you benefit from it.
So, no, more time off is not necessarily the only metric that should matter.
One, it's a hugely important one when discussing the quality of life of a typical citizen.
Two, it wasn't the only thing we were discussing. Are you really not understanding that most regular Americans can't afford to travel anywhere?
Secondly, millions died due to political persecutions, like in the Great Purge, at least 1.2+ million Kulaks, just to mention one.
Nazi sympathizers and famine opportunists aren't gonna get much sympathy from me.
Their crime being only slightly better off plebs.
You're leaving out the part where they destroyed crops and livestock during a famine because they were upset they couldn't price gouge their neighbors who were starving to death.
On top of that millions of others died of famines, in order to get the USSR "going." Same happen under Mao, in fact way more died under Mao
Oh wow, millions died of famine in the early USSR? Tell me, prior to the USSR (which, remember, this argument started because you claimed that things were not better in the USSR than they had been in the fucking Russian Empire), how often did they have famines? About once a decade right?
There were three famines in the Russian Empire in the 20th century. The Russian Empire existed for less than two decades in the 20th century.
Same story with China. The communists came in and put a stop to the famines. You're mad that it didn't happen instantly in the aftermath of a giant civil war, or when the whole planet invaded them, or when the Nazis were ravaging their country. Once they got a moment's peace the famines stopped and never returned.
The presumption that I would be dishonest is silly and reeks to bad faith.
Nah, liberals constantly make dishonest arguments in bad faith. You might just be extremely bad at critical thinking, I guess, and not dishonest at all.
Do not just try to cherry pick a time period for what seems to be benefit.
The last famine was in the immediate aftermath of WW2 and then famines didn't reoccur for the remainder of the Soviet Union's existence.
Who's cherry picking?
How many millions dead over governmental ideology shift does the US have?
Millions of native Americans, millions due to deprivation and deaths of despair (including famines, see the dust bowl), millions due to foreign wars of aggression, millions due to poor conditions in the American prison (slave camp) system, millions due to the ripple effects of our actions wrt "foreign policy."
The US is one of the most evil empires in history. It's obviously killed a massive number of people.
Also, would you not say that the standard of living in say, the USA was superior in the aggregate to Russia's during the same time period, or would you deny that?
Probably but you're leaving a lot out by painting with such a broad brush.
-
the US was geographically isolated and mostly untouched by WW2. While we sent away ships of Jews and considered whether or not to enter the war at all, the Nazis were ravaging Russia with a genocidal war of aggression. The consequences would ripple for decades.
-
Superior for who? I would say not for Native Americans, and not for Chinese rail workers, and certainly not for black people, and not for women who wanted to go to university, and not for striking mine workers being gunned down by Pinkertons.
-
American wealth came from plundering the rest of the world abroad, and theft of land and slavery at home. If you are okay with unspeakable cruelty you can really pile up some material comforts for yourself, sure.
Friend the ignorant here seems to be you. Cheers.
-
You replace billionares by splitting their billions and distributing them among the population. Nobody gets poor everyone gets richer simple as that.