well put. I would add that government is also a byproduct of spiritual maturity and financial structure. No matter the system in place it will be driven by these 2 factors most of the time

This post was edited by addone on Aug 10 2020 07:12pm

Is there a reason you're ignoring: "You denying that the Soviet Union, Mao's China and Venezuela were attempts at communism show you lack understanding and/or are intellectually dishonest. So you can also answer, what did they do wrong, and what do you know that they didn't to make it work properly, like the "real" communism you describe." and instead going with the "read a book you ignorant redneck" argument?

It's hilarious that you describe the Bolsheviks and Lenin as "right-wing" though, makes me wonder what kind of revisionist history you read. Marx also derided the socialists of his time because they weren't left enough on the spectrum, the same way the modern radical left scoffs at liberals and moderates in their own party. That doesn't make them "right-wing" just because they aren't the leftist purists you hold in such high esteem.

If every single time that communism is practiced it ends up with an authoritarian dictator, then that IS what communism is in practice. You can change words on paper to fit your utopian narrative all you like, but if it doesn't work when the rubber meets the road then it has functionally failed as an ideology by that definition. The reason it's easier to criticize the left is because authoritarianism is necessary to obtain equality of outcome sought by communism. It literally can not exist without immense top down pressure or "cutting off the tall grass" if you will.

This thread reminds me of the "there is no true islamic state" defence of terrible things taking place in islamic states by muslims on the internet about a decade ago when i frequented muslim forums to learn about islam.

Not sure why everyone is discussing the meaning of communism and arguing over whether it is possible or not instead of debating the premise of the thread which has pretty much nothing to do with communism beyond using the word to trigger the reds under the beds types.

i guess the question is if you want a company to be 25% owned and run by the government then why not 50%, 75% or huawei?

Because its an incentive not a takeover.
And not run just owned, the government share of votes would vote with the majority block.

You have no idea what you’re even taking about.

Lenin and Mao called their systems State Capitalism. Literally. Just fucking do a quick search. Stop being a lazy, entitled, anti-intellectual shitstain and do some work.

I’ll get you started, you lazy twat.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_communism

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism?wprov=sfti1

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-5/mswv5_30.htm


Perhaps the most important for context:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POUM?wprov=sfti1

Edit: ugh you get so much shit wrong I can’t even. Chavism isn’t communism. Jesus. More than half of Venezuela’s economy is privately owned even today.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Aug 10 2020 10:08pm

Lenin was right wing because unlike the other commie losers he had a job



Its my way or the huawei



Name one majority islamic country without slavery

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Aug 10 2020 10:15pm

Republicans are so stupid.