But it wasn't real communism

To play devil's advocate, if you have a centralized state then it's not real communism. But clearly it's the closest thing we're going to get.

Isn't the only way for true communism to come around is if everyone is communist because the whole world has to be stateless?

That the inability of the theoretical framework to actually produce a political movement that can deliver "real" communism, or even anything that would seem likely to produce "real" communism is itself a failure.

He still clearly advocates violent revolution

I remind them that the countries they're talking about never claimed to be communist so calling them false communists is wrong. I tell them they need to be better LARPers because they're bad at communist apologia.

That was Lenin retard

nice

Communism a fairy-tale touted by socialists, who are the real danger. Sure, U.S.S.R wasn't real communism, but it was pretty far into socialism.

That's like saying artificial selection isn't "true evolution". Capitalism doesn't necessarily have anything to do with rape and murder.
The difference between "fake capitalism" and "fake socialism" is that fake capitalist nations very frequently do not devolve into despotism and still achieve a very high degree of individual liberty - often hampered to an extent by socialist policies brought on by soft, naive men trying to legislate nature's cruelty away.

Yeah dude bombing several million Vietnamese to death is OK but when the gommies fight back then the violence is evil.

There also isn't supposed to be money, it's basically pure gift bartering with actual stuff rather than currency or government regulations.

I don't know about that, my friend. If you dig deeper you'll find a lot of the movement's leaders talking about it.

Mao talked a lot about continuous revolution. That's pretty violent.

What?
Do they or do they not advocate violent revolution?

communism is*

ANTIFA are not communists they're socdems at most who never read Marx.
Not necessarily, it could be peaceful revolution like the "sexual revolution" or the industrial revolution, etc. If that was the case then why didn't China just go full invasion mode?

There was nothing socialist about the USSR. Socialism is profit sharing taken to an extreme, to the point where wages become replaced by the worker's share of the profit which is likely more than what they would get in wages so that the bulk of the profit wouldn't just be going to a few people who don't do work that creates capital in the first place. The USSR or any country has never been like that. It's unironically true that socialism has never been tried desipte what some have called their shit.

> labor laws, pension plans, unemployment subsidies, state intervention beyond sovereign functions.
Those aren't socialism or communism you moron. Capitalism with a human face at best

I'm not talking about Antifa dude. Make a fucking effort.
jstor.org/stable/2708729?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

>There was nothing socialist about the USSR
Nothing Socialist about the United Soviet Socialist Republic?
>Socialism is profit sharing taken to an extreme
Sauce?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

It sure as hell wasn't capitalism over there.
You're going to come back at me with "State Capitalism" as if it makes a difference.
The fact is if BOTH the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. practiced capitalism, your definition is vague enough to be useless.

A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.
“Report on an Investigation of the Peasant Movement in Hunan” (March 1927), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 28.

whataboutism

This

youtube.com/watch?v=4c_ADqshdSA

The year was 1974
youtube.com/watch?v=Z4tebFU9cxo
the cultural revolution was not about destroying learning and education

it was not ten years of disasters(unless you are the child of a party official, who thinks being sent into the countryside is basically another holocaust)

industrial democracy in action
youtube.com/watch?v=x-CwaFmGVLs

It fucking worked

>It sure as hell wasn't capitalism over there.

Their solution to capitalism was to turn the entire country into a single for-profit firm and have people engage in wage labor under them.

>You're going to come back at me with "State Capitalism" as if it makes a difference.

Unless you include an actual refutation of the point, inb4ing your own post is just a show of bad intellectual faith.

In pure capitalism the state does not intervene as an economic agent outside sovereign functions (currency, defense, transport networks)

"those" did not exist until left-wing socialist/communist ideologies fueled worker rebellions in XIX-XXth. Capitalism existed before that, even in its modern labor-capital-share-of-value.

I mean it hasn't really. I don't like communists, but I'm not going to argue against facts. Communism as it was intended has never been achieved.

You're not supposed to form communism by force. It's supposed to just happen as a matter of course.

He did. That is not, however, a "holocaust", a word not in common parlance in the 19th century.

Communism and globalism go hand in hand. Either everyone is involved for the good of the people, or no one is involved. One corrupt man outside of the system can bring it down with greed. That's what people mean when they say "real communism hasn't been tried" because communism in the level that we need it to succeed is functionally impossible. We as humans just don't get along well enough.

Communism was invented for Europe/USA/industrial countries but only ever used in undeveloped/developing countries.

There is nothing wrong with violent revolution.
Honestly nearly everyone in congress and the White House today deserves to die.

I tell them that we don't live in "real" capitalism either, no theoretical framework can really be put into practice in a pure form

Slave trade was before the Industrial revolution. Capitalism is specifically post-industrial revolution.

Trotskysts believe in the perpetual revolution that must occur world-wide.

>It wasn't real national socialism

Its better to say the communist countries (in ideology) failed to reach their utopia. Its like how anarchists don't just want to abolish all government overnight, they want to reach a society where it can work.

By real communism they mean trotskyism, not stalinist/maoist interpretations because these faggots dont understand that you need at least a 'little' traditionalism to have a fucntional society

Communists eternally btfo

you got it mixed.

Commies want to prepare the society before implementing communism.

The dictatorship the USSR had is Socialism

Technically thats readying the people and the society until Communism can be reached.
Pure Anarchists want to abolish all government over night

What anartards fail to realise is that if you have 2 people living together according to common rules you already have a government. Therefore the only path to success is for them to commit sudoku, a choice which I wholeheartedly support

What are the characteristics of Xi Jinping thought? Seems to me China is now officially communist or socialist but in reality capitalist

>And for my next trick, I will turn capitalism into corporatism!