Why has communism always failed despite all the bigbrained shit they wrote?

Why has communism always failed despite all the bigbrained shit they wrote?

Thatd called theory

because it denies reality. it is essentially an attempt to transform the human condition while denying divinity. it is an attempt at escaping contingency with man as his own god.

Not only has it never failed, it has never even been tried. Not only has it never been tried, it has never even been understood, since if it has been understood it would be inevitable and would not fail.

Vaporwave politics

Sparta was a successful communist state. The trick is having a slave class and a national goal.

>Sparta was a successful communist state. The trick is having a slave class and a national goal.
if there is a slave class then it fails at it's stated goal of liberating the proletariat, as it just uplifts one set of people and creates a new underclass in their stead.

Because it’s a system that involves dividing things equally, but then some asshole thought that he should be in charge of dividing it up instead of letting people just take their own share and that’s how you dictators

Why must it always come back to god with you people?

Well the slave class aren't citizens of the state.
Maybe slave class isn't the right term, but subjected people or something

because the idea of God is at the center of everything. whether or not you believe in one (im uncertain).

star trek is set in a communist utopia.

but seriously we don't have the opposite of communism because it will fail. we do have a hybrid of both communist and capitalist tendencies. pure capitalism has never been successful on this world as well.

GANG GANG GANG GANG

you're still just creating another set of proles that are "non citizens" but whose labor and life is sacrificed to the good of the state instead of the market. sounds dreadful.

When people say that real communism ahs never been tried, what they are realing saying is that "I'm a good person unlike those other people that tried if. I've read Hegel, Marx, Foucault, and Zizek enough. I'm an expert on Marxist philsophy, and I'll do it right."

First of all, the chances that somobody who actually believes that communism is good and is able to rationalize away all the pain and suffering it has caused is probably NOT a good person, and probably has all the pathologies that have manifested in the brutal communist dictators of the last century.

But even if they were good, even if they were a paragon of virtue, they would never have a chance to bring about the revolution and the true utopia.

As soon as they were well on their way, they would quickly be shot in the back of the head by a fellow revolutionary who would proclaim "You are a counter-revolutionary crypto-capitalist! I am a good person who has read Hegel, Marx, Foucault, and Zizek! I understand Marxist philosophy and will TRULY run the revolution!"

This will continue until your revolution or state or commune or whatever falls apart, just as it has 100s of times before, until the day where a young educated leftist stands up, points to your revolution, and proclaims "That wasn't TRUE communism!"

Yeah, it's dreadful. But it worked.

>killing people is necessarily wrong
good goy

it's not communism though

*really saying

fug

yes but I'm not sure it qualifies as a communistic ideal if it's just state run capitalism with foreign slaves forming the new proletariat. it seems to me that Sparta was just engaging in empire.

also Sparta had economic disparity

die faggot

it is.

Not the person you're responding to, but it would seem that given the universality of religion in human society & culture, any philosopher who denies its importance is doomed to irrelevance or worse, misunderstanding.

It's not at all surprising that a philosophy that (admirably) attempts to deny a metaphysical hierarchy would fail in practice, due to the necessity to create hierarchies. Not surprisingly, humans seem to prefer a corrupt hierarchy that claims to be metaphysical over a corrupt hierarchy that has no meaningful way to ground itself.

>Sparta was a successful communist state
The power of Veeky Forums.

What about Hitler

regards, libcuck humanist

The realization that killing large numbers of people in the name of ideology is bad is quite literally what has given us a stable civilization. Every time we lapse on that truth horrible things happen that benefit NOBODY.

This.

>bigbrained shit
Materialist "philosophies" are the easiest ones to understand.

Some people are too smart to realize how stupid they are. They hold out hope for a centralized distribution of scarce resources because when you only look at the macro level it genuinely looks like it would be a more efficient method. It's only when you get down into the "plebeian" particulars of manufacturing and transportation of goods do you realize how inefficient such a system will always be. This is aptly called the "knowledge problem" of socialism. No sort of central agency or computer can account for the trillions of constantly changing variables that the free market takes care of by itself by "distributing" scarce resources with price.

But your post is pure ideology, and peace occurs because of oppression and power structures.

...

OMFG LE DIALECTICS

Go look up "Subreption".

What makes you think capitalism is working either? Shit's just dying slower.

The free market is working because we're all wealthier than we were 20 years ago. We didn't even have computers then because they were so prohibitively expensive.

>we're all wealthier than we were 20 years ago.

What planet are you living on? In the US, where I live, the middle class has shrunken to a fraction of what it used to be.

The free market dumps million of dollars on wifi connected juicers, virtual reality clothing, and tricycles for adults. It's terribly inefficient and should die in favor of decentralized proletariat controlled industries.

>despite
No, not despite. BECAUSE.

You do realize that if everyone is wealthier nobody is, right?

>china is to be the dominant economy of the world within this decade
>failed

inb4 real communism has never been tried

It does work at the community level, that has happened many times.
Well because every large communist revolution has been hijacked by bureacrats and resulted in a state. States do not work, there is no transition government between revolution and communism.
Also there are inherent flaws in communism in that is prescriptive, instead of trying to make the world better by getting rid of the bad things Marxism prompts it's adherents to attempts to arbitrarily make something good from something bad.
It's doesn't work like that, you just need to cut the bullshit and let the grass grow, if it takes a spark burn it down. This is why anarchy is the only way for revolution to happen.
>Inb4 anarchy has never worked.
Yes it does, the vast majority of all living is done in anarchy. Me talking to you right now is free of arbitrary hiearchial restrictions. Life evolved in the absence of stratified levels of authority and that is still true for most living. Only in the presence of human economies and governments do such things exist, even then they only dominate a small fraction of Life, with horrible results, mass extinction and despotism. That needs to stop and that is where anarchy comes in. Not has a doctrine telling us what to do. But an action of stopping things that should not be happening on a decent planet.

That doesn't make any sense. Wealth is measured in terms of standard of living and we are as species objectively better right now than at any other point in history.

>Wealth is measured in terms of standard of living
Try again.

>Totalitarian "not real" communism used as a means of becoming an efficient capitalist machine
Nice, fair play to them

That literally happened when Mao died and they started implementing state capitalism, you nigger.

Refinements in manufacturing processes have made computers cheaper. Real wages have stagnated for decades.

>muh Gub
>despite no serious contact between europeans and "heatens", claims for centuries that the "heatens" are nasty ppl
>1700s
>get rekt by trolls who presents empirical data that "heatens" are mostly kind and loving husbands and parents and don't cheat in business
>retcon by saying that they *akshually* are xtians
>India
>in the late 1800s, hinduism finally becames a religion for the sensible middle class
>various charities forms, decades before a certain albanian con artist was even born
>she finally get her shot at fame, because Failcolm Cuckerridge from BBC (oh, the irony) makes a shitty TV show
>finally the failed church can claim that she brought charity work to India
>when proven wrong, backpedal to another position
>also, constantly, relentlessly obfuscate other religion's concepts of the divine (*akshually* monotheistic)

>Some people are too smart to realize how stupid they are

I take this back. People are just stupid.

Like do socialists and commies really believe they can get everyone in mongrel america on the same page and that certain groups wouldnt want more or that another group should suffer because of past agressions? Lmao consumer and nihilist culture is probably for the benefit of the mongrel states.

>it's a "Young 18-25 years old American college kids preach about the benefits of communism" episode
we had it shoved upon us over here. It wasn't that fun for anyone

It's fairly easy to organize people across racial lines via the shared experience of work. Part of the reason the US government shit their pants about the Black Panthers were that they started joining up with Hispanic and white labor movements.

Also seeing as how fascists suck at organizing and are all backstabbers, this smells like projection of your own issues.

its spelled heathen you fucking oaf

>on the same page and that certain groups wouldnt want more or that another group should suffer because of past agressions?
You don't need to, and actually shouldn't. What needs to be done is to get rid of the structures and conventions that allow for unjustified authority and hiearchy in the first place, such as private property (inb4, not personal possessions ffs) and state structures. The hardest part would be getting ride of ecological fascism(by far the biggest problem)and patriarchy which wouldn't go away even if socialism was the norm, those are both results of particular kinds of centrisms and chauvinisms that need to be destoryed.

>people still actually think capitalism is getting better
Hahahah, oh boy are we in for a rude awakening in the west, holy shit. I don't know how we're going to deal with this without an actual organised movement. I feel bad for the proles in America, I really do, they've had decades of shitty propaganda on literally everything they consume.

...

Individual ego overpowers collective group-think

Because the masses are too dumb and weak-willed to actually do a decent revolution.

The reason I say this is people still may hate each other but if they can't organize beyond a lynch mob they aren't going to do very much damage. And if they can't collectively gain anything by doing so beyond settling petty tribal conflicts they probably won't do so if that have a rational head among them. If people do mobilise en mass it will probably be to crush an organization attempting to do anything wrong.
Violence is a potential part of every person, just as peace and morality are. The state or private power having a monopoly on violence or anything at all for that matter only make things worse.

It didn't work. Sparta was in a perpetual state of tension, the only way they dealt with the constant threats of revolt from slaves was to make all their male citizens soldiers. These full time soldiers didn't have time for agriculture and other crafts, so the slaves dealt with these things. This isn't a communist system at all.
On the political side, they had a dual monarchy.
Please stop.

I look at it this way - under a socialist economy, the state is obligated to give you a job and public healthcare, education, transportation etc. Even the worst socialist states effectively obliterated homelessness and unemployment.

In a free market society, it's all up to chance. If you're born into a wealthy family, you're good. If not, you're fucked if you don't land a proper job or if the job market is in a particularly bad place. You could lose everything if healthcare is privatised and you need meds etc.

Therefore, by pure probability, if you didn't know where you'd end up, a socialist economy is the correct choice. I don't care about a remote possibility of getting rich if I risk living in the streets.

Future revolutions will follow ethnic lines mostly. The idea that common working conditions can create a common consciousness beyonf racial faults is an enduring illusion without basis.

A market society is not incompatible with socialism. Your dichotomy is false.

I don't understand what you're saying.

I don't agree with market socialism. The basic idea of socialism is to replace market mechanisms with rational planning of production. Cooperative ownership is not socialized, it's just a slightly better form of market exchange. The undesired elements that proceed from capital accumulation are still present.

Then why did the population of former socialist countries embrace capitalism with glee? Why is it always people from from socialist countries fleeing socialist countries and not the reverse. If given the choice, people always pick a capitalist country.

what do you mean?

If people can throw rocks at each other but the only benefit is hitting each other with rocks, they probably won't bother.

Well, I'm a socialist but I recognize it can only work in a homegenous all-White state. Which is innately high-trust and altruistic. Engels, Marx, Che, etc, all recognized this. It wasn't made for the lower races.

So until that happens I am a far-right extremist. To do it now is just to waste time and shuffle deck chairs on the titanic.

>The basic idea of socialism is to replace market mechanisms with rational planning of production.

Wrong. That's planning, which is entirely compatible with (state) capitalism. The basis of socialism is the end of private property in favor of socialised means of production. Market, in the broadest sense of the term, are entirely compatible with socialism. It is a mean to allocate resources and nothing more.

I live in a former socialist country, and I can definitely tell you that we didn't embrace it with glee. We were given no choice and coped with it best we could. Stop buying into western propaganda, interact with people from these countries.

Marx himself believed that communism would prevail because Sparta defeated Athens.
Engels also said:
>a communism, ascetic, denouncing all the pleasures of life, Spartan, was the first form of the new teaching

so you're saying if you remove the incentives for societal division societal divisions will cease?

It probably needs to be homogeneous but there is no need for it to be white. There are white countries that due to culture have low interpersonal trust/altruism and non-white countries with high trust/altruism. Also material conditions and mass education/propaganda can shape culture towards higher trust/altruism (though generational inertia means that it may not occur in a timely manner).

There were many factors, including luck and strategic (not ideological) mistakes that played into Athens losing. Reducing it to such simple terms is retarded.

Yes, I agree. Marx was a retard.

>JBP: The Post
(for what it's worth, I agree with you)

They actually acknowledged Marxism in the sense that you must play out capitalism to its logical end, not just convert a peasant society into crude barracks communism in a single country and hope it werks

They're a mixed economy now with strong state influence which makes them more capable of international competition than other nations like the US where the state is cucked by corporations instead of the other way around.

They haven't given up on their ideology, they are not neoliberals. They have just shown the necessary flexibility to adapt to circumstances, something which the USA is now failing to do.

For the same reason your womyn studies prof probably doesnt know how to fix their dishwasher

Bingo.

I hate this kind of right-wing folksy bollocks so much.

because every attempt has been sabotaged by other world superpowers :^)

well, do you know how?

Real Communism has never been tried.

I'm sure media and corporate interests were very happy. Meanwhile the life expectancy of Russians dropped drastically compared to when they were under the USSR.

I plead the fifth.

Killing in self defense, or in defense of a citizen-controlled government, is morally good. Killing people whom have done nothing but criticise or disagree with your ideology isn't.

What is a citizen controlled government?

>citizen controlled
>government
lel

>Killing in self defense, or in defense of a citizen-controlled government, is morally good.
Why?

I like totally don't understand when people are like real communism has never been tried. I mean duh. It may not have been successfully done, but like I'm sure the first steps toward it has been totally attempted and not even once it didn't ended in total corruption. Keep trying is like so silly.

Because nobody like to give their shit away, commies less than everyone else.

You see, failed attempts at Communism have increasingly bad results, until Full Communism is achieved, which is heaven on earth, as proven by Marx. If you disagree you are a reactionary who deserves death.

This is unironically true to some degree. I know this commie gyt who is convinced that communism would solve all his problems yet his house is a filthy mess and the guy despise doing any kind of work even if it's washing his own dishes. A disgusting human being.

Bullshit. Communists are literally the proletarian and they work harder than everyone else.

Maybe 60-70 years ago

you could have saved everyone a lot of time and just said "niggers are the problem" like every other /pol/lack.

sure

it was a collective failure of the entire council

niggers ARE a problem, though. really, niggers are problematic for a whole lot of theories of human social organization. you can spend years building up complex theories of society in general, only to get BTFO by niggers.

Absolute poverty around the world has shrunk substantially the past two decades. In spite of a billion or two more people added in that duration.