>what if we banned all political parties except for ONE
>and what if this one political party controlled every aspect of government, and what if this government controlled all aspects of the economy
>And what if the head of this political party was the dictator of the whole operations with no term limits or separations of powers or breaks on his power
>Oh, and theres zero input from the people at large as to who this dictator is going to be, its basically just back room dealings by the oligarchy of the party elites
>But we have some sort of elections for local offices for the people
>they get once choice of a candidate that the all powerful party selects for them
>this is "real democracy"
How the fuck do people still defend this shit?

>>17866836 (OP)
You just described Feudalism, not Communism.

>>17866842
No, thats how communism works. You're clearly some retarded band dork who thinks "dude communism is when you share!"

>>17866836 (OP)
>How the fuck do people still defend this shit?
they imagine themselves as high ranking members of the politburo

>>17866846
Yes. You litterally described feudalism. You know words have meanings, yes? Reals before feels?

>>17866867
Nonsensical response. Are you a furry/trans too?

>>17866865
This

>>17866872
>encounters the slightest opposition
>immediately begins thinking about trannies

>>17866885
>e-commie gets called out
>immediatly starts shitposting nonsense
Communist nation states all do the above listed you fucking retard. The fact that you think this is feudalism should be a wake up call for you faggot.

>>17866887
>national states do feudalism
>this means it's communism

Reals before feels, remember?

>>17866888
This response makes no sense. AI bot response.

>>17866865
>>17866874
Real reason is that most e-commies have no actual clue what communism is. Its amazing how utterly clueless and illiterate they are.

>>17866836 (OP)
Thats what we have now, they are called ZOG and they use politicians like sockpuppets so no matter who gets elected the ZOG is always in control

>>17866894
If that doesn't make sense then you need to take a remedial English class.

>>17866904
That image is such a classic 2007ish Libertarian/conspiracy theoriest throwback lol

>>17866898
He says, in a "communism is when government do bad thing" thread.

>>17866909
>n a "communism is when government do bad thing" thread.
No one said this except you though. Thats a strawman argument. Try again retard.

>>17866913
So >>17866836 (OP) these are all good things?

>>17866921
>posting to the OP post which doesnt not include the phrase "communism is when government do bad thing"
Good job retard.
>these are all good things
Those are all things inherent to all communist nation-states. If you read all that and thought it was bad, then that means you're anti communist.

>>17866926
Do you think those things are bad?

>>17866929
You apparently do. Those were just presented as the facts of communist systems and your reaction was to claim that the OP post was saying its a bad thing. It never said if those things are good or bad, you just came to the conclusion yourself of being anti communist.

>>17866933
2nd time of asking, do you think those are bad things?

>>17866936
2nd time pointing out that you have already admitted that you think communism is bad. The factual realities of how communist nation states operates was presented, you read through, and responded that it was when the government is bad. I think its pretty obvious to even you that this is what happened, you realize you have no real counter argument, and are just doubling down on repeating the same thing over and over again.

Sorry you based your identity on online edgy politics and it just got shattered lol

>>17866945
3rd time asking, are those things bad?

>>17866948
Are you asking if I agree with you that communism is bad?

>>17866952
I am asking if those things you listed in the OP are bad.

>>17866955
You mean the list of characteristic of communism that you said were bad? Those?

>>17866958
The things listed in the OP, are they bad or no?

>>17866961
You mean the ones you said were bad?

>>17866965
Why can't you say if they're bad or not?

>>17866972
Why wont you admit that you said they were bad? lol

>China rejects international communism and sides with America
>They immediately see modernization, take out giant loans from the world bank, and the Soviet Union dies
lol

>>17866872
>heh, feels before reals tranny! science matters!
>btw green is blue if you disagree you're a heckin' troon or something
real valid brave etc.

>>17866836 (OP)
They never call it a democracy. It's a nation state.
Maybe there's a democratic process to voice greviances.
>Oh, and theres zero input from the people at large as to who this dictator is going to be, its basically just back room dealings by the oligarchy of the party elites
This just sounds like the US to be honest.

>>17866885
>>17866867
Alright, tankie furshitter

>>17868104
>litterally cannot formulate an argument without thinking about wierd sex

>>17866836 (OP)
Westernoids screech about "democracy" while their "choices" are two corporate-owned geriatrics who serve the same oligarchs. China lifted 800M from poverty, US drowns in debt and mass shootings. Your "freedom" is voting for which warmonger bombs brown kids next. Cope harder while your empire crumbles and the East rises.

>>17866842
>>17866867
>the system that was filled with people born in the Russian empire manifested itself similarly to the Russian empire
>Wtf how could this happen???
Why are commies so delusional?
Racial realists are ALWAYS right. Demographics are destiny. Ideology can not overcome genetics.

>>17868117
>MUH CHINA
China was a rotting backwards shithole up until the late 1970s. They only changed after Mao died, Deng trashed orthodox marxism, and then just started taking out huge loans from the world bank.

>>17868117
>muh debt
Chinas debt as a percentage of their GDP is about 88% and rising since Xi took power. I don't know why midwits always throw this around like it means anything. Debt is a necesarry thing for a countries development. I would rather be more like Japan than Russia, and I think most people would agree with me

>>17868254
You're right. Chinese understood this.
But instead of identitarian politics, Chinese decided to put their Han genetics over capital.

>>17866836 (OP)
>still had a flatter wealth distribution that capitalist societies
it wasn't perfect and needed more internal democracy, democratic centralism was a mistake
but what does it say about liberal "democracy" that even a one party state mogs it when it comes to treating people equally?

>>17866836 (OP)
>>this is "real democracy"
This is the only part that makes it a blatant farce. Authority is inevitable and the unknowing masses shouldn't even be given the illusion of participation.

>>17868254
The USSR's most infamous ruler was not a genetic Russian though? And most of the Tsars who gave Russia that reputation in the first place were genetically Germans or Scandinavians

Lenin did a gamble hoping that Germany would also have a revolution, and them work together to spread communism. Otherwise they were lost. Doing communism in a industrial rich society was absolutely necesarry - people who read Marx get this.

It was very irresponsible