Dude free stuff lmao

>after all these decades people still don't understand his work
Maybe you fuckers should actually read the books instead of some youtube videos and the wikipedia

hahahahaaahaahahahahahahaa

yeah

hahahaaha

What's the point?
Should people who don't like Hitler read his book?

Marx was a moron who inspired dozens of genocidal maniacs. If he was never born the world would be a better place with less suffering.

Just no

>Marx was a moron who inspired dozens of genocidal maniacs

the same way Jesus is a moron who inspired dozens of pillaging, murdering, raping maniacs, right?

You don't understand. In order for the hamburger you didn't finish to make it to starving people you'd need to figure out where to send it without some corrupt official hiding what's happening and find a means of doing so without your aid workers being harassed, stopped or sometimes killed in wartorn regions. It has nothing to do with wasting food or capitalism.

Hitler literally has nothing to offer other than being a reminder of how low people can go while facing despair

Woah, that argument definitely changes everything!

>187 million dead from capitalism
let me fix that for you

>Smallpox is capitalism
-100 million
>Atlantic slave trade killed 15 million despite only involving 12 million slaves
-10 million
>Indian famines greatly exaggerated
-22 million
>Nazis were capitalists
-25 million
>Algerian war of independence is capitalism's fault despite being started by socialists
-1 million
>Vietnamese killed by US higher than total Vietnam war dead by both sides
-1.5 million
>US bombing killed twice as many people as died in the civil wars
-500,000
>Both Angolan and Mozambiquan civil war deaths exaggerated by half a million, murders by communists not mentioned
-550,000
-600,000
>UN sanctions on Iraq death toll exaggerated
-600,000
>Civil war in Afghanistan death toll exaggerated, blamed on capitalism rather than Communist invasion
-400,000
>Destruction of Communist Yugoslavia blamed on capitalism instead of just Nato bombings
-190,000
>Congolese civil war death toll exaggerated
-2 million

Total killed:
222,655,929
-164,340,000 misattributed or made-up deaths
=58,315,929 killed by capitalism in over 500 years.

Remember not to fall to commie lies

...

Capitalism has never killed anyone because it's the normal and natural state.

It's like being underwater vs being on land.
People die underwater because they can't breathe but people die on land because of various reasons.

>marxists
>in 2017

For the sake of humanity, never reproduce and never publicly discuss your thoughts ever again.

>Capitalism has never killed anyone because it's the normal and natural state.

Utopian Communism is so natural, isn't it?
Maybe even TOO much for this world. Fucking humanity too stupid for Full Communism, *sigh* at least we have our subreddits.

I'm pretty sure the current system that we have is the best! teehee! :')

not only are you correct, but it heeds to remember that capitalism is a very broad term while communism is a much more specific one.
Really any system where the means of production is in the hands of private people rather than a state is capitalist by Marx's definition, which would refer to nearly every human nation in history.

He's honestly right, specialization in human societies is an emergent and inevitable phenomenon. As complexity increases, currencies are used in a greater share of transactions.
Communism is fundamentally different because it's contrived. We know what individuals are responsible for the proliferation of communism, nature is to blame for the rise of capitalism.

So comparing death tolls is absurd

>it's the natural state
lmao

>objective value
>sociology pseudoscience
>dialectical axiomatic analysis
These three are the basis of all his work. All of them are wrong.

Next question.

dude protectionism taxes prohibitions bureaucracy

Why are you proving his point? If you don't know what you are talking about just shut the fuck up

Another strawman. Communism "has never been tried" yet it's natural.

Capitalism is based primarily on private property which is completely natural, and doesn't exclude a family or great family(clan) as being the same property nature against people outside of the circle.

The other one is the subjective value and how every trade between individuals creates wealth. Because the person A got sonething more valuable for him and the person B got also something more valuable for him.

Try again, mugremita.

What he means is that capitalism (as private ownership of means of production) wasn't "implemented", theorized before it happened, had political leaders who fought for it before its existence etc like fascism and communism did.
I believe that is what he means by "natural state"

>private property which is completely natural
rofl

...

>rofl
>lmao
>memeimage.jpg

The best arguments in favor of Communism the world has ever seen

Marx literally bases his work on these principles and axioms. Try again, mugremita.

If you can't confront it, it should. Unless you're someone intellectually dishonest.

How about no Christian theocracies or Communist states? That should make everyone happy

>Jesus: lay down and take it
>Marx: rise up and take it
hardly the same

>fails in horrible fashion literally every single time its tried

>DUDE THIS TIME IT WILL WORK!

Anyone else enjoying watching commieLARPers scrambling to gain relevance in online counter culture by pathetically trying to co-opt this resurgence in right wing memes?

saying x or y is the natural state when our species and society is constantly going through changes is really stupid, hence why the rofl, lmao, etc

Kys /r/communism

...

pontius pilate hitting the red on the head jupiter bless

HOW IS THE RIGHT WING ALWAYS ONE STEP AHEAD OF US

Why lie/be misleading so deliberately?
I mean, I understand that someone can spend hours debunking you and at the end you can just say "it wasn't real socialism anyway, who cares", but it's really pathetic.

Both are garbage

>reduce inequality by 54%
how was this measured

>Capitalism has never killed anyone because it's the normal and natural state.

>not knowing that socialism is more acceptable in the young
Once the boomers are dead, we are coming for your toothbrush bucko

>expropriate bakeries and legalize restaurants.

>Lefty memes
>Furries

>he doesn't know the scale from catgirls to full on furry
Come on, at least act less new

It was due to socialism.

To avoid the repercussions of a drop in oil prices, Venezuela should have gone all into free trade and free markets to diversify the economy and allow them to make investments they can withdraw from when oil prices drop. They still could have spent a lot on welfare, as long as they did not implement price controls, nationalizations, a fixed exchange rate or any excessive interventions in the economy. Socialist ideology prevented them from doing any of this, including high welfare spending since the economy has collapsed and now there is no money to pay for it.

>Venezuela should have gone all into free trade and free markets
This sounds like a 10 year old trying to explain economics

>To avoid being screwed over by the neoliberals, they should have neoliberalized to suck the global neoliberal elites' dick so really it is their fault that they didn't do that

guys, who takes socialists seriously anymore? The more I learn about history and economics, the less I take any of their shit seriously. There's no intellectual support for s'lism besides edgy contrarians and liblefties. Why is this movement still going as an issue?

...

Again, why is Marx's head shopped into some fat guy wearing some kind of harness and nipple piercings?

but the Venezuelan government actively undermined an possibility or attempt for its people to start businesses outside of the oil industry. it purposefully homogenized its economy.

>ur 10
This sounds like you're stretching for an excuse to avoid debate. You should go all into facts and logic instead.

Why should a business (domestic or foreign) invest in Venezuela if the state and corrupt officials will just confiscate most of it? Going all into free trade and free markets is far from "sucking the global neoliberal elites' dick". The Venezuelans are not children that need to be protected by Papa Chavez/Maduro, given free choice they will only accept a deal if it is in their self-interest. In a free market the vast majority of exchanges are mutually beneficial.

>shifting the goalpost from the responsibility of the Venezuela oil crisis to be about how getting screwed over by the neoliberal elites is in their best interest

Not an argument senpai.