If invading a country that's having a civil war in order to "stop bolshevism" and taking their land and funding the...

If invading a country that's having a civil war in order to "stop bolshevism" and taking their land and funding the unpopular ruling elite is morally right, Then why is installing communist governments in formerly hostile neighboring countries after liberating them from an enemy which invaded and genocided you, morally wrong?

Because communism itself is wrong.

The rightness or wrongness of a state action depend upon outcomes, not the methods used to achieve them.

No action, no matter how radical, taken to suppress communism is wrong. No action, no matter how moderate, taken to spread communism is just.

>hurr communism is wrong.
Less wrong than western empires, oligarchies. etc.

>No action, no matter how radical, taken to suppress communism is wrong.
Then you're a disgusting hypocrite, just like the west.

>No action, no matter how radical, taken to suppress the bourgeoisie is wrong. No action, no matter how moderate, taken to spread capitalism is just.

What makes communism wrong?

It's the best balance of ethics and freedom yet conceived.

It's ethically wrong to invade a socialist country to impose capitalism because capitalism is less ethical than most forms of socialism.

It's ethical to invade a brutal and authoritarian country to impose a less brutal and less authoritarian model of socialism. Imposing capitalism is possibly preferable to letting the worst socialism exist, but the despair of transitory Russia suggests that replacing bad socialism with capitalism is so brutal that it is not worth it.

It's ethical to invade a capitalist country to impose socialism, but only if the planned model of socialism is more ethical than the existing expression of capitalism.

>"wrong"
>"just"

Explain yourself. I want definitive philosophically moral reasoning that allows the ethical use of force to remove the property of an individual gained through non-violent means.

Ethics and morality are a social development, and thus differ from culture to culture.

State morality is a tool used to justify the state's purposes to the population. It is the most malleable and misunderstood social concept humans have ever created.

Because shit like that has been flying since 3000 BC but apparently we didn't invent "morality" until the 20th century.

Because public works utilized by many people should not be owned by one person. Private ownership of public property harms both producers (workers) and consumers.

>Because public works utilized by many people should not be owned by one person
If they are owned by one person then they are not public works.

>Private ownership of public property harms both producers (workers) and consumers
Tragedy of the commons says otherwise. Private owners have much more incentive to take care of "public" property than the public.

>mass killing is ok when we do it
Suharto pls go

Private owners only keep public works viable as long as it generates profit. Quality and accessibility aren't even considered.

>Quality and accessibility aren't even considered
They are seriously considered because they are required for the end user. I don't even know what you're trying to argue here. Are you stating that companies do not have incentive to provide fresh water at a reasonable price? If so, why are publicly managed utilities of higher price and lower quality than private?

The private sector inevitably leads to reduced quality, especially in the absence of serious competition. When the goal is profit, there's little incentive for quality services to be provided.

>communism
>freedom
Choose one. How is being forced to work, unability to start you own small, family company and no basic human rights freedom?

Yugoslavia was the least of all "Communist" evils, yet it was violently dissolved through external, mainly American, German and British involvement, together with native ultra nationalists, of course.

Under communism you wouldn't be forced to work any more than you currently are.

And under communism, nothing stops you from starting your own practice. Independent industry is important and necessary!

The only thing that is considered is profit. It just so happens that satisfying customer demand leads to more profit. Customer demand is whatever people feel like they want, and can be manipulated in lots of subversive ways by the companies selling the products. There's no reason to think this interaction will create authentic quality and not just the illusion of it attached with some status-signaling social value.

every possible action taken against communism is self defense.