This thread is permanently archived
Can a communist justify their own economic system without bashing capitalism?
| isn't the whole point of state planned socialist economic system that it's more fair to the average worker than capitalism and would eventually lead to communism (where shit is free and overabundant)
| Are you asking because you do so?
| It must be hard seeing everything in black and white huh?
| you could switch capitalism/communist or replace it with any ideology and it would still be a pointless argument
| *Quoting dead French philosophers from the 1800s*
| >>313399 ... because the majority of the capititalist world was so scared from the comunist way succeeding, that it didn't find peace and undermined constantly the status quo of consumerism and the 'all is muh property' way. Caring for the next is not what capitalism excels at and those who do are commies with sharp fangs who eat capitalist children for breakfast.
You may now proceed telling me that I reverted to bash capitalism after your intelligent bait.
| If you have a problem with capitalism and want to criticize it, that's okay, but don't use nothing but the errors of one system to justify the implementation of another. If that were the case, then I can justify anything on the sole grounds that it would be anti-capitalistic.
"We should all mass-suicide because then there wouldn't be any capitalism."
| I can agree to mass suicide. If you gave the button to blow the world to bits with EVERYONE on it, as it is now, I'd do it. After smoking a cigarette of course.
| >>5721d3
>>869dde
Isn't capitalism just a slow mass suicide by working people to death? Time is money, and you'll never make enough!
>>313399 I'm just kidding; capitalism already doesn't exist, just ask the largest government jobs program in the world (it's called the US military) or the nationalized Banks and auto industries that support it.
| Nothink is clean white or black. always is there hybrid of both systems.
| >>313478
>We should all mass-suicide because then there wouldn't be any capitalism.
Hm, after two world wars capitalism still persists, stronger than ever, leading straight into the 3rd world-war. It will happen, if things continue like they are now. Maybe in 5, maybe in 10 or even in 20 years. But we will all suffer from it, killing each other for god, leader and/or the nation and other lies.
| >>313791 Nah man, every sentient entity in existence just offs themselves. Clearly, reality belongs to those that have only their instincts to rely on.
| you normies need to learn about labour theory of value first:
https://youtu.be/67HfnfLYr7U
| This entire board is a good justification
| Every single argument of support for communism I hear is just a usually valid criticism of the status quo and then an offhand mention of the intentions of how communism will fix that without any careful consideration for the realities of implementing such a solution.
"Communism is supposed to make everything alright".
"HOW!?" I ask. "How would it work?"
Then I get called a name and get blocked everywhere for being a suppressive person or whatever.
Case in point: >>313390
| >>314225
>"Communism is supposed to make everything alright".
>"HOW!?" I ask. "How would it work?"
>Then I get called a name and get blocked everywhere for being a suppressive person or whatever.
Sounds pretty like a made up story. Usually it's the other way arround: any critizism on capitalism, even constructive one (reforms), get smashed by "Muh, you evil stalinist/maoist! Communism failed! It's not the human nature, it's against god, blah, blah, blah"
| >>314396 You didn't address his argument and justified his point.
>Valid criticism of the status quo
But how will that status quo be fixed? It'll be fixed because it's Communism! How? Because it's Communism!
| It's both ways my dude. Just because they're part of YOUR tribe doesn't mean they're perfect little angels who can do no wrong.
| >>314445 >>314446 You still don't address his point though. He gave the perfect recognition to its ability to criticize the system but not to create its own. It's that it sees its justification for a new system in simply criticism on its own right and no substance.
| >>314617 Listen, ubermensch. I'm not justifying capitalism whatsoever. If you want to bash either -ism, go ahead, but don't say communism is bad so therefore we need full capitalism or vice versa. I'm just complaining about a tactic I see many communists employing.
| >>314619 I'm not saying you're justifying capitalism (x.x) I'm asking you, or frankly, anyone, to justify communism without resorting to "Well, but capitalism." I'm not even a capitalist, I'm a fascist firmly in favor of a corporatist economy.
Really, I'd have thought someone would post something positive within 25 posts. Are commies only able to define their position in the way it contrasts capitalism?
| >>314629 you clearly don't understand Marxist thought. It is believed by Marxists that capitalism will eventually transition to socialism and later communism because of its inherent contradictions (labour theory of value etc). That's why it's not possible to talk about one without talking about another, they are linked.
| Btw just so you know Marx wrote a lot about socialist mode of production, not much about communism itself.
| >>314657 I understand that you folks are very big on the dialectic transition of paradigms, but why would you expect anyone to listen if you can't explain what it is you're wanting to transition to, other than by saying "Where we are now is awful?" Many folks can see that it's fucking awful, but life in the USSR was similarly unappealing. If you say "That's not real communism, it'll be different next time around," then the burden is on you to say exactly what it WILL look like.
| Or, I would have thought it insulting to venture such a question before seeing this thread, but can it be that you have faith that one day Marxism will produce an earthly utopia, even while you have no idea what it will look like beyond "It'll be different & better than capitalism?"
| >>314676 or more to the point, without any idea of exactly how or why such an economic system would work & be better than capitalism, aside from being something developed after capitalism?
| rrryeyywttw_eyytt[y9Ho
| /fjjs33s^yc/^a7/cffffnd}t[^8^xdd6f]^:::zz*ozytkd
| I don't really care about Marxists. What I truly don't get are the communists. If communism is an inevitability, then why do communist activists even exist? It's like being an activist for day turning to night.
| >>315237
Some believe that it the revolution will occur with time (Leftcoms), others want to hasten it coming with enlighten revolutionary vanguard (MLs), a small minority want unions to be the foundation of the movement organization (Syndicalists), and finally many others what to immediately abolish the state (Anarchists), this all massive simplifications of theory and thereb are more movements than these but they are the general gist of all of them, the main thing that divides...
| >>315265
(Other than theory) is praxis, and how said society would function after the revolution.
I should also note that Leftcoms are kinda split between the Italian and German schools of theory.
| >>315441
While many Anarchists do agree with Marx's analysis of political economy and LTV, they themselves aren't Marxist while still being communist.
Though you might have meant Marxists are always communists, but the reverse isn't always true.
| >>315440
While the meme is funny if I understand it correctly Leftcoms view traditional forms of organization as bourgeois and thus those types of socialist/Anarchists orgs are the left-wing of capital, however, I don't how they organize (I'm not a Leftcom).
This thread is permanently archived
|