Why are you opposed to socialism?

>implying all humans are equal
>implying humans aren't greedy animals
Every utopian socialist experiment failed in the 19c. Every socialist revolution in the 20c has resulted in a dictator taking power whose government was more oppressive than the one it replaced.

That's not democratic control over means of production. That's a company making a bad product and people not buying it. I understand what you're implying, the whole "vote with your dollar" argument.

The people who produce phones in our society don't have a say in how their workplace is operated in any way.

exactly, socialism has two centuries of failure, just give it up you fucking pussies, that shit sucks

Im going to be a retard here. If the workers own the means to production how is that different from private individuals owning the means to production? Arent workers private individuals?

>The people who produce phones in our society don't have a say in how their workplace is operated in any way.

they're free to quit and work somewhere else, chairman mao isn't forcing you to work in a kindle factory, it turns out for people who don't like nerdy shit for fags like reading and doing math, working in a factory is actually a quite nice way to make a living without having to read books n shit, stop trying to "save" people, no one asked you

>worker control over means of production

But what exactly does this mean? Does it mean that people who work the machines in a coca-cola factory actually OWN coca-cola?

Humans aren't greedy we are however interested in self preservation and under a capitalist mode of production where your needs for survival are under perpetual threat due to the current economic arrangement this makes people greedy.

Humans aren't all equal in an unequivocal sense of the word, no socialist claims otherwise.

The majority of socialist experiments fail due to imperialism forcefully crushing socialist movements, not because the system itself imploding.

Revolutionary Catalonia
Burkina Faso
Free Territory of Ukraine
Korean Anarchist Federation

Those are just a few socialist experiments that didn't end up in your alleged more oppressive dictatorship.

Yes, the main point is that workers who make shit and do actual work get a say in how the company is run. Yeah, peons are dumb, but they should have a say and a share. They should profit equal to the work they do for the company, as opposed to being paid the regulated minimum or the minimum market value.

This. I mean, I'm socialist too, but it's not actually a book.

I feel like "means of production" is an outdated phrase, technically everyone sitting in an office is contributing to the "production" in some form

If im honest with myself, Id rather not have any control over the means of production. Im not very good at running complex multinational organizations.

what you mean every cartoon watching dweeb and burger gobblin fatass isn't going to be able to optimize the supply chain as much as someone with an education and experience? well shiiiiite

>They should profit equal to the work they do for the company, as opposed to being paid the regulated minimum or the minimum market value.

But they already do. The honest truth is that pulling levels in a factory is not worth very much at all, because anyone can do it. The more replaceable a job is the less you will usually get paid. It's a lot easier to replace a construction worker than it is to replace the architect who designed the building; which is why the architect makes more.

>get a say in how the company is run

But we have entire jobs dedicated to deciding how a company should be run and what the best moves for its success would be. Your typical laborer is not capable of making these kinds of decisions. Do you really think a McDonalds cashier could make decisions for the McDonalds franchise? I certainly wouldn't want them to have control over business decisions

>Do you really think a McDonalds cashier could make decisions for the McDonalds franchise? I certainly wouldn't want them to have control over business decisions

and what if two cashiers suddenly have a severe disagreement? who will make the final call? the chief cashier? uh oh, oppression!

humans aren't equal, I like hierarchies (the cool ones, modern capitalist one is shit)

Socialists don't want control of the means of production anymore, they just want insanely high taxes so everyone can get food and healthcare and living space. They like to praise free trade and the global market because it means more multiculturalism.

Its a radical theory

That's not a meaningful choice considering your only alternative is to go starve somewhere else.

It's succeeded several times and when it does reactionaries do everything in their power to crush it.

You're not a retard that's a legitimate question and one a lot of people have before they understand socialist theory.

Essentially it's how the workplace is run. When one individual or a small group of individuals have complete authority over all those who work for the company this is textbook totalitarianism. In socialism the workers come together and work cooperatively with each other and decisions are made via democracy.

>Does it mean that people who work the machines in a coca-cola factory actually OWN coca-cola?

Yes and no. It's ownership marked by occupancy and use. Think about how a library functions, it exists as an institution to serve the public, when you check out a book it becomes your book until you're ready to give it back.

In a socialist workplace no one technically owns it per se but they all use the machinery and what not to produce whatever is necessary for society.

>Just to be clear socialism is defined as worker control over means of production while capitalism is private ownership of the means of production.

That is not clear at all. In fact it is an empty platitude. I bet if you had to convert production from being privately owned to being worker owned, you would have no idea what it would even look like

Even Marx admitted the need for a "temporary" dictatorship to help establish the new communist order. Marx's critiques of capitalism are great, his theory of communism is not.

>That's not a meaningful choice considering your only alternative is to go starve somewhere else.
Nigger you can turn tricks in the alley. People who can't make money are retarded, there is always a job out there.
Unless you're in a place like China, of course, and you'll have to slave away forever. But wait a minute... wasn't China communist?

>It's succeeded several times and when it does reactionaries do everything in their power to crush it.
If your system crumbles so easily before foreign pressure you may as well throw it on the trash.

Nice book talking or book related talking you have here, it certainly sounds nothing like the kind of political talking that actually belongs on /pol/

I like all the book by that writer btw

funny how working class people are never socialists

It makes no sense to me why socialists are so opposed to nationalism. They seem to go together perfectly. Like, no shit if we want to control the means of production, we want to make things better for US and not just invite a bunch of immigrants.

> socialism is defined as worker control over means of production
and this is good because?
>capitalism is private ownership of the means of production.
and this is bad because?

That's because they are uneducated.

The issue here is that you're starting out with assumptions. First, you are assuming that the purpose of a business shared by its employees is that of maximizing profit. In this case there are no investors beyond those employed. Those employed look for satisfaction in their work, a living wage, and providing a product or service to others, not maximizing profit, for maximizing profit sometimes leads to lesser working conditions. Instead of supplying some with hundreds of times the wages of another worker for the same company, that profit is distributed to the employees and to the quality of the workplace and product. This provides an intensive to the workers to do a good job.

Second, yes there are people who run a business professionally, and those people would still be employed, but they would not be paid nearly as much, and they would have to answer to the rest of the company instead of a CEO. The employees could even hold weekly elections for "efficiency sake," but the main point is to disseminate power and share the wealth the workers have created.

Rude.

commies aren't people

Because capitalist countries are nice places to live, and socialist ones are failed states. Being dissatisfied with my job and the pointlessness of life is still way better than soviet breadlines, East German surveillance, or Venezuelan supermarkets.

>freedom exists and isn't just an abstraction to trick dumb fat lower class Americans into being content with abuse from corporate feudalism

And this board claims to be literate

Explain how capitalism is anything but slavery, and how freedom matters at all

>It's succeeded several times and when it does reactionaries do everything in their power to crush it.
if you can't defend yourself against foreign aggression you cannot be said to have succeded

>we know what's best for you fucking stupid proles

I'm sure that you're aware but all of these fall under the category of notRealSocialism™ for not working, try again.

I agree, Americans are way happier than any Nordic country

That's why half the country is on Xanax. Capitalism does wonders for the mind and soul. Don't forget to drink some more soda and eat your Monsanto burger for the energy needed to work tomorrow you pig

>private property and being paid a wage that corresponds to the amount of goods and services you produce over unit of time is slavery

Nordic countries aren't socialist, they are capitalist with insanely high tax rates and social welfare.

Nordic countries are racially homogeneous. Norway has nationalized oil. Don't even try this line of argument.

In Socialism, they wouldn't even have Xanax to ease themselves man.

>nordic countries are examples of socialist countries in spite of being mostly capitalist with socialist programs because it's prosperous
>venezuela is state-capitalist in spite of the elected socialst party having seized the means of production because it is a failure

R M Y T
M
Y
T

>Nordic countries are racially homogeneous.
30 years ago, perhaps. not so much anymore

>America is a monolith

the poor have the internet. they could learn better ways. they dont.

>Why are you opposed to socialism?

Because socialism is opposed to the individual

>Don't forget to drink some more soda and eat your Monsanto burger for the energy needed to work tomorrow you pig

you're free to get some artisanal toast on your way to whole foods to buy organic kale, you fucking mong, if people eat shitburgers filled with prions it's because that's what they like, no one wants you to tell them what to eat, take it to cuba, asshole

hence the recent dysfunction

'recent', soon to be 'perpetual'

You'll work harder with a gun at your back for a bowl of rice a day.

These arguments are ridiculous. That's like saying "if a degree from Virginia Tech is good then why did someone shoot all of those people? checkmate!"

Take Anarchist Spain, every single major world power including the Soviets contributed in assisting Franco to crush the workers control.

>Because capitalist countries are nice places to live

That's because capitalist countries gain their wealth through imperialism and exploitation of labor. You might as well argue "If Mafia and Cartel bosses are bad people than why do they tend to live in nice houses?"

slave for soldiers til you starve and your head is skewered on a stake

>realism is ridiculous
socialists, everyone

you're right. workers should have the right to be sedated from their abuse instead of doing anything about the problem

why the fuck am i wasting my life arguing with socialists teens on the internet, this is so gay, grow up nerds

>workers control
>carried out extralegal killings on civilians
>raped and murdered nuns, and burned churches
>factory production efficiency went abysmal after a few months
>had their own trademarked anarchist gulags(prison labor camps)
truly, what a paradise!

Opposed to the individual? So Oscar Wilde, Henry David Thoreau, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Lucille Parsons, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, Max Stirner etc and their respective political philosophies are opposed to individualism? WEw Lad

>workers control
You mean "who has the biggest army to coerce everyone else" control.

you can only fail for so long. their system will have to change.

I'm not. I am a communist. Capitalism is a disease and the people that don't see it are horribly blind, indoctrinated, or just ignorant.

Thanks, Cold War propaganda created by bourgies.

The aggregate capacity to satisfy human needs from nature in general grows over time i.e. creative discovery can't be captured beforehand in the market values of commodities. Capitalists by buying labor power at its value are able to capture this creative increment and call it their private property. The big mistaken axiom in most economics is that accumulation cannot be a goal in itself and that exchange is all about [immediate or postponed] consumption i.e. Say's law.

>tfw broke proletarian who actually supports left-wing economic policies
>everyone I meet who is involved in these causes are fruitcake numales

was George Orwell right about the "pansy" left?

White upper middle class men are too afraid of acknowledging capitalism had a huge influence on systemic racism

This is why a large majority of Veeky Forums users are so strongly against socialism - they have a reactionary, Pavlovian fear of being debased from the white, judeochristian masculine daddy figure

The workers are usually working, so yes.

I only recognize three names on that list. Wilde was a poet. Thoreau was a borderline anarchist who could not have been farther from espousing what you understand as 'socialism'. Stirner is a proto-Nietzsche with less than 1/10 the intellectual sophistication.

Argue the point, not the names.

>eight decades of abject failure and brutality is just propaganda

if you don't have the balls to make something of yourself in capitalism beyond "broke proletarian" then you are just another numale, friend

>Nordic country

>systemic racism

there's that meme again. An accusation you never have to actually sustain

2/10 b8

hello fellow (((((((((((white man)))))))))))

...

Then why don't *you* do small scale socialism on your fucking own without getting me involved.
Start a business, hire good people, and split the capital equally amongst the people you hire and let everyone have a say in the running of the business.
If the model works then more people will pick it up.
Why is it always large scale revolution with you people?

>capitalism and the free market
>real

>>/gaskammer/

maybe if I keep espousing what my illiterate baby boomer parents were told about how great America and capitalism are my parents will love me and I will be a man and not a cuck

Oscar Wilde definitely isn't somebody you want to champion as a socialist senpai

>communism and food
>real

>cuck

>implying the siviet union wasn't state capitalism
>implying kulaks didn't deserve what they got

[helicopter noises]

The immediate relies solidifies my claims of insecurity. Go back to playing video games, where you can express your virgin rage behind the nuzzle of a shotgun

Orwell is weird because I feel like he was almost a cultural conservative. I think he liked British culture and would want to keep it.

>White upper middle class men are too afraid of acknowledging capitalism had a huge influence on systemic racism

racism is a left over relic of pre-capitalist production, aka agricultural slavery, the only people who seem to be made about multiculturalism are proletarian bums, the rich people are like open the borders and let all comers get a piece of this glorious free market while the uneducated white slobs are like "muh jerbies"

hoLy fucK CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM BTFO

youtube.com/watch?v=1LvntriHLxA&t=19s

>le state capitalism maymay

Classical mistake, he understood not that culture is a bourgeoisie construct, too bad.

upvoted, fellow warrior of the redpill! My high school classmates are such degenerates, if only they watched Monty Python and Dr. Who like me, a real man

we are a state capitalist system

read List and Ha Joon Chang cuck

youtube.com/watch?v=wFdwTjnX8RM

see you in 24 hours pham

>actually knows all that popcultureshit
classic lefty-tell

>I only recognize three names on that list
>openly admitting you're retarded

I guess by that gif's logic the Nazis were actually really socialist too. It's in their name, right?