Thread 17972266

Now that we know communism doesn't work, why doesn't communism work?

>>17972266 (OP)
>why doesn't communism work?
because communists don't work
they are NEETs and other parasitical leeches

>>17972266 (OP)
It violates the law of the universe, as established by our Heavenly Father, that some men will be rich and others poor. (See Matthew 20:15)

There are only two types of men in the world, which are: men who don't work, and men who don't want to work. (See Leviticus 25:39-40)

If you give men wealth, they will lose it or waste it. If you give men responsibility, they will abuse it or destroy it. If you give men power, they will either squander it or misuse it. (See 1 Corinthians 15:58)

Communism cannot exist where there are only 9 people in a society because it requires a 10th man to create the chaos. (See Genesis 3:1)

Communism only works in a society where no one goes to church or pays tithes. (See Deuteronomy 14:22)

The very concept of wealth redistribution is unnatural, as it is man's natural right to take the wealth of another man. (See Exodus 21:16)

The very idea of communism is anti-freedom, as it denies man his natural rights to be free, free to oppress others, and free to take their property, if not their lives. (See Exodus 21:23)

Socialism cannot be sustained in a world where women are permitted to vote. (See Genesis 3:16)

Communism works best in a world without Christianity, because it was created in a world without Christianity. (See John 14:6)

Because communism has been proven to not work in the Soviet Union, North Korea, and China, that must be why it not works. (See 2 Corinthians 6:14)

Socialism is just a means to justify revolution, very poorly. Notice their symbol is the sickle which addresses the main concern of pissants, food. The other symbol is the hammer symbolizing industrial unions which they use to coup the government. They lay it all out for you. They grift hungry peasants and stage strikes to during wartime to try and collapse their host government.

After this they have no game plan and usually devolve into a worse centrally planned monstrosity than what they would have had if they didn't revolt

>>17972266 (OP)
Because it is based on extremely utopian (read: unrealistic) assumptions.

>>17972306
No no.
The sickle is the Reaper, the hammer is the Smith. The people are the wheat and chaff.

>>17972288
What does the success of a fascist state have to do with communism?

>>17972288
Communism doesn't work
>But China
They have over a billion people, relative to their population Chinas economy is complete trash and can't even nominally compete with the USA. Under any other economic system China would've conquered the solar system by now but instead they're being kneecapped by retarded tankies.

>>17972374
Economic systems don't fix stupid civilizations. Which is kind of the opposite of what socialism promised

>>17972266 (OP)
Something something human nature.

Because North Korea is a shithole. Simple as

>>17972374
>relative to their population
>he uses gdp per capita
>he thinks the west's calculation of their gdp is even remotely accurate
yeah paying mr shekelberg your 2500 a month for a studio apartment is proof the US is such a strong economy! it makes the gdp go up after all
meanwhile china surpassed the us in gdp ppp like 10 years ago and the gap is getting wider every single year. wall street "fianance" ie shuffling money around is not economic activity

>>17972266 (OP)
Do you want the theoretical or practical reason?
>theoretical
Because it assumes human nature will not naturally form hierarchies and that we have evolved beyond that point, which is patently untrue. It also presupposes a post-scarcity society, which is impossible for the foreseeable future.
>practical
Because the dictator eventually either dies and the system dissolves (Mao), the system dissolves under its own weight (USSR), the system is overthrown by outside forces (Cambodia) or the leader is overthrown (Romania).

>>17972266 (OP)
idk, but I feel like it has something to do with inflexibility and how microtransactions function at scale.

>>17972288
>poor people points

>>17972363
The fascist state in that picture is in second place.
>>17972374
>it doesn't work
>now listen to me ramble and ignore the fact that it works
Do Gweilos really
>>17972795
The economy is real. Sorry you spent your peak neuroplasticity reading about niggers and trannies idpol instead of assets like a real adult.

>>17972799
>>17972597
Sinophillia is a mental illness. It's amazing how much mental gymnastics you people use to justify the fact that an economy of 1.4 billion people can't even surpass the economy of 330 million people. Don't you feel embarrassed? Have you people no shame?

>>17972306
you're a peasant like the rest of us.

>>17972832
In order to be left of Ayn Rand you have to get a degree in deliberately misunderstanding per capita.

You ready to blow your mind?

Che Guevara leaves his cushy digs in Argentina successfully overthrows the capitalist pigs in Cuba then goes to Africa and then Bolivia (site of every communists fever dream of exploited proletariat workers . . . Potosi's silver mines), and the peasants don't know what the hell Guevara is yapping about, not only that they basically turn him in for execution.

Talk about world communism not working, imagine what the ghost of Che is thinking now, you bastards would rather die from mercury poison in the world's worst silver mine then give up Catholicism!

Such is the human condition.

>>17972832
>reeeee why do you like China
Kek. It's afraid.

>>17972597
ok then what about ppp per capita?

>>17972363
the fascist state in that graph is second place. it's getting beat by the communist country. are you colorblind?
>>17972832
no one wants your vision of the future.

>>17973614
>>17973600

>>17972308
>Because it is based on extremely utopian (read: unrealistic) assumptions.
This, notice how marx dosen't even attempt to describe the final stage of socialism in detail.
That's because it's so far in the future and so idealist he doesn't even have an idea of it.

>>17972288
China is Natsoc though. DPRK is the only communist country left

>>17972266 (OP)
Many reasons. But an important one is the economic calculation problem. Without honest price signals, economic planners can't rationally allocate scarce goods, capital and labor between multiple competing uses.

>>17972288
China has a gdp per capita below the world average and its growth only took off after they ditched communism.

>>17972266 (OP)
Commietrannies are subhumans and they cannot make anything work properly.

>>17972832
If they had common sense they wouldn't believe in whatever they do.

>>17972288
>socialism with chinese characteristics

The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital is almost devoid of any mention of immorality and violence and human impulses. There is little understanding of how social relationships and systems actually form, it is like trying to learn about chemistry without any mention of molecular structure and straying off into alchemy and the 4 elements.

Imagine a merchant who acts as a middleman between a spinner and a weaver handling the numerous transactions, distribution and storage, all of which are an economic expense alongside the actual spinning and weaving. The communist however would say something like the capitalist superstructure forces the spinner to sell to the merchant who sells it at a higher price to the weaver and pockets the difference for zero real work. It is possible the merchants are all in cahoots and formed a cartel to manipulate prices of course, and one might imagine the spinners and weavers forming a union to counter this then attempting to centrally plan the distribution of spun wool and other matters like how much to spin, the type of wool, how it is spun and who does the spinning. However you then run into the problem of incompetence, fraud and scams within this union, favoring spinners over weavers or one group of spinners over another, granting the leadership privileges above everyone else and so on..

This is perhaps the origin of this error. These unions want to be viewed as perfect and infallible. Despite their grass roots origins looking out for the "proletariat", they fall prey to the exact same self-justification as every other large political body. So naturally when Karl Marx set out to write his treatise he does not mention this, perhaps deliberately. If you want to start a revolution, you are better off reading Hobbes.

>>17972266 (OP)
Because humans are trash and no amount of delusions of grandeur and self importance will make up for that. All systems of governance headed by humans are fragile and crumble with time, some more readily than others. I for one welcome our new AI overlords.

It makes me sad.

Because yeah, obviously it'd be great to have actual hard workers be properly rewarded. Of course in a world of abundance nobody should be starving or homeless. Obviously. That all sounds great.

But unfortunately the only things we have are;
>20th century dictators who tried to strongarm their way into it and failed (or got invaded)
>20th century dictators who pretended to fight for it to centralise personal power

>people who disagree with all of this and want to stay cucked to big bankers forever

Long story short?

Marxism fails in practice and in theory because it presumes that abolishing private property and centralizing economic decision-making can perfectly align individual incentives with collective welfare, but in reality this creates insurmountable information and incentive problems that lead to inefficiency, stagnation, and authoritarianism.

Don’t get me wrong, Marx did make some valid points about inequality and socioeconomic tensions that can and do erupt into violence and instability if left unchecked. But the field of economics has come a long way from “Fuck it, burn it all. Utopia will rise from the ashes.”.

>>17972288
China is about as communist as the Crumbl Cookie CEO is heterosexual

Commies are about as retarded as Libertarians in that both are totally delusional about just how altruistic and rational humans are.

>>17972639
Kinda. Humans get more hierarchal when there is greater incentive to actively compete over resources. However, humans get more egalitarian when there is greater incentive to cooperate over resource collection and allocation.

>>17973920
Honestly when one puts it like that, one wonders how we got this far as a species when we are so trash.

>>17973927
>“Fuck it, burn it all. Utopia will rise from the ashes.”.
Except thats kind of what has been playing out. World economic order burns due to world wars, the US redraws the rules to suit themselves. Economic prosperity for the US ensues. Barely got a century before the cracks became too deep to ignore. What learning has the field of economics really done when the field they played on was so lopsided? Why are US economist struggling to deal with rising competition in international markets? If the field of economics has learnt so much, why does the US deficit continue to soar? Why do we keep hearing whispers of finding alternatives to the green back, is the status quo not stable enough? Why does another burn it all down event akin to the world wars look more and more likely as a the chosen solution? Decades NATO members sat on their ass and none sweet fuck all, now all of a sudden even america hat is remilitarizing. I cant fucking wait until zoomers are getting blown to pieces by AI guided munitions. Imagine the terror on their faces right before the drone explodes sending multicolored hair everywhere.

>>17972832
I swear ppp is the white equivalent of blacks not understanding per capita

>>17973984
Uh, no?

The global economy in 2025 compared to 1945 are like night and fucking day in terms of human development, median wealth, labor quality, and market efficiency.

>Why are US economist struggling to deal with rising competition in international markets?

We’re…not? Aside from the Populists actively shooting themselves in the foot by restricting trade, investment, and labor.

>Why do we keep hearing whispers of finding alternatives to the green back, is the status quo not stable enough?

Conspiracy forums and YouTube videos

>Why does another burn it all down event akin to the world wars look more and more likely as a the chosen solution?

Because nuclear Armageddon wasn’t on the table then

Hang on, your broken English and conspiracy claims are setting off my bot senses

>>17973978
Lack of any competition. Same reason many fear the rise of AGI, another intelligent entity potentially competing with humans, basically unprecedented since humans started eating to much grass.

>>17974013
>human development, median wealth, labor quality, and market efficiency.
Technological improvments and human rights developments are not the domain of economists

>Populists actively shooting themselves in the foot by restricting trade, investment, and labor.
This is the domain of the economists, sir.

>Conspiracy forums and YouTube videos
Satoshi Nakamoto didnt stay hidden because of a tinfoil hat

>Because nuclear Armageddon wasn’t on the table then
You think it will last forever? Are you incapable of imagining how advancements in technology could make ICBMs obsolete? Your own ignorance wont stop militaries from trying.

>>17974032
Analyzing the development of technology and its impacts on the economy is quite literally part of economics.

There are no populist claims that would be backed up by any mainstream economist.

Again with the conspiracy theories.

>You think it will last forever?

Until we discover a hard counter to nukes, yes

>>17974081
>mainstream economist
The same mainstream economist that saw no problem arising before 2008? The same mainstream economist that see no problem in printing money to fix americas problem? How many different types of economists are there going to be before your done moving the goal post to defend their mistakes?

>>17972266 (OP)
Human nature

>>17974081
>Until we discover a hard counter to nukes, yes
You think that shit will be televised? You think you knowing about it is necessary to their developments? Calling it a conspiracy theory wont change that fact.

>>17974093
That’s like saying meteorology is nonsense because forecasters missed one hurricane’s specific landfall time and location. Plenty of economists and housing-market specialists did warn about the risks of subprime lending and securitization YEARS before 2008. The problem was less a lack of knowledge and more that policymakers, regulators, and investors didn’t act on those warnings. Economists provide the facts, policymakers choose what to do.

As for “printing money”, mainstream economics doesn’t treat it as a magic fix. Post-2008 and post-2020, central banks used monetary expansion because the alternative was depression-level unemployment. Economists still debate the side effects on inflation, asset prices, and inequality, but the models didn’t claim money creation was cost-free. They claimed correctly that in a liquidity trap it could stabilize demand. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

In medicine, you don’t see people proudly calling themselves “humoralists” or “phlogistonists” anymore. The profession has largely consolidated around an integrated biomedical framework. There are specialties, but they are nested within one dominant scientific paradigm. A cardiologist and a neurologist disagree on details, not fundamentals. Economics in modern times is along that same trajectory. Most professional economists no longer identify primarily as “Keynesians” or “Monetarists” or “Austrians”. Instead, there’s a broadly shared “New Neoclassical Synthesis” (sometimes called the “mainstream consensus”) that blends insights from Keynesian demand management and Neoclassical microfoundations. Within that synthesis, you’ll find specialties like international trade, labor economics, development, and behavioral finance just as medicine has subfields.

>>17974156
Hmm maybe youre right, maybe economists know what theyre doing and we arent living with dread of economic turmoil. Maybe the recessions were all the fault of politicians, economists and bankers did nothing wrong. Maybe the 'right' economic knowledge will provide us a solutions to the decifit.

>>17973642
Only good post in this thread.

>>17972266 (OP)
Nothing works because of kikes...
Only stalin somewhat managed to do somehthing jewfree for a little period until he got killed by them

>>17972266 (OP)
We have this thread every week.

>>17973642
I would add the issue of human motivation. Capitalism haven't created human greed, it merely use it because capitalism is ductile. Work and I will pay you.

The end goal of socialism is to create a man who would not have what they call capitalist deviancy. they think that the workers will identify themselves as the collective and everyone would gladly work for the community.
This, obviously resulted in horribly low production outputs. The Imperial Russia whose economy was mostly agrarian, whose main export was grains and who had the fertile plains of Ukraine had a famine and kept having one until Lenin decided to have a state capitalist economy instead.

>>17974093
Economy is a soft science. It's a polite way to says that they are only people with opinion, and they don't have to be right to be paid.

>>17972266 (OP)
Dialectics are literally finding stuff out by mistake. Contradictons are false and thesises are meant to either stand or be debunked, not both at the same time.
>Leftism
There's very little sociological difference between the damage caused by the average K-12 teacher and a cartoon monopoly capitalist, one is extremely selfless while the other is extremely selfish. Stalin and genghis khan essentially

>>17973614
Literally every vision of the future involving any sort of socialism be it fascist, NS or commie results in WW3. Even the status quo corporatism results in cyberpunk dystopia

>>17973926
The world has scarcity