Has real communism been tried?

Has real communism been tried?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

real communism is an illusion as the theory is flawed from the start. It'll always end with the same totalitarian shitfest.

What is the flaw?

>inb4 I haven't read Marx but I critique it anyway

Every day my friend

The world would almost have to be fully automated, money would have to be eliminated, and the races would somehow magically have to get along with each other. So no.

Every attempt has gone to shit before achieving true communism

Historical materialism is a fantasy for starters.

Next is the dialectics.

Guaranteed replies

the economic theory is dogmatic and unable to understand basics principles of human economic behavior, it is unable to explain the modern economy.
The solutions it proposes fail miserably because a 5 year plan apparently is not as efficient as a market hive mind.
Best of it all, with it's centralized structure it sets the perfect conditions for corruption, power abuse and what else turned socialistic states into totalitarian shitholes.

>trying to solve all problems of mankind with a 19th century polemic book
>what could go wrong?

>"trying" communism
I know what you mean though and yes real socialism has been tried and works ;>)

No, because true communism is an impossible pipe dream. It'll never be achieved, but millions have died trying.

Where?

All over the world

Also, his labor theory of value is one of the few ideas in economics that is considered objectively wrong.

Because humans are greedy and stupid and weak. If you're a communist you're either dishonest or naive

Name one.

If you want to change the world and make it more "just" thats a good goal, but if you really choose communism and Marxist theory as the tool for this in the 21st century you simply are an idiot.

>"The value of a thing comes from the work a person put into making it"
>Objectively wrong

The world

>he has never heard of the Subjective theory of value

>implying it isn't

The world isn't socialistic, either bring an example or fuck off you retard.

>cutting out 'useless' middle men will make factories more efficient
>the work those useless middle men has no value

Maybe you could specify where Socialism has worked in the world?

All over it.

>Objectively wrong
>Implying Economics is a science

I think the subjective theory of value is bullshit desu

Economics is the bourgeois religion

Socialism hasn't worked in the US.
>our argument is moot

Yes it is

And apparently they are a good bit better at it than Marxists.

Maybe not in the US, but certainly in America.

Marxism is science

Socialism hasn't worked in Canada either. Nor did it work in Mexico. Nor Brazil. Nor Chile.
Socialism is currently working in Venezuela, which will crash within a few months.

Pseudoscience that fucked up when its theories where put to the test.
Humans don't work as Marx predicted, Economy doesn't work as Marx predicted, and so it ended up on the garbage heap of Veeky Forums.

The failures of those countries (if we concede them to be failures) illustrate the limitations of the nation state form, not socialism.

Check out how venezuela is starving to death thanks to chavism communism

itt: commies that cant stand the idea that their already dead ideology has no place in the modern world

Sure, mostly because just nations fail that adopt Socialism.
>my theory that explains absolutely everything is completely valid
>just reality is flawed

Marxists are as delusional as religious people.
A theory that fully understands human behavior, both political and economical, simply doesn't exist. Making it a dogma won't change that. In that regard, Marxist actually prevent solutions instead of helping the world become a better place.

Economics is pseudoscience that fucks up when it's theories are put to the test as is illustrated by all the poverty caused by capitalism

Humans don't work as bourgeois economists predict. Fortunately the bourgeoisie will soon be relegated to the museum

>Economics is pseudoscience that fucks up when it's theories are put to the test as is illustrated by all the poverty caused by capitalism
>he thinks economics doesn't explain poverty
Why are English lit majors so economically illiterate?

>Fortunately the bourgeoisie will soon be relegated to the museum
Interestingly we are still waiting for this, albeit good ole Marx already predicted this.

>poverty caused by capitalism
Implying Capitalism's goal is to make poor people rich...

There are lots of successful nation states that are socialist or have socialists in power in their governing bodies. That doesn't matter though because socialism is much more than government.

Religious people aren't delusional. Religion is a normal part of human behavior. It's supposed to explain human behavior!

Economists just want to understand how economy works, which is complicated as economy and society changes all the time. They don't see economy as a good or bad thing per se and are aware that the system changes over time
thats science

Marxist want to prove that Economy exactly works just as some guy wrote in a 19th century book and all contradicting evidence has to get aligned so said theory works.
thats pseudo science and close to a cult

The discussion is moot in the end, because Marxism has lost the test of time and Marxists are unable to come up with new theories because of the dogmatism.
So basically you just can watch them fight on Veeky Forums, because that's all that is left to do.

>There are lots of successful nation states that are socialist
Name a single one then.

lmao. Marxism is a mental illness.

Lol
>it's not the fact that socialism failed while our capitalist neighbors succeeded, it's because we didn't socialism hard enough!
>o-oh, ignore the fact that the quality of life improved in Czechoslovakia and Poland post communism

Capitalism is far from perfect. But I'd prefer to live in a capitalist country than any country trying to achieve socialism any day of the week.

How about some of the ones you listed earlier. I like canada

Name one (1) faggot. And if you say Denmark...

Canada has a freer market than the US. Try again.

Lol, even more retarded than I expected.

Of course you want to live where all the economic resources are being sucked to. Don't you see why those countries who are so poor are so passionate about socialism? Isn't it obvious?

Not for health insurance. How about the united kingdom? Lots more public services there.

excuse me if I don't want to be a self loathing cunt worshipping an outdated economic system

You're right I definitely am retarded for trying to earnestly argue this stuff on a Hungarian goulash recipes posting board

Would rather live under absolute monarchy then communism tbqh

You already are my friend

All the states that 'seized the means of production' collapsed under their own economic inefficiency. The end of the Cold War should have empirically btfo the marxist ideology

communism can't exist without big government control, why would you want that? Also, it requires a governing body to make sure everything is doled out fairly, which is impossible since people are corrupt and the governing body will always become corrupt thus not carrying out the ideals of communism. It's been tried, it just doesn't work. People have to be free, they should govern and choose for themselves. It is the natural order of the world and you can't go against it.

Mao moved China closer to real communism.
Stalin wasn't bad but he was never the intellectual Mao was.

Mao's experiment in decentralized popular mass communism is excellent evidence that communism works.

People claim that the cultural revolution was a disaster.

They claim China destroyed history.
False, numerous archaeological sites such as Mawangdui were discovered and preserved and peasants were educated on how to identify historical relics if they were to come across them in the field.

They claim science and learning was destroyed.
False, China sent its first space satellite and created high yield hybrid rice. While building schools in rural areas.

They claim the economy was a disaster.
Yet, growth rates were higher then than in the reform era. Rural areas actually had growth rather than decline as they do now.

Sources:
Mr. Science and Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution : science and technology in modern China / edited by Chunjuan Nancy Wei and Darryl E. Brock.

The battle for China's past : Mao and the Cultural Revolution / Mobo Gao.

The Unknown Cultural Revolution
Life and Change in a Chinese Village / Dongping Han

If you go to rural China you will find it is these people who (according to wealthy Chinese urban elite expatriates and Western scholars who have never been to rural China) are supposedly his victims, who are most supportive of Mao and the cultural revolution and hate the reforms.

t. Brother Hao

Do you know how many people died because of Mao's policies? How can you have the gall to say that communism works after citing Mao

States don't seize the means of production, the working class seizes the means of production through various means including claiming state power

Yeah it was 100 bajillion katrillion. Terrible dude

Right, the working class rose up and claimed state power and then seized the means of production and these economies collapsed. Whats your point?

Do you really believe they had growth in all areas though, since communism kind of creates a situation where the communist government has to justify itself and pretend it is working even if it isn't. North Korea goes on and on about how great they are doing after all. Like the news broadcasts about how wonderful Oceania was doing in Orwell's "1984" that ol' Winston had to hear.

there's no such thing as real communism

Yes but every time in ends up in starvation tyranny and mass murder. Perhaps giving all the power and wealth of a country to a small clique of jews and professional criminals in hopes that theyll redistribute it fairly is not the best way to create utopia.

The growth numbers come from third party foreigners
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

people forget that the cultural revolution lasted until 1976. They look at the amazing growth numbers of the 70s and assume it was Deng.

I urge you to go to rural China and actually speak with the people there

Thats not what specify means

Yes, of course it has been tried. Every primitive civilisation was something of a communist utopia until one person decided to take power as a king.

>one person just decided he was the king one day
yeah thats definitely how it happened

tankies unironically believe this

It doesn't matter if real Communism hasn't been tried or is "good in concept"

It is not good in concept. Stealing from others is wrong.

>literal neo-Nazi deflection
Communists really are retarded.

>le neo colonial theory
Fuck off, Chomsky

This

This. You require such a concentration of power to implement it without any checks, that it must fall to corruption.

It can't be tried because it can't get off the ground.

Communism failed because the orthodox marxists severely overestimated the ability of a state to manage an economy. They overcentralized their economy and it became brittle and resistant to change.

The flaw in their thinking was that they thought they could accelerate historical processes, but all they really ended up doing was creating inefficient, top heavy bureaucratic states, and it turns out the best way to bring forth a future economic system is by investing in education and science and letting society find its own way.

Historical materialism is simply the understanding that the material conditions of society play a more important role in shaping human society than, say individual morality. Slavery was not possible in the Bronze Age because in those days every scrap of metal was precious, and it wasn't until iron became plentiful that people could invest in things like shackles, chains, and cages.

>dialectics

The dialectic is simply the belief that human progress is real, but does not follow a linear path and is rather the messy lurching of society from one extreme to the next, learning mostly by trial and error, and the "golden path" is often a synthesis of competing ideas in a complimentary way. For example: the ancient Greeks bickered about the proper arrangement for government, whether it should be a monarchy, oligarchy, or democracy, and fought each other to the point of exhaustion over the matter. The Romans built a mixed system which combined all three government types in a way where the strengths of one was offsetting the weaknesses of the other, and their model was stupendously successful in the ways that a Greek city state could never be.

Maybe that passion for socialism is what makes them poor.

It comes from what people are willing to pay for it.

A worker can spend a hundred thousand hours making shoes out of cement. It doesn't matter how much skill or time they put into it. It has no value

If I spend a year making a pile of shit, would you buy it at a price to compensate the many hours I spent shitting in a pile?

Are you telling me the value WASN'T in the labour?

I'm a proud centrist-statist and I'm offended that you think taking care of a nations citizens is the same thing as the totalitarianism that comes along with socialim.

Capitilism is imperfect, so some support is nessesary for a state to reach it's full potential but the moment you try to infringe on the rights of people to own property, run busniess or deal with their own matters personally you've crossed the line.

I know you're a marxist, idiot and troll..but using a state's public service as a stealth try at communism makes me mad.

It's stuff like this that's the reason I feel like a market of capital is necessary. There needs to be a mix of subjective and labor theory, wherein those individuals who make profit from the subjective value in the market can be in control of monetary distribution amidst themselves according to the labor put in to create the finished product.

if by 'working' you mean 'it hasn't completely collapsed yet'

No, but 'real communism' is a utopian fantasy.

Really been tried, really didn't work, really murdered hundreds of millions of people.

Your generation is lost.

No because Communism together with Jacobinism are just tall poppy syndrome: the ideologies. They're not meant to work, just to create a power vacuum