Comrade Sophia
Well-known member
"ChiCom"
Funny, I'm pretty sure China is Dengist and running on Xi Jinping Thought, not Communist.
Funny, I'm pretty sure China is Dengist and running on Xi Jinping Thought, not Communist.
No True ChiCom/Commie Derail Thread
- Thread starter Comrade Sophia
- Start date
Oh, China isn't a real communist country?
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
The real communism has never been tried. Probably because communist keep running into real life problems when trying to implement utopian theoretical system. Obviously the reality itself is fascist and needs to be bashed into coma.
Comrade Sophia
Well-known member
Bruh....
Yeah that tends to be what happens to communist regiemes that don't collapse.
And once again I have to explain how things work in the real world and why communism always has a shitty ending.
How many windshield wipers do you need? You probally said some thing like two or 4 right? That's what the soviet union thought. The result of this was a windshield wiper shortage, so people would remove their wipers and then when it rained traffic would stop as every one put their wipers on.
That's just one tiny facet of the economy, you have no idea no appreciation for how complex and intricate an economy is. One person no matter how smart he or she is can not manage it, a group of people can not manage it. That's why we take this huge massive task and we cut it into smaller manageable chunks that are handled by things called business's, and even those business's fuck up so we have lots of them and force them to compete.
This is what capitalism is its taking an absolutely mathoth task and chopping it into smaller more manageable bits.
It doesnt matter who is in charge, it doesnt matter how smart they are, or how capable or their intentions or if their a good person your socialist utoptia is never going to happen because of that shear complexity.
Rather then banging you head against the wall attempting to make a idiology that has killed millions of people and caused pointless death and suffering yet again how about doing litterally anything else.
Comrade Sophia
Well-known member
I’m sorry you don’t know how to distinguish different lines of Communist thought or realize that China has a Capitalist economy and has done so for literally decades now. You’re ignorance is truly sad, I’ll pray to Satan such that he gives you knowledge as he one did before!
D
Deleted member
Guest
Red China is just running a New Economic Policy until the time is ripe to turn the screws again... Which is exactly what Xi has started to do.
Morphic Tide
Well-known member
Isn't Syndicalism basically aping how capitalism functions without actually having a formal currency or actively enforcing the management structure? By design, as it's what a bunch of union workers came up with as the system they wanted after their "rise of the proletariat"?
All forms of "real" communism, by the standards I recall you setting for it, have the fundamental issue that they need a monoculture to work, because they're supposed to be stateless, so there isn't a hard authority to make people play by the rules, and thus you require a population fully acting in good faith, with the same idea of what that even means. Being incapable of dealing with bad-faith actors before they deal severe damage is a massive downside of any low-authority system.
The constant criticisms of Capitalism always (seriously, every goddamn time) come down to the fact there aren't actually rules in the way of all sorts of shit, especially a total lack of any rules forcing "charity" that makes it possible for people to be truly impoverished. Because nobody's holding a gun to the head of the farmers to force them to give away the food they grow. How you expect there to not be such issues with "real communism" when there's even less rules than the goddamn Gilded Age is beyond me...
Ah, "not real communism", the standard byline of fuckwits who fail to realize the utter failures of their basic precepts on social organization. For a functioning society, there very much does need to be some form of hard authority making people play by common rules. Otherwise, at best, the society disintegrates into irrelevant micro-groups no longer capable of any sort of resistance against outgroups that do have a hard authority holding them together in larger formations.
Mind, I'm well in favor of small government, as I feel it's best to fragment power to minimize the scale of the intended plurality so that forceful resistance to it is practical in the event of it becoming tyrannical. It's that I believe, on account of looking at how history has panned out, that there needs to be a government to enforce the rules of society in some fashion (punish murderers, thieves, etc.) and update them in response to their failings (getting rid of the many forms of ponzi as they arise), otherwise the society fragments into impotent insular communities or collapses from bad-faith actors destroying it from within.
Navarro
Well-known member
Well, they're certainly doing better than when they tried to decentralise the production of steel in accordance with the same principles you favour, and ending up with a load of useless pig iron and millions of deaths from starvation (because the peasants were wasting time making useless pig iron in their backyards rather than putting in the harvest and leaving the steel production to traditional, hierarchical, centralised methods in the cities).
Also was the direct ideological precursor of fascism! They don't like to admit it though.
We've already discussed this - Sophia's "utopia" results in either a worldwide Khmer Rouge or global collapse of civilisation, followed by post-apocalyptic warlords. Then the strongest warlords become overlords of their respective regions and voila, we have all those nasty states and heirarchies all over again. What more can you get from an ideology that's basically the equivalent of a child pouting that his parents can't make him clean his room?
The criticism comes from a comparison of capitalism as it exists in our imperfect (many would say "fallen") world with a hypothetical ideal communism that exists only in its proponents' heads. Because a comparison of "imperfect capitalism" with "imperfect communism" only ends in disaster for the latter, they have to do this to have anything resembling an argument.
Last edited:
Navarro
Well-known member
When looking at the communist/anarchist fantasy, bear in mind that you're not actually looking at a coherent political program, but the eschatological end state of a religious movement. There's no sense in asking how the communist utopia will be kept from backsliding, because they assume that it just will somehow.
Last edited:
Why should we need to?
See, this is the problem with commies, they think others actually care which specific commie clique they run with.
Navarro
Well-known member
Well, they themselves care very deeply, no surprise that they would project that on others.
Sol Zagato
Well-known member
I think that on the merits, the CCP isn't running any version of communism at the moment. The system more closely resembles facism. This could change in the future.
Facism is just another incarnation of socialism/communism.
That's fair, it's why I refuse to distinguish between right wing groups and I'm glad that position is seeing support on the Seitch
Morphic Tide
Well-known member
There's a vital difference between the generalization you're making and the generalization we're making: We dismiss all communism due to underlying patterns of history and the commonalities that define them as communist. In other words, we generalize because what defines the group as one is what we have issue with.
You, on the other hand, refuse to see a functional difference between theocratic monarchists, actual fascists, heartless utilitarians like me, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, the various flavors of mainstream conservative, and all the other things in the ballpark of "the right", on the basis that they're all opposed to your preferences, rather than that they hold any meaningful similarities.
Ignoring that you include a sub variant of anarchist on your list of thing deserving differentiation when a sub variant of anarchism, an-com is being dismissed as worthy of differentiation, all I can say is this -
What's up with the domestic terrorism and murder my dude?
Yeah I'm very curious how you justify Antifa attacking reporters, how you justify driving trucks into political rallys, the atrocities of the shinning path, the bombings of the weatherman and a whole slew of domestic terrorist groups through out the world I mean yea the right has lone nuts but you guys are the ones with literal black shirts around who go around attacking innocent people during protests.
I mean how do you live with that?
Same way you guys live with supporting the state kidnapping and torturing union organizers with rape dogs (wait shit I don't even have to pretend, you guys just straight up support that one), bombing abortion clinics, lynching blacks, driving trucks into political rallies (but more this time!) and supporting and training blackshirts a world over.
Very carefully :^)