B-bu-but not my very thoroughly defined, specific brand of communism

>b-bu-but not my very thoroughly defined, specific brand of communism

Attached: IMG_0082.jpg (1536x754, 101K)

> b-b-b-b-buts it's okay when capitalism does it

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 133K)

>country that was exporting food starves because of a retarded system
>well look at this country that had a series of crop failures in the middle of a war, capitalism killed those guys

Nice try, but liberal democracy makes you immune to famine.

This is why Ethiopians starved during the droughts of the 80s and Botswana was able to ride it out.

>muh brand of communism would work

>muh brand of fascism isnt racist

>muh brand capitalism has a heart

its time grow up and embrace the enlightened despot

Attached: 04282014thomashobbes.jpg (640x361, 46K)

based, fascism had a semi-empowered king tho

italian fascism*

>what about X and his ebil *insert non commie ideology*
eternal tankie

Bengal famine came into being because there was a fear of japanese ocupation, that's why the british goverment decided against helping the bengalese.

The British did help the Bengalese, when the British military took over disaster relief efforts in 1943, starvation deaths dropped off dramatically.

oh that makes it okay then

Well yeah I mean, considering every time a communist government in Africa forms the CIA get some cunt to assassinate or start a war to destroy it. I mean go and look up the history of Burundi. The US went as far as to fucking stoke ethnic tensions to get the president killed because he was a socialist and put a capitalist on the "throne" (because that's what it really is). And I'm not going to sit here and defend Marxist-Leninism or Maoism. agree the direction they took, don't agree with their methods, especially Mao's anti-science approach. But at least have the common decency to do the same thing.

How do you allocate scarce resources?
How do you prevent the tragedy of the commons and constant shortages like in the Soviet Union? If it's a free for all, everyone will take what they can without any regard for other industries or people, because if they don't take it someone else will, and they're not losing anything through taking it.

On a side note, we make fun of gonmies who say "it's not real gommunism" or "it wasn't actual socialism" because so often they're unable to point out what they would have done differently. When a capitalist says "that wasn't real capitalism" then go on to list reasons why, such as tariffs, or controls you cab atleast tell they have an idea of what they're talking about.

> muh CIA
Wow! It is like all countries compete with each other (dirty tactics included) or something, but commie ones require greenhouse conditions to even hope to exist.

>greenhouse
more like incubator

Its funny because it goes both ways. /pol/acks will routinely rant about frankfurt school and critical theory to demonise socialism as a whole.

>How do you allocate scarce resources?

Based on need. This isn't an issue for communism, but capitalism. I mean look at fidget spinners. You used a finite scarce resource to build millions of toys that do fuck all and then marketed them as a status symbol to children for money. Now, as a therapeutic toy for autistic people, I understand. But what fucking neuro-typical kid needs a fidget spinner? They don't, you created the need through advertising.

Wow, its almost like the USA had a huge headstart compared to eastern europe which was ravaged by the bloodiest war in history.

By large, the discussion is not about some overtly specific brand. The fact is that following the death of Karl Marx, the Marxist intellectual movement split into authoritarian and non-authoritarian movements, the latter which were prominent in Western Europe, and the former in elsewhere. Lenin, while being a leading theorist of his time, did not represent the whole of Marxism as a theoretical school - in Germany, Kautsky was a much more prominent theoretician, and he did not support the Bolsheviks and publicly criticized Lenin and Trotsky during the revolution.

You can trace the evolution of Marxist thought right through these diverging schools. Western European communist movements can be described as reformative rather than revolutionary, seeking to change the society through parlamentary action rather than revolutionary as seen in countries widely identified as communistic ones. The argument that all communist movements are blood thirsty neo-stalinities is quite absurd, and continuing to be ignorant of the elementary divisions within perhaps the largest political movement of 20th century is only a clear indication that your shitposting carries no clear substance.

> I mean look at fidget spinners.
Yeah! Who needs toys? They are waste of resources. No fun allowed except working like slave for the glory of a party. Your arguments become more and more pathetic with every second. This is a literal issue of communism. Some armchair philosopher decides on a whim for you what you need and what you don't need to have in your life ever.

> you created the need through advertising.
and this is bad because? should people live in ignorance about things that they can consume?

>not my brand...bla..bla..marx is god...bla...bla

>can't stop crying about communism 30 years after USSR collapsed
wow, porkies sure are scared aren't they?