Victims of Communism

[Soupnazi630]

Is China still communist? The Communist Party is in power and has a monopoly, and I don't disagree that they are a dictatorship, but they are not communist economically.

Chinese economical system is taken by them from Soviet but they we able to make reforms in 1990s and not to make same mistakes as USSR had done which lead to huge crisis.
And neither in China nor in Russia is dictatorship. But in Russia people vote for president at the elections while in China parliament does quite the same as it was in the USSR.

They both had dictatorship and China still does.

China did not avoid the same mistakes as the USSR they committed the same old errors. Genocide and slavery.

They are slightly better off now only because of some small degree of capitalism

You are overfilled with fake and propaganda. Whatever I say you don't believe because all you know is based on biased sources.
And if you try to get real information your brain may explode because you realize that 90% of what you know about it is false

You are projecting.

I am stating historic documented facts you are stating delusional propaganda and fiction.

 

[Sunsettommy]

As well they should be

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

 

[Tehon]

As well they should be

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

 

[Soupnazi630]

As well they should be

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

 

[Tehon]

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

 

[Tehon]

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

 

[Tehon]

You say death by the state but I say that communism is a stateless society. Communism didn't do it. Fear the state, not communism.

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

 

[Eugene]

As well they should be

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

1. Those data taken from where? A work of Horowitz but how can I (you and anyone else) believe him? What are the sources of his figures? Oh, I see "highly likely" like in Skripal's and MH17 cases...

2. If real figures are taken how can one divide deaths by government from others?

3. Snd again I don't see any real figures about USA and Britain who are the main murders in the world.

So all that is absolute bs fed you by those who want you to have "correct" opinion.

Another bs is about socialism. Socialism is now in many European countries, especially in Scandinavian. It never denied private property and interpreneurship. USSR under Stalin was developing same way- there were private companies who worked freely and even had government's orders.
Communism or socialism doesn't kill anyone but many of kills (that did were! I do not deny) were done by criminals in authority. Such as Khrushchev for example.
I'd rather agree that in another system of hierarchy in government such guys wouldn't get so much power and were stopped...that is a problem, agree.

But anyway, as socialism came to the most economically and socially developed countries same way communism will come to the human society when it is ready for that economically. And I do agree communism in Russia of early 20 century was impossible.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Communism is not a stateless society.

A stateless society is merely the unrealistic and foolish goal of communism. Communism is the means of reaching that ludicrous and utopian goal and communism is evil as a means of reaching said goal. It is a totalitarian evil state which will use any force or violence necessary to ensure obedience and fealty to the state and it's goal which will of course never be reached.

This is precisely what Marx taught and precisely what happens when people attempt to implement his ideology.

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

Wrong.

Capitalism is no where near exhausting itself which is one of Marx's many predictions which proves his abject stupidity.

He instead taught that the means of production must be seized through violence and not when it exhausted itself but instead when it was thriving. Another of his idiotic predictions which proves his stupidity is that people would spontaneously do so. Seizing the means of production IS by definition forcing a new system on people and it is what he taught. Hence the violence and genocide associated with his ideology. Exactly as he taught.

No one is ready for attempting communism because it is an evil system based upon the ignorant ramblings of a diseased fool.

His economic ideas are akin to a guide to dieting and weight loss written by a morbidly obese person. He was a fool who knew nothing about economics and yet many fools believe he had great economic ideas.

 

[Soupnazi630]

As well they should be

So you tell people that you fear knowledge and then proceed to prove it in follow up posts.

No I never said any such thing.

Knowledge is power and people should embrace it.

Communism is to be feared, not knowledge of it and why it is evil

I was talking about Marx and what Marx had to offer is knowledge. Clearly you've never made any attempt at understanding his work. You said people should be fearful of him. At least that is the way it came across based on the comment you responded to.

Why should communism be feared? There is nothing evil about it. It is a cooperative society.

No that is FALSE!

DEATH BY GOVERNMENT

"4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill "

That is 100 MILLION people who have died in just two communist states, during the 20th century.

1. Those data taken from where? A work of Horowitz but how can I (you and anyone else) believe him? What are the sources of his figures? Oh, I see "highly likely" like in Skripal's and MH17 cases...

2. If real figures are taken how can one divide deaths by government from others?

3. Snd again I don't see any real figures about USA and Britain who are the main murders in the world.

So all that is absolute bs fed you by those who want you to have "correct" opinion.

Another bs is about socialism. Socialism is now in many European countries, especially in Scandinavian. It never denied private property and interpreneurship. USSR under Stalin was developing same way- there were private companies who worked freely and even had government's orders.
Communism or socialism doesn't kill anyone but many of kills (that did were! I do not deny) were done by criminals in authority. Such as Khrushchev for example.
I'd rather agree that in another system of hierarchy in government such guys wouldn't get so much power and were stopped...that is a problem, agree.

But anyway, as socialism came to the most economically and socially developed countries same way communism will come to the human society when it is ready for that economically. And I do agree communism in Russia of early 20 century was impossible.

The black book of communism was not written by Horowitz he only contributed a small part of it. The data is from the communist nations themselves who are the greatest killers not the USA or britain as you claim.

You have been busted and proven wrong about American famine and about the death toll of communism and the gulag and virtually everything else you have stated.

You are asn bad as any holocaust denier.

 

[Eugene]

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

Wrong.

Capitalism is no where near exhausting itself which is one of Marx's many predictions which proves his abject stupidity.

He instead taught that the means of production must be seized through violence and not when it exhausted itself but instead when it was thriving. Another of his idiotic predictions which proves his stupidity is that people would spontaneously do so. Seizing the means of production IS by definition forcing a new system on people and it is what he taught. Hence the violence and genocide associated with his ideology. Exactly as he taught.

No one is ready for attempting communism because it is an evil system based upon the ignorant ramblings of a diseased fool.

His economic ideas are akin to a guide to dieting and weight loss written by a morbidly obese person. He was a fool who knew nothing about economics and yet many fools believe he had great economic ideas.

Marx couldn't predict hybrid of capitalism and socialism. All capitalistic states did much to improve social conditions thanks to Russian revolution and USSR. As a result western countries are very much socialistic now

 

[Dan Stubbs]

The Red menace is still not entirely on the ash heap of history, so here are some reminders of past and present victims of that totalitarian horror.

http://victimsofcommunism.org

Ever notice that the Elite Russians retire to the U.S.A when they retire, and some even become American Citizens. "Strange".

 

[Tehon]

No, socialism is the means of reaching the goal of communism. To be precise, the socialist mode of production is the means of achieving a communist society.

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

Wrong.

Capitalism is no where near exhausting itself which is one of Marx's many predictions which proves his abject stupidity.

He instead taught that the means of production must be seized through violence and not when it exhausted itself but instead when it was thriving. Another of his idiotic predictions which proves his stupidity is that people would spontaneously do so. Seizing the means of production IS by definition forcing a new system on people and it is what he taught. Hence the violence and genocide associated with his ideology. Exactly as he taught.

No one is ready for attempting communism because it is an evil system based upon the ignorant ramblings of a diseased fool.

His economic ideas are akin to a guide to dieting and weight loss written by a morbidly obese person. He was a fool who knew nothing about economics and yet many fools believe he had great economic ideas.

Capitalism is leaving too many people behind. People are starting to look for an alternative. Look at the movement toward democratic socialism as an example. Hell, even many of the people who voted for Trump sense that they are getting left out, that's why they voted for him.

Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
The German Ideology

 

[Tehon]

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

Wrong.

Capitalism is no where near exhausting itself which is one of Marx's many predictions which proves his abject stupidity.

He instead taught that the means of production must be seized through violence and not when it exhausted itself but instead when it was thriving. Another of his idiotic predictions which proves his stupidity is that people would spontaneously do so. Seizing the means of production IS by definition forcing a new system on people and it is what he taught. Hence the violence and genocide associated with his ideology. Exactly as he taught.

No one is ready for attempting communism because it is an evil system based upon the ignorant ramblings of a diseased fool.

His economic ideas are akin to a guide to dieting and weight loss written by a morbidly obese person. He was a fool who knew nothing about economics and yet many fools believe he had great economic ideas.

Marx couldn't predict hybrid of capitalism and socialism. All capitalistic states did much to improve social conditions thanks to Russian revolution and USSR. As a result western countries are very much socialistic now

The problem with that for me is I don't see a hybrid socioeconomic system. I see a reformed capitalist system. And that is doomed to failure.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Wrong.

Communism is the system used to reach the perfect state. The difference between socialism and communism is akin to the difference between manslaughter and murder.

A communist state is a state working TOWARD communist perfection which can never be reached. This is why it is called communism rather than cooperation which you were wrong to compare it to. Cooperation is strictly voluntary, communism is not and is rooted in violence and dictatorship with all the genocide and poverty which accompanies such systems.

Socialism has no means of production it merely destroys the means of production

Socialism is a method of producing commodities. It is done cooperatively. A co-op being the closest example we have today.

Wrong.

Like communism socialism is a means of seizing the means of production and stealing it through government force.

After that you get the usual poverty starvation and terror such as you see in Venezuela.

Socialism merely tries to make it look legitimate through democratically elected officials rather than through plain dictatorship as communism does.

Co-ops or even worker owned companies are free to exist or to be attempted in a capitalist society but private property rights are outlawed in collectivist societies. Therein lies the difference.

Regardless of how many hairs you splint in definitions you always end up with tyranny and force and violence in any socialist/communist/collectivist system because they rely absolutely on violence to achieve their horrific ends.

Marx taught this and nations attempting his evil ideas follow it exactly as he taught.

This is why communism is evil and should be studied but also feared.

Marx understood that in order for a new productive force to take shape in a given society, the old productive force must have fully developed and exhausted itself. Capitalism is exhausting itself now, there is no way the undeveloped countries in the early 20th century were ready for what they attempted.

Marx also understood that the socialist method of production was not something that was going to be forced on people but instead was something that people were going to come to when the capitalist system of production fails them.

Wrong.

Capitalism is no where near exhausting itself which is one of Marx's many predictions which proves his abject stupidity.

He instead taught that the means of production must be seized through violence and not when it exhausted itself but instead when it was thriving. Another of his idiotic predictions which proves his stupidity is that people would spontaneously do so. Seizing the means of production IS by definition forcing a new system on people and it is what he taught. Hence the violence and genocide associated with his ideology. Exactly as he taught.

No one is ready for attempting communism because it is an evil system based upon the ignorant ramblings of a diseased fool.

His economic ideas are akin to a guide to dieting and weight loss written by a morbidly obese person. He was a fool who knew nothing about economics and yet many fools believe he had great economic ideas.

Capitalism is leaving too many people behind. People are starting to look for an alternative. Look at the movement toward democratic socialism as an example. Hell, even many of the people who voted for Trump sense that they are getting left out, that's why they voted for him.

Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
The German Ideology

Capitalism is not leaving too many people behind. The very idea of leaving too many people behind is strictly subjective.

Capitalism elevates all people and the only ones left behind are those who choose to be left behind. Communism on the other hand forces all people to regress or they are killed.

Democratic socialism is merely communism with a great deal of confusion and ignorance. It is nothing new. People always seek to steal from those who have more which is why they embrace violent and oppressive ideologies such as communism which allows them to violently steal through government proxy without getting their hands dirty.

Reality NEVER adjusts itself to what human's want. That is one of the chief and massive failures of the communist ideology you cannot make reality change.

Communism is not an ideal it is a way of forcing people to die in order to believe in an ideal which can never be reached hence the massive death toll of communism.

The conditions result from brainwashing and nothing more.

 

[Soupnazi630]

http://victimsofcommunism.org

not victims of Communism, they are that of Capitalism, which stood in the way of every Communist state and sabotaged their progress.

How did capitalism cause the holodomor or the cultural revolution?

Communism fails because it is unworkable and inherently evil. Sorry but your claim is revisionist nonsense.

Capitalism not only causes huge hunger but also hide it well and doesn't allow this information to be widely spread. Your propaganda is working excellent.

Researcher: Famine Killed 7 Million in U.S. During “Great Depression”

 

[Soupnazi630]

http://victimsofcommunism.org

not victims of Communism, they are that of Capitalism, which stood in the way of every Communist state and sabotaged their progress.

How did capitalism cause the holodomor or the cultural revolution?

Communism fails because it is unworkable and inherently evil. Sorry but your claim is revisionist nonsense.

Capitalism not only causes huge hunger but also hide it well and doesn't allow this information to be widely spread. Your propaganda is working excellent.

Researcher: Famine Killed 7 Million in U.S. During “Great Depression”

Capitalism does not cause hunger it cures it.

This is why throughout the cold war the soviet union was fed BY the United states of America.

We sent the USSR surplus grain because communism cannot feed people. It does how ever deliberately starve people.

The link about famine debunks itself it was not allowed on wikipedia BECAUSE it is FICTION.

The author of that study merely used any natural death as an example of famine because old people and sick people often do not eat well. But that is NOT famine least of all deliberately weaponized famine as the USSR waged war on it;s on people with.

 

[Skull]

Here is an inside view of Chinese communism:

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...01e4b02e9630241d9a/1404931073072/9ping_en.pdf