Thread 18092259

Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today? The Earth has the technology; computers, AI, etc. As of today, there is no rational reason to not have an efficient economy based on industrialization, universal employment, transportation, housing, energy, healthcare, etc.

>>18092259 (OP)
How do these two even physically reach each other?

>>18092259 (OP)
Every capitalist society engages in economic planning. Marxist-Leninist societies were not all the same, and many of them liberalized. Marxist-Leninism doesn't make sense, in the 21st century, because it was a born from specific historical conditions. The Soviets adopted their economy because they had to survive in a world surrounded by enemies.
Any form of socialism has to take in consideration of historical and material conditions.
For example, Cuba has allowed some private property but also has a co-operative sector.

>>18092263
an epic heart of darkness-style voyage into the west african interior on a steamboat

>>18092259 (OP)
>why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today
Because communists don't work

>>18092273
Sounds kino but how do Noks get to Africa in the first place?

>>18092275
>communists don't work
>muh gulag work camps killed 6 billion dissidents
Pick one already

>>18092277
well they aren't land-locked, and I'm sure they have decent relations with one of burkina faso's maritime neighbors

>>18092278
>communists don't work
>non-communist slaves work on their behalf
Why does he have to pick one?

>>18092285
because there weren't only non-communists in there, there were also communists of the wrong flavor

>>18092283
You would think America would just intercept Nork ships considering the US Navy controls the seven seas.
Also
>Egypt’s Foreign Minister holds trilateral meeting with Malian and Burkinabe counterparts
LMAO

>>18092259 (OP)
>The Earth has the technology; computers, AI, etc.
Because you imply the economy is all about "calculation", when in reality it is more about creative solutions, transparent and fast information, reactivity and collection of skills that only a decentralized market system where actors have a certain degree of freedom to organize resources alone can offer.

There is no way you can replace all of this with a centralized system it is impossible, even in your wildest dream where an AI contains all the knowledge and skills of every human being on earth it would be capped by how truthful collected information is (makes it prone to errors like humans), and it would make humans themselves obsolete which makes all the socialist betterment efforts all for nothing, humans would go slowly extinct.

>>18092263
Through smoke signals.

>>18092290
america doesn't actually fuck with nk that much, sure they're embargoed but beyond that I guess risking nukes over guam and hawaii isn't worth aggravating them

>>18092295
Uh, capitalist countries are very centralized dude. There's nothing decentralized about capitalism at all. What drugs are you on?
Everything you have, in your house, is regulated from your water to your fucking car.
Even companies, like corporations, are very hierarchical and centralized.

Bro why is half this board just /pol/ threads

>>18092304
>He thinks NK has nuclear weapons that could get in close to Hawaii
hahahahaha

>>18092304
we tried but trump completely botched talks and he's pretty much the sole reason they are now back in russia's good graces and sending them millions of artillery shells

>>18092307
>capitalist countries are very centralized dude. There's nothing decentralized about capitalism at all. What drugs are you on?
They are not, you can start any business you want here and plan accordingly.
>but muh corpos
first of all they suffers from diseconomies of scales so their giant body is reflected in poor quality of their work which exposes them to smaller companies stealing customers, second of all regulation doesn't mean you're not free to decide on your own. It will never be as heavy and absolute as waiting for the state planner to decide what paint you must use for your machines (something that caused a factory to halt in ussr because they ran out of red paint, until the state told them green is also ok).

>>18092322
they've been sending rockets into space for 15 years, if they could do that then there's no reason they couldn't have long-range missile technology.

>>18092259 (OP)
The big issue is innovation. The best way to make money in capitalism is to create a new kind of product be effectively a monopoly until your competitors catch up and make an alternative to your product. There is not much incentive in planned economy to innovate. Companies are optimized fulfill quotas so they don't have much resoruces to spare to experiment.

You can have publicly funded r&d departments that will create cool scientific innovations, the Soviets were able to do that too, but you won't get a lot of novel consumer products. And important technological innovations can come from them too, so in the long term even an effective planned economy would fall behind technologically.

>>18092259 (OP)
Do you think the politicians would be better managing the economy?

>>18092342
>They are not, you can start any business you want here and plan accordingly.
Not really, in the US businesses have occupational licensing requirements and require a business license to even operate in any state. This is laughably wrong and proves you've never started a business in your life. I doubt you've paid taxes in your life.
>first of all they suffers from diseconomies of scales so their giant body is reflected in poor quality o
This is completely wrong considering corporations own 60% of the US market share. Corporations are very efficient at what they do. You're just stupid and childish.

Also, the "you can start a business anywhere" is so fucking dumb and politically illiterate I can't believe you would say something so stupid.
In the US, you literally have zoning that prevent from you putting a business anywhere. Zoning laws prevent corporations from dumping water into local water supply, coal plants being opened near your house, and stop brothels being put near fucking schools.

>>18092389
Is there a historian with a doctorate who shares this opinion? It makes sense but I wonder if there's more nuance that a book could cover.

>>18092263
North Korea has some merchant vessels that operate under other flags.

>>18092389
Most innovation in the US came from the military, NASA, and government funded institutions. It's a bit wild to say this when you're using the fucking internet.

>>18092688
DARPA invented the internet and then sat on it for decades until private enterprise was allowed to develop it into something useful.

>>18092259 (OP)
The issue wasn't ever with planning as a thing. Theoretically they had these calculations that they'd need more people to plan than to work if they did it properly but again not the point.

I remember watching an interview with a soviet planner who talked about some kind of pantyhose plan. Pantyhose was extremely fashionable at some point, the supply was too low, so they figured out vertically integrated plan to produce pantyhose. By the time the production has physically started the fashion was over.
What was needed wasn't more efficient pantyhose plan but outright brutal rejection of fashion. Universal workers uniform, autumn model, female, size XYZ, unchanged since 1953 is the only clothes you are allowed to wear but first you will get 3 months of anti-capitalist classes because their thinking clearly has gotten you.

This is how you make planned economy work, you keep it as simple and streamlined as possible. You don't allow fashion, luxury, specialisation or personal preference, it's all as streamlined as it ever gets.
>but life will suck
Yeah. We're not in business of making life not suck, we're in a business of making planned economy work.

>>18092259 (OP)
>

>>18092259 (OP)
>LARP as a Sankara wannabe
>Base your entire cult of personality on fighting Western resource extraction while allowing Wagner to to take all your gold and REMs
>Lose 40% of your country to JNIM
>Instead of doing anything about it you focus on targeting unrelated ethnic minorities and fags while the JNIM keep launching raids

>>18092290
North Korea is allow to sail international waters. Plus they usually work under disguise whenever abroad. For example, China exports North Korean goods that are sold as if they were Chinese. You may own a North Korean thing without knowing.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today?
Ask China.

>>18092290
>Egypt’s Foreign Minister holds trilateral meeting with Malian and Burkinabe counterparts
>LMAO
You'll love this one

>>18092719
True, military communication was not useful. But onlyfans certainly is. Thank you free market!

of course it would work, city states would work, how well would it work is the real question

>>18092852
They had onlyfans in 1993?

>>18092852
>Various technological innovations were developed and became easily accessible to the average person once private entities were allowed to sell and mass produce it for the consumer market
>Well yeah uh...porn...take that Chud

>>18092905
>Actually, the government making stuff for productive endeavors such space travel and satellite communication is not as useful as private companies making onlyfans to enable prostitution and AI data centers making shitty memecoins that drain our supplies and make electricity more expensive
Its no surprise lolberts are not taken seriously anywhere on Earth

>>18092688
>>18092852
>>18092919
>Planned economies stagnate due to a lack of a robust consumer economy
>Well yeah but whatabout (things that were created under American free market capitalism with the aid of numerous privacy companies)

>>18092259 (OP)
>Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today?
IDGI, America works. China works. How are they not planned economies?

>>18092919
>Claim that anon is a dum dum for saying that planned economics don't innovative because the American government created Internet and he's using the Internet
>Proceed to seethe about how much you hate the Internet

>>18092955
>Planned economies stagnate
I don't see China stagnating.
>under American free market capitalism with the aid of numerous privacy companies
True, the internet is so much better now with Google and Microsoft controlling it. You are totally not a retard or anything.

>>18092960
>He thinks the internet did not exist without private corporations ruining
This is how I know you are not old enough to post on 4chan

>>18092919
>productive endeavors such space travel and satellite communication
But all those things were created by private companies

>>18092979
No, NASA was not created by a private company.
Even Space X, Elon Musk's company, relies on NASA and government subsides.

Round (cm) Historical equivalent (approx.) Penetration (cm)

0.27 BB / tiny airgun pellet 0.00
0.635 .25 ACP / 6.35 mm pistol 0.00
0.57 5.7×28mm (FN) / small PDW 0.00
0.90 9×19mm Parabellum (9mm) 0.01
1.09 .44 Magnum / large pistol 0.02
0.556 5.56×45mm NATO (rifle) 0.04
0.762 7.62 mm (7.62×39 / 7.62×51) 0.06
0.762 (2) 7.62 mm (heavy bullet) 0.07
1.27 .50 BMG (12.7 mm) 0.38
0.833 8 mm Mauser / 7.92 mm rifle 0.85
3.7 37 mm anti‑tank/AA gun 3.61
4.0 40 mm Bofors / 40 mm gun 7.26
4.5 45 mm AT gun (WWII era) 9.13
5.7 57 mm anti‑tank/AA gun 11.92
7.5 75 mm field/AT gun 10.16
7.62 (large) 76–77 mm field gun class 19.11
8.5 85 mm anti‑tank/AA gun 17.96
10.0 100 mm naval/field gun 30.09
7.6 (heavy) 76 mm naval/field gun 25.22
8.8 88 mm FlaK / AT gun 17.74
12.2 122 mm howitzer 18.31
2.46 25 mm autocannon class 37.86
2.31 23 mm autocannon (VYA‑23 / Oerlikon class) 55.31
5.5 57–60 mm gun / recoilless class 25.26
10.0 (2) 100 mm gun (variant) 26.50
4.1 41 mm / small naval gun (approx.) 41.80
3.6 36 cm? (or 36″ siege mortar ≈ Little David class) 46.22
3.1 31 cm heavy mortar class 42.88
2.5 25–26 cm siege mortar class 40.36
2.2 22 cm siege mortar class 38.45
2.5 (2) 25 cm class (long) 55.53
2.5 (heavy) 25–26 cm heavy shell 86.77
2.95 30 cm class siege gun 84.05
12.7 127 mm (5") naval gun 21.05
15.0 150 mm howitzer / naval gun 35.83
20.0 200 mm (8") naval/artillery gun 41.37
41.0 Big Bertha / 42 cm siege howitzer (WWI) ≈ 41 cm 80.59
80.0 Schwerer Gustav / Dora (80 cm railway gun) 140.39
41.0 (fast) 41 cm / 16‑inch class (battleship) 126.24
101.0 "Supergun" / Project‑scale ~1 m (approx.) 136.48
49.95 50 cm siege gun (≈500 mm class) 140.08


Notes: equivalents are approximate (common historical guns of the nearest caliber/class).

Round (cm) Historical model (specific / representative) Pen (cm)

0.27 BB / tiny pellet 0.00
0.635 .25 ACP (FN Model 1905) 0.00
0.57 FN PS90 / 5.7×28 (P90) 0.00
0.90 9×19 mm (Beretta 92) 0.01
1.09 .44 Magnum (S&W) 0.02
0.556 5.56×45 NATO (M16) 0.04
0.762 7.62×51 NATO (FN FAL) 0.06
0.762 7.62×54R (Mosin) 0.07
1.27 .50 BMG (M2 Browning) 0.38
0.833 7.92×57 Mauser 0.85
3.70 37 mm AT/AA (M4/M3) 3.61
4.00 Bofors 40 mm L/60 7.26
4.50 Soviet 45 mm M1937 9.13
5.70 57 mm ZiS‑2 / 57 mm AT 11.92
7.50 German 75 mm Pak / field gun 10.16
7.62 Soviet 76.2 mm (ZiS‑3) 19.11
8.50 85 mm D‑44 / FlaK 41 17.96
10.00 100 mm BS‑3 / naval 100 mm 30.09
7.60 76 mm naval/field (Oto/WWII) 25.22
8.80 88 mm FlaK / Pak 43 17.74
12.20 122 mm D‑25 howitzer 18.31
2.46 25 mm autocannon (Oerlikon) — APFSDS capable 37.86
2.31 23 mm autocannon (VYa/HS) — APFSDS capable 55.31
5.50 57–60 mm recoilless / gun 25.26
4.10 40–41 mm autocannon / gun — APFSDS capable 41.80
3.60 30–36 mm autocannon — APFSDS capable 46.22
3.10 30–31 mm autocannon class — APFSDS capable 42.88
2.50 25–26 mm cannon — APFSDS capable 40.36
2.20 20–22 mm cannon — APDS/APFSDS possible 38.45
2.95 ~30 cm siege/large KE analog 84.05
12.70 127 mm (5") naval / tank analog 21.05
15.00 150 mm howitzer / naval gun 35.83
20.00 200 mm (8") naval/artillery 41.37
41.00 41 cm WWI siege howitzer (Big Bertha) 80.59
80.00 80 cm Schwerer Gustav / Dora 140.39
41.00 406 mm (16" battleship) 126.24
101.00 Experimental “supergun” (~1 m) 136.48
49.95 50 cm siege gun (≈500 mm class) 140.08

>>18092984
NASA works with hundreds of different contractors.
https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-contractors/
https://files.catbox.moe/pc1r6x.xlsx

>>18092958
I guess planning isn't the issue. It must be the Marx part or the Lenin part. My money's on Lenin because compared to Marx's day, worker's rights won. But then, I don't really see a problem with pure Leninism. Maybe they just don't make a great match at the end of the day, I think both men would agree.

>>18093001
Hundreds of private contractors rely on NASA, correct.

>>18093001
You're kinda exposing fro being a retard.
NASA pays those companies.
Johnson Space Center Awarded Contracts are government contracts. It's boggles my mind when people on 4chan are so confidently wrong about stuff.

>>18093024
I guess we can all agree planning and authority are not the problem with government.

>>18093041
Yes

>>18093039
>Uh the government is better at making stuff
>But they hire out hundreds of private contractors to make said stuff
>Well their working for the government so it doesn't count

>>18092259 (OP)
Poor morale. Death to the degenerate society.

>>18093043
so, why did the marxist economics fail? Leninist tyranny is sort of alive but not as a major force either.

>>18093052
If Marxist economics failed, why not just get rid of trade unions, the 8 hour working day, and child labor laws? Lets just go back to the god ol' days where people died on the job.
>Leninist tyranny is sort of alive but not as a major force either.
Do you think Cuba is on the same level as Stalinist Russia?

>>18093060
well ok, they succeeded. I would argue the successful ideas were incorporated everywhere. What's the point of this thread then? Makes it all seem kind of pointless.

No one wants to live for "pleasure" as is defined by academics. They want the ordinary life. You can't just replace people with foreigners until it works!

>>18092746
Marxists have never defeated an Islamist movement once in history. Not once.

>inb4 “Uyghurs”
The Chinese are going to lose. Look at Chechnya, Islamists won after 70 years.

>>18092746
>spends his rule whining about muh Western boogeyman while doing nothing to actually improve the country

Turns out he's truly Sakanra's spiritual successor.
Now he just needs to get assassinated by his second on command.

>ITT retards don't understand how the MIC works
Do you think the military creates weapons? No they contract a firearms company who manufacturers and sells them armaments. Does the Air Force build planes? No an aeronautics firm will design and build them. That's just the big stuff. Everything from sanitation, catering, and IT is contracted out to numerous companies. The DOD employees almost a million civilian contractors.
https://sam.gov/reports/awards/static
https://files.catbox.moe/o9enbe.xlsx

>>18093060
>why not just get rid of trade unions, the 8 hour working day, and child labor laws?
None of those things were created under Marxism

>>18093077
there is no "under marxism" Marx said people would demand their rights inevitably as the working class became predominant. That's what happened. Leninism is where you decide it's not happening fast enough and make people marxist at gunpoint. The marxism is incidental to leninism because they can do anything once the guns come out, and that's good because not all countries need 30th century marxism. Sometimes these ideas serve as philosophical justification to resolve real conflict that lies beneath.

>>18093068
Chechnya jihadists lost tho

>>18092273
>>18092277
This would be the best Netflix series. Apocalypse Now meets Master and Commander. They could get a whole sub arc going about getting Iran to distract the ‘godless colonialists/western chauvinist imperialists’ with a bunch of zany antics on the Red Sea to help the cargo ship get by the Americans.

>>18092263
Through Senegal and Mali probably
A lot of African countries have good relations with the DPRK

>>18093175
Give them a specialized train with variable axle width. Three cars and a diesel engine. They could slip through connected rail networks as far as Basra

>>18093175
>>18093231
then they . . . uhh . . do this but damn Africa needs railways

>>18093050
>Uh private contractors are better at making stuff!
>But they need government money in order to do it!
Really making the case here for libertardians hahaha

>>18093061
It's just funny making fun of conservetards who live off government programs and calling people communists
It's fun to point out the hypocrisy

>>18093231
So you’re proposing a hijinks laden dark comedy? Planes, Trains, and Automobiles but with a load of nork munitions? Also a good series idea.

>>18092259 (OP)
If you're interested in this subject I recommend you do a deep dive on Victor Mikhailovich Glushkov
I'm absolutely fascinated by his ideas, so visionary
https://museum.dataart.com/short-stories/ogas-the-red-bit-system

>>18093236
similar, I imagine to the "champagne socialist" or modern equivalent being funny. horseshoe theory?

>>18093240
It is funny, I won't deny that

>>18093237
Add a layer of irony and we're there. It stars Ken Jeong and he's a CIA agent trying to run the guns to burkina faso in order to catch them red handed, but first he has to survive the trip

>>18093089
>there is no "under marxism" Marx said people would demand their rights inevitably as the working class became predominant.
Marx and Engels argued that socialism would take different forms because it was dependent on the social and economic context of whatever society it took place in. That's why he argued socialism, in the United States, would most likely be possible through a democratic path. And that was somewhat true. FDR and LBJ's social programs were a result of the large amounts of unionization in America society at the time pushing for those things. Republicans were even supportive of unions. But don't tell the retards here that. That will hurt their brains.

>>18093257
They were broadly correct and most importantly, they posed an alternative to contemporary and future economic norms. The threat of a viable alternative permits change, in that way Marx is truly a great liberator.

>>18093235
>State has to rely on private entities to basically do anything
Wow you really showed me bunkertroon

>>18093267
>Private companies can't exist without government money is proof the state doesn't need to exist
It's no wonder lolberts are not taken seriously anywhere on the planet. Imagine being this fucking stupid. I'm so happy they chased your faggot ass off /pol/.

china owns construction companies like CRCC outright and doesn't have to contract out
it still amazes me that people will really go out of their way to argue just for the sake of arguing... can't we all just agree none of us are really sure about what we're talking about?

>>18093235
>>18093270
>It's another episode of communists thinking everyone that doesn't believe in planned economies is a AnCap

>>18093255
>forced to act as a korean for the first time in years, surrounded by paranoid north koreans, the stress is building up
>Ken feels "white" expressions sneaking through his mask. He adopts a sneering, anti-Jap propaganda face to cope
>he tries to be more asian . . trying too hard? focus on the mission, man
>but maybe they'll just shoot me when we get out to sea
starting to like this idea

>>18093274
>Its another episode of lolberts thinking everyone who isn't autistic enough to believe Mac Donalds shouldn't have a private army or employ child soldiers is a communist

>>18093272
>china owns construction companies like CRCC outright and doesn't have to contract out
Sure but they still run according to a for-profit model like any capitalist firm does. It's not the same thing as a Soviet-style central planning, which is more like a wartime economy done permanently.

>>18093272
>china owns construction companies like CRCC outright and doesn't have to contract out
His argument is that governments don't drive the majority of technological progress while ignoring the fact private companies, he's citing, rely on government grants to do anything of note.
It's the type of dumb lolbertarian logic that doesn't make sense and has never applied to reality. It's also why when you point that Millei, a libertarian, is now asking for the Trump administration to save him with a government bailout.
It's largely stupidity, like this, that made /pol/ chase libertarians off their home board. Libertarians have no consistent economic or moral philosophy because his history keeps showing how stupid and ineffective their beliefs and ideas are.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today?
Because it doesn't work. It's a retarded idea that's been proven wrong every time it's been tried. Even in Russia (where it ruled over one of the most resource rich areas on the planet without opposition) or China (where it had the unwavering support of one of the most populous nations to ever exist) it couldn't survive - and either died slowly and painfully in Russia, or morphed into authoritarian state-capitalism wearing a Marxist skin suit in China. The idea is dead. It was never alive. Anybody announcing that they are a Marxist, after so much proof of the inferiority of the idea, is either announcing that they're retarded, or that they think they can exploit the retarded enough to gain power for themselves.

>>18093297
>he's citing, rely on government grants to do anything of note.
But then why does the state have to rely on said companies to make shit for them

>>18093301
"State capitalism" is just largely anarckiddie/Trot non-sense. Socialism is a transitory period towards communism. That's why many socialist countries had nationalized, socialist sectors where certain utilities like electricity and natural gas was owned by the state, while a private sector existed to allow people to form their own businesses.Marxism is not utopian, your like belief system, because it understand economic systems are not ready made, but emergent depending on historical, economic and cultural circumstances. The rise of capitalism, from feudalism, was a gradual process and did not happen over night. It took centuries of peasant, and even aristocratic revolutions.

>>18093307
If companies didn't need the government, why are they asking them for money?
If Millei is a libertarian, why is he asking the US government to bail them out?
Why can't companies, and people like Millei, just use the free market to solve their problems?

>>18093270
Nobody in this thread has been advocating for Anarchist Capitalism.
The point is that the state (specifically the American government) has to rely on various private companies in order carry out projects and day to day tasks.
>But they require government money
Ok but then why does the state have hire them out instead of making stuff by themselves?

>>18092457
>Not really, in the US businesses have occupational licensing requirements and require a business license to even operate in any state
Doesn't mean the state strictly controls how you manage resources.
>This is completely wrong considering corporations own 60% of the US market share.
First, it doesn't mean shit because each of them has a degree of autonomy unlike state planning economies, second they do have the luxury to lose millions because they still have advantages and disadvantages in how they scale, not exactly efficient but their optimization is built different.

>You're just stupid and childish
And you're a waste of time, i fell asleep last night but i see there is no real counter argument from your side, as always.

>>18093312
Actually, you are arguing against the need of the state. NASA doesn't need to give them money. No private company has ever landed on the moon, but NASA has.

>>18093313
>Doesn't mean the state strictly controls how you manage resources.
The state controlling who can do business and what businesses can even run in their states isn't proof the state is managing resources? Only a libertardian would say something so retarded. You can't even a start business anywhere because of zoning laws. The U.S. is not a free market economy and regulates almost everything. You're just a dumbass kid with no understanding of the real world. I doubt you even file taxes, bud.

>>18093309
>Marxism is not utopian
nta but marx is not shit, he just theorized it all and you faggots are stuck inside an infinite cycle of experimentation because you don't even know what it looks like and if it works at all. Marx calls it scientific because he doesn't kniw shit about it as well expect theory of that, theory with no solid foundation.

>>18093317
>The U.S. is not a free market economy and regulates almost everything.
Imagine being this much of Communist that you loop around to sounding like a AnCap

There is no real reason a Planned Economy couldn't work, they've worked in history. The reality for most of human history you functionally had planned economies, just kind of shitty ones like serfdom.
Soviet Economy was at it's highest when planned (1930s-early 1960s) and at it's shittiest when not planned (1965-1991) and you have to remember, not a single fucking computer was used in the planning of the 1930s-1960s Soviet economy, it was all done by hand by people in offices on fucking paper.
A Planned Economy is possible, it just likely wouldn't be a consumer oriented economy. Even then, it's probably pretty easy to input consumer desires through AI and marketing.
>>18092295
Capitalist economies are far less driven by demand than exists on paper. If Demand is truly what drove production then advertising wouldn't really need to exist. Products are created then demand is created through advertising.
Even then creative solutions could still be done in a planned economy, the USSR was arguably the technological/scientific world leader through the 1940s-60s.

>>18093317
>The U.S. is not a free market economy and regulates almost everything.
Imagine being this much of a Communist that you loop around to sounding like a AnCap

>>18093317
>The state controlling who can do business and what businesses can even run in their states isn't proof the state is managing resources
Regulation doesn't mean the state controls and allocate resources by itself for everyone, dickhead.
Zoning laws only says where can you build structure and where you can't, it's different fom starting a business.
>The U.S. is not a free market economy and regulates almost everything
Correct, it's why it's so shit and companies can exploit state laws for themselves.

>>18093322
But its true, you cannot enter any market without getting bombarded with regulation. The most regulated industries, housing and medical, are fucking ballooned to shit because of it.

>>18093309
>"State capitalism" is just largely anarckiddie/Trot non-sense
No, it's capitalism run by and for the benefit of the state/the men at the top of the shitheap that is the state - i.e. exactly what's happening in China.

>>18093322
>Regulating markets is communism
Yes, ancaps are retarded, we know

>>18093323
>Regulation by the state doesn't mean the state doesn't control it
So, by that logic, the Soviet Union didn't control anything, retard. LMAO.

>>18093326
>absolute zero reading comprehension

>>18093315
Nigga the point isn't that we can just replace NASA with SpaceX but that agencies like NASA rely on various private contractors to help create and support various facets of the organization while it's employees focus on their main mission

>>18093238
Literally proof that Stalin was 100% correct and Khruschev's shitlibbery led to the downfall of the USSR.
The dumping of GOSPLAN and the shelving of OGAS and Cybernetics due to Khruschev shitlibs in the Ministry of Finance feeling their basically stranglehold on power in the Soviet Government being threatned is probably what led to the downfall of the Soviet Union in the end.
What's hilarious is that when the US learned of OGAS internally in the white house they were absolutely shitting bricks as US Government models showed the USSR would leapfrog the US in tech the economy to such a degree it would be near impossible for the US to catch up. You can bet your ass they were cheering when the MoF refused to fund OGAS project and by 1970 GOSPLAN was functionally offically dropped behind closed doors.

>>18093332
Also just to add OGAS is proof that a planned economy can work as US/White house/US Treasury's own modelling showed a fucking 1960s level of cybernetics in a planned economy would leapfrog the US.

>>18093325
Not really. "State capitalism" is just anti-communist non-sense. China has seen the largest reductions,in poverty, in history because of state intervention dude. China isn't simply ran for the "benefit of the state." They actually do help their people. Why do think China has a higher health insurance rate than the U.S. and actual high speed rail? Because they're doing the opposite of what you're saying.

>>18093327
>being so fucking retarded you can't discern a planned economy from a simple market regulation
No wonder you retards became so bad in debates, you're actually one of the most incompetent fucks i've ever met, some of them commies with more understanding than you included . And i am done with this thread.

>>18093329
No private company has ever landed on the moon in 52 years, but NASA has multiple times.
The fact alone refutes everything you've said. You're just a retard.
The fact that Millei is begging Trump to save him, because his lolbertardian policies failed, is the final nail in the coffin for retards like you.

>>18093334
Ah, so you're a commie who can only think in official soundbites. Thanks for making that clear. In case you haven't figured it out yet that's one of the main reasons nobody wants to interact with your boring ass or listen to you in RL.

>>18093336
>The U.S. federal highway system, the FAA and zoning laws are "simple regulations."
Yeah, libertarians definitely retards. You should have stopped posting a long time ago. You clearly are an unemployed high school student. You don't know anything about how economies work. Stop being an oxygen thief and kill yourself, thanks.

>>18093344
So IMF data is sound bites? You're a literal retard arguing against reality.

>>18093347
see >>18093344

>>18093349
Yeah, you're a literal retard arguing against reality.
China has high speed rail, more people with health insurance than the U.S. and has reduced most of the world's poverty with by using the state.
Like what you saying, retard? The Chinese Communist did all those things, that cost them money, to enrich themselves? Imagine being that fucking dumb.

>>18093345
>Socialism is when the government does stuff and the more stuff the government does the more socialist it is

>>18093339
Yes with the assistance of various private companies that wouldn't have existed under a planned economy

>>18093355
Yes, Marx said socialism could require the state. Multiple times in fact. Do you want to look even more of a dumbass because I could I quote Marx and Engels explicitly saying so. Please, I dare you to challenge me on this.

>>18093357
Historically communism was a 10/1 ratio of oil to iron production. Here are the figures for 1970.
Oil tons
Ussr 350m
Iran 190m
Algeria 48m
Angola 6m
China 30m
Egypt 5m
Coal
Ussr 770m
South Africa 100m
China 300m
North Korea 10m
Iran 1m
Iron (pig iron)
Angola 6m
Ussr 100m
Iran 500k
Algeria 100k
South Africa 5m
North Korea 2.5m
China 23m
Egypt 400k
Angola hit the ratio from growth. Cuba got it in 2000s. Kerala has it if you include trade.
Ratios
Communist
Ussr 10
China 10
Egypt 10
North Korea 4 plus aid
Not
Iran 1000
Algeria 500
Angola 1
South Africa 20
So it's a ratio, coal higher.
France was 10m coal in 1870 and 100k iron. By 1910 it was 30m coal 300k iron. Then it stayed around 1m iron and it crossed the ratio in the eighties but then the industry collapsed.
Germany was 1m iron 1885 40m coal, 10m/100m around the time of the german revolution, then iron crashed and coal stayed high. Uk was 1mt iron in 1880 and 200mt coal. It was 10mt in ww1 iron. It hit the ratio going down also but then the industry collapsed.
>>18093358

>>18093052
The Marxist "economies" didn't fail. That is one of the biggest lies of the USSR.
The planned economy was done away with functionally by 1965 and behind closed doors by 1970. This wasn't really due to it "not working" but because of factional shitfights within the CPSU itself between departments. Under Khrushchev the Ministry of Finance basically became the most powerful department in the Soviet Union, and what the fuck do bankers do? They start banking and restoring capitalist relations and that is what they did. When a system came along that basically streamlined gosplan in a super efficient way, they refused to fund it, instead funding firms to basically act as Capitlaist businesses and set their own planning and produciton. GOSPLAN post 1960s was nothing more than a "suggestion" and the USSR basically became an crypto version of a Japanese/South Korean economy just with no real small business sector.
The reason you had breadlines and mass shortages was literally because of reforms that were literally designed to destroy the system. Gorbachev's "reforms" basically nuked the Soviet economy upwards of 30%.
The main difference between Brezzy and Khrushcuck also is as explained
>This conflict of interest was basically between two groups of embryonic capitalists: one group, centred mainly in the Russian Republic and composed mainly of high managerial personnel involved in heavy industry, was represented politically by the faction around Brezhnev; the other group, composed mainly of high managerial personnel involved in light industry, was represented politically by the faction around Krushchev. ....The Khrushchev faction, representing the economically less powerful embryonic capitalists involved in light industry, felt it necessary for the Soviet Union to follow a foreign policy which amounted in fact to subservience to the United
States, while the Brezhnev faction stood for an "independent" foreign policy.

>>18093357
Planned economies, like the Soviet Union, allowed private companies to operate and assist their economy all the time. Planned economies don't exclude private companies. I don't think you understand "planned economics" very well if you think that. You do realize the flag of China represents both the national and petite bourgeois?
Millionaires were common in China for that reason, under Mao, for that reason.

>>18093052
The Marxist "economies" didn't fail. That is one of the biggest lies of the USSR.
The planned economy was done away with functionally by 1965 and officially behind closed doors by 1970. This wasn't really due to it "not working" but because of factional shitfights within the CPSU itself between departments. Under Khrushchev the Ministry of Finance basically became the most powerful department in the Soviet Union, and what the fuck do bankers do? They start banking and restoring capitalist relations and that is what they did. When a system came along that basically streamlined gosplan in a super efficient way (OGAS along with Linear planning), they refused to fund it, instead funding firms to basically act as Capitalist businesses and set their own planning and produciton. GOSPLAN post 1960s was nothing more than a "suggestion" and the USSR basically became an crypto version of a Japanese/South Korean economy just with no real small business sector.
The reason you had breadlines and mass shortages was literally because of reforms that were literally designed to destroy the system. Gorbachev's "reforms" basically nuked the Soviet economy upwards of 30%.
The main difference between Brezzy and Khrushcuck also is as explained
>This conflict of interest was basically between two groups of embryonic capitalists: one group, centred mainly in the Russian Republic and composed mainly of high managerial personnel involved in heavy industry, was represented politically by the faction around Brezhnev; the other group, composed mainly of high managerial personnel involved in light industry, was represented politically by the faction around Krushchev. ....The Khrushchev faction, representing the economically less powerful embryonic capitalists involved in light industry, felt it necessary for the Soviet Union to follow a foreign policy which amounted in fact to subservience to the United States, while the Brezhnev faction stood for an "independent" foreign policy.

>>18093364
Also just to really make Capitalist reforms in the USSR even more on the nose, they were literally called the Liberman reforms due to the architect being shitlib pro-capitalist Evsei Liberman. Yes, the reforms that functionally restored capitalist relations to Soviet production are basically named the "Jew reforms".

>" I say on the contrary; the social movement will lead to this decision that the land can but be owned by the nation itself. To give up the soil to the hands of associated rural labourers, would be to surrender society to one exclusive class of producers.The nationalisation of land will work a complete change in the relations between labour and capital, and finally, do away with the capitalist form of production, whether industrial or rural. Then class distinctions and privileges will disappear together with the economical basis upon which they rest. To live on other people's labour will become a thing of the past. There will be no longer any government or state power, distinct from society itself! Agriculture, mining, manufacture, in one word, all branches of production, will gradually be organised in the most adequate manner. National centralisation of the means of production will become the national basis of a society composed of associations of free and equal producers, carrying on the social business on a common and rational plan. Such is the humanitarian goal to which the great economic movement of the 19th century is tending."
>"Marx and I never doubted that in the transition to the full communist economy we will have to use the cooperative system as an intermediate stage on a large scale. It must only be so organised that society, initially the state, retains the ownership of the means of production so that the private interests of the cooperative society as a whole cannot establish themselves. It does not matter that the Empire has no domains; one can find the form, just as in the case of the Poland debate, in which the evictions would not directly affect the Empire."
The idea that Marx rejected the state being necessary for socialism is a total anarkiddie/liberal fantasy pushed by retards who have never read Marx or even understand why he kicked Bakunin out of the International. I swear for a history board, some you guys are pretty historically illiterate

>>18093364
The Soviet Union's collapse had more to do with nationalism and Gorbachev being too timid to do anything about it, really.
If he had just did what Deng did, and used the tanks, history would have been different.

Planned economies are good for industrializing rapidly and mercilessly. China did almost perfectly aside from some maotism by first industrializing and then sprinkling some markets.

>>18093378
Gorbachev was a literal traitor who was brainwashed by his anti-Commie activist wife to infiltrate the CPSU and destroy the USSR. He was literally backed by a CIA financed Spook Yakovlev. The Atlantic called Yakovlev "The greatest investment the US ever made" after the dissolution of the USSR.
>My ambition was to liquidate Socialism, the dictatorship over all the people. Supporting me and urging me on in this mission was my wife, who was of this opinion long before I was. I knew that I could only do this if I was the leading functionary. In this my wife urged me to climb to the top post. While I actually became acquainted with the West, my mind was made up forever. I decided that I must destroy the whole apparatus of the CPSU and the USSR. Also, I must do this in all of the other socialist countries. My ideal is the path of social democracy. Only this system shall benefit all the people. This quest I decided I must fulfil.
>I found friends that had the same thoughts as I in Yakovlev and Shevernadze, they all deserve to be thanked for the break-up of the USSR and the defeat of Socialism.
>Gorbachev
I mean for fuck sake, the guy that Gorbachev put in charge of all Soviet media was Yegor Gaidar, yeah, the Gaidar of the same lolbertarian capitalist elite Gaidar forum.

>>18093376
The Soviet Union was real communism. It was product of multiple civil wars and invasions. It's economic system was not a product of men, but a product of circumstances. Every socialist society will have its problems. That shouldn't discount the Soviet Union its successes. It was the country send a man into space, they invented Tetris, developed nuclear weapons, and doubled the life expectancy after the average Soviet peasant while abolishing illiteracy for the first time in Russia history.
More over, every society is built on bloodshed to create progress. I don't see you retards denouncing Napoleon despite his violent, disastrous, imperialistic wars setting the foundational of modern bourgeois society.

>>18093387
Yes yes
Counterpoint

>>18093376
The Soviet Union was real communism. It was a product of multiple civil wars and invasions. Its economic system was not a product of men, but a product of circumstances. Every socialist society will have its problems; that shouldn't discount the Soviet Union's successes. It was the country that sent a man into space, invented Tetris, developed nuclear weapons, and doubled the life expectancy of the average Soviet peasant while abolishing illiteracy for the first time in Russia's history.
Every society is built on bloodshed to create progress. I don't see you denouncing Napoleon despite his violent, disastrous, imperialistic wars setting the foundations of modern bourgeois society.
>>18093384
Have you read the recent biography about Gorbachev?

>>18093393
Franco and Hitler were toppled by socialists so what is your point
It didn't even lead to the end of socialism or even Marxism. Most young people, in the US and Western European countries, support Marxism or some sort of socialism.

>>18093380
Well okay whet if china had been capitalist. Gdp growth has surpassed most capitalist countries year after year.
What about japan’s lost decades.

>>18093395
>Have you read the recent biography about Gorbachev?
Didn't know there was one, honestly the cunt makes me seethe, not so much Gorby himself, the Soviet system was dysfunctional enough to literally let an anti-communist basically make himself sole dictator and destroy the country overnight. What pisses me off is all the Western Revisionism and bootlicking of Gorby and Yeltsin how they were "true democracy advocates" and had "good intentions but the system was too far gone" and shit like that.
Gorbachev was literally a dictator, he created an office for himself, gave himself unlimited powers and proceeded to tear the USSR apart while killing journalists and political opposition, his purges were the largest ever in the USSR.
Yeltsin was a mafioso corrupt freak who literally stole all Soviet state property into himself through the Kremlin Property department and then handed it out to whatever Mafioso freak and Western shill he wanted to suck up too. Of course, look who was the deputy head of the Kremlin property department, fucking Putin. It's estimated that Yeltsin stole more than Russia's entire GDP.
Of course, doesn't stop Western liberals "dindunuttin" both of them to oblivion.

>It's another episode of Western Communists VGHing over the Soviet Union
As much as people meme on Vatniks for shit like pic related I respect them because they ultimately don't give a shit about ideology and simply want to see Russia gain more power and view all eras of their history as a rich tapestry

>>18093405
It's simply not real capitalism.

>>18093415
>le Russia bad

>>18093417
t. Literally John Smith from Texas Oblast

>>18093414
>Of course, doesn't stop Western liberals "dindunuttin" both of them to oblivion.
Western liberals are calling Trump a communist now. They are deliberately ignorant about history.

>>18093419
>t. Literally John Smith from Texas Oblast

>>18092746
Truly African Bashar Al-Assad

>>18093384
Gorbachev was the leader of a narrow group of people that climbed the political ladder to destroy the USSR from inside. First, he replaced most of the real communists for people who were against the USSR and incompetent. This neutralized most of communist's activities. You see, political activities into the USSR were done via institutions. By replacing their leaders, he shut most of them down. Those who broke up with these reformists led institutions were either dealt with with KGB or cut in to work under Gorbachev too. The biggest infight was inside the KGB, as they were fierce communists that understood Andropov's reforms.
Many of its reforms were then sabotaged from the inside by himself. For example, acceleration was the idea to make some industries have a 3rd shift: but then, Gorbachev didn't allow to send buses, kitchen personel, provide extra electricity, etc. So, it was a disaster economically - which was his objective. He would then blame communists and communism again and again, while using the media against communism and replacing the normal curriculum with a pro-capitalist one.
He then faked the so called August Coup, which was never led by hardliners but by his own reformist cabinet. Soldiers were sent without weapons, people were brought there by buses sent by the communist party itself. They were behind it all, and its well documented.
By this time he and Yeltsin were acting as a scissor: Gorbachev faked being a communist, and did nothing when Yeltsin banished the Communist party. The Red Army was humiliated and Gorbachev took care it wouldn't do anything to stop the collapse of the Union.
When the other republics still didn't leave the USSR, he forced them out and then declared the dissolution of the country. When people marched into the streets to stop the dissolution of the country, Yeltsin then got help from the CIA and the Bratva in Russia and killed thousands on the streets.

>>18093430
Gorgachev was the first leader to grow up in the soviet union. People who grew up in the soviet union were infantile because the state did everything. They didnt plan for the next day of though about the economy or anything much. It was a prison but there was no chaos.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Marxist-Leninist

Team tards? An expert in neetism and a syphilis patient?

>>18093384
>>My ambition was to liquidate Socialism, the dictatorship over all the people. Supporting me and urging me on in this mission was my wife, who was of this opinion long before I was. I knew that I could only do this if I was the leading functionary. In this my wife urged me to climb to the top post. While I actually became acquainted with the West, my mind was made up forever. I decided that I must destroy the whole apparatus of the CPSU and the USSR. Also, I must do this in all of the other socialist countries. My ideal is the path of social democracy. Only this system shall benefit all the people. This quest I decided I must fulfil.
>>I found friends that had the same thoughts as I in Yakovlev and Shevernadze, they all deserve to be thanked for the break-up of the USSR and the defeat of Socialism.
The full quote is funnier with the current reality
>A World without socialism is going to be much better. After year 2000 the world will be much better, because it shall develop and prosper. But there are countries which shall try to struggle against this. China for one. I was in Peking during the time of the protests on Tienanmen Square, where I really thought that Socialism in China is going to crash. I sternly demanded of the Chinese leadership that I want to speak to the protesters, but they did not allow me to do so. If the Communist party would fall in China, all the world would be better off, and on the road to peace.

>>18093436
Plato, the most successful philosopher in western civilization worked less than Marx did.

>>18093233
Only way they're getting to BF is through Guinea. And that's subject to the local king retard's whims.
>>18093332
>>18093333
IIRC Cybersyn in Chile worked reasonably well with way less resources and more upsets than the USSR would have faced. Not that it helped the Allende regime very much because it had many other very pressing problems at the time. But there's that, too.
>>18093339
I mean arguably the reason why his project is failing is because the legislature stonewalled him. He just didn't move dynamically enough. Now he is back at regular spic politics fare.

>>18093441
Being a succesful philosopher does not equal being right though. Aristotle blew his elitist ass out the water.

>THE GLORIOUS CCP WILL FREE THE WORLD FROM THE SHACKLES OF THE CAPITALIST PIGDOGS
>Meanwhile in reality

>>18093441
>Plato
>economy

Even hobbo Diogenes moggs you, shill.

>>18092259 (OP)
Most political and economical systems can work just fine, the problem is that the dominant system today benefits from having more countries with the same system. (((They))) will never lose an opportunity to make money off of you.

But knowing this, I don't know how anyone can be a socialist/commie today. There is a fine line between idealism and practicality. I think both could work if majority of countries were doing the same, but that's not reality, might as well be find an alternative that works within capitalism.

Also, I don't think they could work in every culture. Some cultures are just lazy and that's ok, they need to find their own way of doing things.

>>18092389
>There is not much incentive in planned economy to innovate
You can implement innovation incentives and bonuses for productivity. This was done too historically, see the Kosygin reforms. Not really hard to do aswell, if the workers manage to produce more using less ressources, he gets the financial equivalent in bonuses. By opposition, if he overutilizes the ressources at his disposition, they come out of his wage.

>>18092295
>you imply the economy is all about "calculation", when in reality it is more about creative solutions, transparent and fast information, reactivity and collection of skills
Not really. You can broadly divide the economy's function for the consumers as the following : the ability to deliver consumer goods, the ability to scale to match continuously-evolving demand for these consumer goods, and lastly the ability to produce innovation to have continuously better products.

The first 2 are essentially a question of initiative and calculation : which product can we make without a loss ? The last one is essentially a question of incentives supply side. It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to make sure a planned economy realizes these 3 functions to satisfy consumer demand.

>>18093052
>marxist economics
Not a thing, at least not in the way you think it is. Planning is not "marxist", nowhere does marx say that you need to plan your economy to be marxist.
As for the reason planning failed, it boils down to an unresponsive political class pushing reformers to become radical (Gorbachev) and dissolving the country.

>>18093325
People like you tend to think that marxism is just planning the economy. Marxism is the belief that artificial norms (like the bourgeoisie) alienates the individual, which in turns creates a historical tension to fight against his dominant class. If free market is necessary, then so be it, aslong as it is in the interests of the majority then according to Marx it fits within marxism.

>>18093364
>>18093742
I don't give a fuck. Your beliefs are superficial, you probably support communism because you're ugly. I can argue your position better than you can because you don't really care, it's just a vehicle for your own butthurt. The guy who likes capitalism is probably just defensive because he's a wealthy american. You're both normie tards.

>>18093756
>waaaaah waaaaah you hurt my feelings waaaah
fucking retard, you can't argue for shit given you couldn't even respond to what I said

>You're both normie tards
fuck off back to r9k

>>18093742
Marxists are the seventh day adventists of secular ideology. Oceans of ink spilt to avoid the possibility that the mid 19th century economist may have gotten things wrong. The last stage of capitalism lasts for a hundred years and counting (admittedly, this dig only applies if you are a leninist who but not being one is a joke in and on itself), no one in the Western world is actually proletarian because they industrialized and de-industrialized without socialism materializing from the aether which is why the proletariat only exists in Cambodia and the Central Republic.
Back when Mrax was writing his assumptions about Socialism and the future economic configuration of humanity were fairly reasonable. But they were pretty laughable by even the 1930s.
Still a brilliant economist and philosopher, though.

>>18093774
>Oceans of ink spilt to avoid the possibility that the mid 19th century economist may have gotten things wrong
Most marxists agree that Marx was wrong on quite a few things

>The last stage of capitalism lasts for a hundred years
Late stage capitalism usually refers to the Financialization of the economy, where everything becomes subject to the market and private individuals. This has only been going for 30-40 years.

>no one in the Western world is actually proletarian because they industrialized and de-industrialized without socialism materializing from the aether
what the fuck are you talking about retard

>they were pretty laughable by even the 1930s
By the 1930s, a massive economic crisis had crashed western economies, the republic of Weimar was on the brink of collapse, and multiple countries in Europe had had far-right coups. So much for being "laughable"

>[Deleted]
lol topkek

>>18093742
Marxists are the seventh day adventists of secular ideology. Oceans of ink spilt to avoid the possibility that the mid 19th century economist may have gotten things wrong. The last stage of capitalism lasts for a hundred years and counting (admittedly, this dig only applies if you are a leninist but not being one is a joke in and on itself), no one in the Western world is actually proletarian because they industrialized and de-industrialized without socialism materializing from the aether which is why the proletariat only exists in Cambodia and the Central African Republic.
Back when Marx was writing his assumptions about Socialism and the future economic configuration of humanity were fairly reasonable. But clearly he has been proven very flawed by now.
Still a brilliant economist and philosopher, though. Noticed many real things, created a whole new way of viewing the world (from a Hegelian foundation), whole new school of philosophy. But in the end he was a man of his time.
>>18093782
Spelling mistakes.

>>18093760
You didn't say shit though. You're exactly the same as a 50 IQ ultra, you believe what you believe and nothing will change that. You're a moron with extra steps.

>>18093782
>Most marxists agree that Marx was wrong on quite a few things
I know. But not the final outcome and how the world gets there.
>Late stage capitalism usually refers to the Financialization of the economy,
Now it does, but not when the term was coined in 1925. Or when Lenin published Imperialism: The highest state of capitalism nine years before that. Capitalism has been on its last legs since before your grandparents were born.
>what the fuck are you talking about retard
Admittedly disingenous mockery of the fact the aims for socialist revolution have been shifted over the years.
>By the 1930s, a massive economic crisis had crashed western economies, the republic of Weimar was on the brink of collapse, and multiple countries in Europe had had far-right coups. So much for being "laughable"
I'm not talking about that, he was right. Though imo socialist treatment of Fascism is mostly cope and sour grapes. I'm talking from a purely organizational, technical, production standpoint. The Managerial revolution would not be published too long after that.

A classless, stateless etc etc was a fever dream by then.

>>18093807
>But not the final outcome and how the world gets there.
How to achieve socialism is the number 1 debate that leftists constantly engage in

>Now it does, but not when the term was coined in 1925
Meant a different thing back then (the fact that capitalism was being forced at gunpoints in colonies)

>the aims for socialist revolution have been shifted over the years
Not really. The aim of a marxist revolution has always been to free people from alienation and the contradiction from capitalism. Marx himself noted that revolutions and new socialist regimes would differ based on local elements

>I'm talking from a purely organizational, technical, production standpoint
You mean the years in which the Soviet Union gained international reknown for shedding off the 1929 crisis like nothing ?

>A classless, stateless etc etc was a fever dream by then.
Always has been except for some socialist experiments in the 19th century. Most marxists socialists by that time had already agreed on the prerequisite of a socialist state emancipating the masses prior to a ""communist"" civilizational state. Ironically enough, Russia, due to its backwardness, clung to this dream quite a bit after the other euro countries had given up on a direct transition, leading to the infamous experiments in the RSFSR under Lenin's wa economy.

>>18093794
cope and seethe

>>18094195
Socialism merged with capitalism. If you're under the tyranny of one side, you need the other argument available. New leftist beliefs like this require a motive that doesn't exist, except locally. In other words, you need the leftist argument in your life or your country. Nothing wrong with that, but you will recognize the original motive.

>>18093309
>That's why many socialist countries had nationalized, socialist sectors where certain utilities like electricity and natural gas was owned by the state, while a private sector existed to allow people to form their own businesses.
The Soviet Union didn't even have privately owned restaurants (although it would've been quite rare for your average Soviet citizen to go to one anyways). It was a command economy although there was a massive black market in all kinds of things because it was impossible to get what you needed if you followed the law exactly.

>>18093325
>No, it's capitalism run by and for the benefit of the state/the men at the top of the shitheap that is the state - i.e. exactly what's happening in China.
There are certain things China has done like developing the economy and so forth that is good, but I've yet to meet a Chinese person from there who believes in any of that communist stuff. Even people who like certain aspects of the Chinese government. Just the whole thing with the "--isms" is only something I've seen on the internet. It makes me think it's like talking about America in ideological language, like "they have freedom-ism in America where the government helps the people." You'd just sound weird talking like that. There are also massive corporations in cahoots with the American government?

My impression is that the CCP cares foremost about maintaining control and remaining in power, and *everything* else is secondary at *best* to that basic prerogative. Ideology is a justification tool, not a guiding principle. On the other hand, that is fundamentally rational. But then the flip side is that people will tell you that this is a "transition stage" to communism, and you have to trust the plan, but this kind of system is structurally incapable of achieving that, because it's in the nature of the centralized power around the bureaucracy leads them to care about themselves and their power, control, and privileges above all.

>>18092259 (OP)
Well, for one, because Ibrahim Traore is retarded and corrupt.

>>18094372
>The Soviet Union didn't even have privately owned restaurants
This is false, the Soviet Union allowed private restaurants as co-operative enterprises, and I don't think you even know what a command economy is dude. The Soviet Union did not plan, and could not plan, every aspect of the economy. Also, there were private corporations in the USSR such as Pepsi that did business.

>>18093499
>Being a succesful philosopher does not equal being right though.
This is a stupid point to make considering argument was "not working" doesn't make you a successful philosopher, you autistic retard. Not even Aristotle worked very much either.

>>18094372
>The Soviet Union didn't even have privately owned restaurants
It's amazing you can immediately tell someone has no idea what they're talking about when they say this. The Soviet Constitution, even since the Stalin times, permitted private enterprises. Where do you retards get your information about Russia from? It's obviously not from books.

>>18094482
So only little businesses where permitted or what?

>>18095135
Co-operatives and sole proprietorships were allowed. This was always the case in the Soviet Union. What changed, from Lenin, Stalin to Gorbachev was essentially how much autonomy they had.

>>18092317
Starting in the mid 2010s, feminists began harassing male hobby spaces/internet spaces by insisting everything is political. They operated by exploiting the goodwill of a normal person who would naturally seek to defend a crying victim-like woman. Their widespread trolling campaign has now successfully traumatized the entire internet to the point where it's difficult to have a non-political discussion

>>18093257
Republicans supported Unions basically until the USSR ate itself out. Whatever that implies, I couldn’t tell you.

>>18092259 (OP)
Planned economies suck at intensive growth and with the world getting more and more industrialized the potential for expansive growth which planned economies actually excel at decreases.

>>18096343
>Planned economies suck
Fixed that for you.

>>18096345
If you an pre-industrialized agrarian nation with unexploited natural resources and ineffecient use of labour, then a centralized planned economy can be very effective at speedrunning the development process, but usually that also requires and authoritarian state willing to trade blood for progress. Then you have 20ish years of good times to reform you economy before your economy stagnates catastrophically.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today?
Yes, it would be implemented by Marxist-Leninists.

>>18092342
>you can start any business you want here and plan accordingly
This is like saying you can start your own country and militarily compete against the US, China, etc.
It's a losing game to play unless you win the technological equivalent of the lottery.

>>18097430
>This is like saying you can start your own country and militarily compete against the US, China, etc.
The Soviet Union did just that, and libs are still mad about it

>>18098379
The Soviet Union was just a trendy version of Russia on steroids. It wasn't started out of nothing.

>>18098393
Nothing starts from nothing. The Soviet Union was birthed from a civil war while fighting 19 different countries.
It's a miracle they won because their enemies were so stupid and incompetent.
We're seeing the same scenario play out now with the U.S. imploding on itself while China builds its economy and soft military power.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Our gibs are exemplary

>>18092289
Yes and the wrong-flavor communists were probably lazily slacking off while industrious capitalist slaves did all the work

>>18092295
It's more about motivation. An ugly 2/10 manlet with a tiny dick will move heaven and earth for the off-chance he will strike it rich and get a Stacy gf. That same man will just do barely enough to skate by in a planned economy with no class mobility where he can never ascend

>>18092457
NTA but I literally just submitted an online form with my state government and have a business now

>>18093073
The commie trannies ITT wont reply to you because they literally have no response, just like how they never reply to any of my posts

>>18093089
What the fuck are you babbling about, Henry Ford created the 8 hour work day.

>>18093354
China also has a ethnic slave class and released a plague on the world because of their inability to regulate their citizens eating bats. It's like being proud of north korea because they have a pool and an amusement park. You are sipping the propaganda

>>18098818
I am proud of North Korea
Pleb like you just wouldn't get it... Just enjoy your propaganda while others hope for a better world

>>18098818
>China also has a ethnic slave class and released a plague on the world
These types lies and smears about China from people who live in dying liberal regimes seething about China's rising star
No one cares outside of your westoid bubble.

>>18093417
Oh no, not the hecking blackface. How unwoke :(

>>18098898
Woke is believing in the Holodomor and that Mao killed 60M people.
I'm not woke because I don't believe any of those things.

>>18093417
Gotta love the classic Russian go too of whataboutism. Just ignore Russia was also involved in those conflicts.

>>18098816
I bet you think Elon created the electric car too.

>>18092259 (OP)
>Is there a reason as to why a Marxist-Leninist planned economy couldn't work today?
It's failed everywhere it's been tried and should be thrown into the dustbin of history. But by all means move to north Korea or Venezuela if you think it works

>>18092259 (OP)
>North Korean rifles
The geopolitical equivalent of a nigger using a hi point.
>>18092304
Retard. The sole reason NK doesn't escalate their sabre rattling is because it's all show in front of China. The Nork high command has been reduced to a hermit dynasty that lives off of Chinese gibs, but they can't risk making themselves look like what they are: an appendage that China uses to put some space between them and westerners.

>>18092259 (OP)
The thing is, we don’t even need all that technology in order for a Marxist Leninist planned economy to work.

The Soviet Union, as haphazardly as it was orchestrated and executed, it still managed to see monumental growth and industrialization, turning a poor backwards agrarian society into a highly literate industrious superpower in like, 2 decades. And that was with 1920s tech.

Obviously the problem with Soviet model, or even the Marxist Leninist we could say, and every country so far with the exception of China, this problem hasn’t seemed to affect them yet, but it’s corruption. By the late 50s the Soviets started to stagnate because of the corruption. Its because Marxist Leninist vanguardism create a bourgeois ruling class with a vested interest in protecting itself

>>18100182
Economic stagnation does not explain the collapse of the USSR very well as North Korea has maintained despite having an economic model similar if not the same as the USSR.
What explains the fall of the USSR was the lack political will to keep it going. Gorbachev was dissolving Moscow authority from the beginning, and giving too much authority to its individual republics. China and North Korea studied the fall of the Soviet Union extensively, and came to the conclusion that it's fall was largely a result of historical nihilism.

>>18096283
It's the same in my country. The social-democrats got in power in the 1940s and formed an alliance with the Christian democratic bloc. They outlawed both fascist and communist parties. Together they implemented many social reforms in the first decade after taking power from the 8-hour work week to public healthcare, compulsory education and pensions. Many strategic industries were nationalized as well. In the 1980s when USSR started to collapse the same Christian socialdemocratic parties embarked on the biggest privatization campaign in my nation's history. Almost every state owned enterprise was sold out to international investors. Most of the social reforms were gradually rolled back too. The government did a complete 180 over a span of like a single electoral cycle. I'm not sure whether it was Lenin or Stalin who said that socialdemocratic parties are the greatest obstacle to socialism because they pull workers away from revolutionary politics, but looking at the state of modern socialdemocratic parties I can't help but agree in this assessment.