Communist paradise that is Cuba 🇨🇺

[Toddsterpatriot]

What the Soviets did in WW2 was spare America from having to fight 7 out of 10 German soldiers in Western Europe along with thousands of more tanks, artillery pieces..etc.

7 out of 10 German soldiers were fighting their former ally?

By the late 1930s, the Soviet Union was more mechanized in its food production than the US and Western Europe. The Soviets eliminated food shortages by the mid-1930s.

In reality? Or according to Soviet propaganda and their useful idiots in the west?

Germany's National Socialism turned Germany into one of the most technologically advanced, wealthiest, most productive nations on Earth. Socialism whether right-wing or leftist, is always much better than capitalism.

Obviously. That's why East Germans drove Trabants (10-year wait list) and West Germans drove Mercedes and BMWs.

The US controls the world's reserve currency and international banking system, hence banks that in the past have tried to open accounts for Cuba have been heavily fined.

Weird, the entire world wants to hold US Dollars, but no one wants to hold Venezuelan Bolivars, Cuban Pesos or Russian Rubles.

 

[TruthNotBS]

7 out of 10 German soldiers were fighting their former ally?

By the late 1930s, the Soviet Union was more mechanized in its food production than the US and Western Europe. The Soviets eliminated food shortages by the mid-1930s.

In reality? Or according to Soviet propaganda and their useful idiots in the west?

Germany's National Socialism turned Germany into one of the most technologically advanced, wealthiest, most productive nations on Earth. Socialism whether right-wing or leftist, is always much better than capitalism.

Obviously. That's why East Germans drove Trabants (10-year wait list) and West Germans drove Mercedes and BMWs.

The US controls the world's reserve currency and international banking system, hence banks that in the past have tried to open accounts for Cuba have been heavily fined.

Weird, the entire world wants to hold US Dollars, but no one wants to hold Venezuelan Bolivars, Cuban Pesos or Russian Rubles.

7 out of 10 German soldiers were fighting their former ally?

Durrrr, the Soviets were allies of the US in WW2. Did the US not fight a Cold War with the Soviets after that?

A convenient agreement between Bolshevic Jewish-run Russia and national socialist Germany to split Poland wasn't necessarily a friendly alliance or arrangement, it was out of necessity, for practical reasons. Your question is dumb, because the facts are that Germany did indeed invade the USSR in Operation Barbarossa on June 22nd, 1941. The worst mistake Hitler made, ensuring Germany's defeat.

Stalin unlike Marx and Lenin (i.e. two liberal communist "internationalists") was a nationalist, and unlike the Jewish intelligentsia and many Jewish communist party leaders, including Trotsky, he had much in common with Hitler ideologically. They could've been allies and we would now be speaking German or Russian, not English. A German-Soviet alliance would've meant sure defeat for Britain and the US.

In reality? Or according to Soviet propaganda and their useful idiots in the west?

In the reality of practically all of scholarship. Anyone can pick up a book published by Western academics who are experts on Soviet history and economics, and they will admit with few exceptions, that by the mid-1930s, the Soviets had heavily mechanized food production and were no longer having food shortages. Food shortages in the Soviet Union were caused by war or capitalism in the 1980s. When you start fully privatizing farms and factories, the government's central planning office doesn't have the same degree of control or collaborative capacity with workers as before. This decreases production, causing shortages.

Today thanks to advanced computing, automation, and artificial intelligence, socialist central planning is much more effective and efficient, than it was 50, or 80 years ago. The situation today is completely geared, and 100% compatible with socialist central planning. China's economy is heavily dependent upon central planning, and it utilizes all of the advanced technology available to achieve it. They're running circles around the United States and Western Europe and if we don't wakeup we're going to lose, economically and otherwise.

Trump has enough courage and intelligence to see that, and he's imposing tariffs on China and forcing companies to manufacture everything here in the US. Trumpism is "fascism light". He's a little fascist, not too much, just enough.

Obviously. That's why East Germans drove Trabants (10-year wait list) and West Germans drove Mercedes and BMWs.

What does East Germany have to do with the Third Reich or National Socialism? There are different ways of doing socialism. You have this erroneous idea that all socialism is the same. But anyway, even your criticism of East Germany is wrong.

West Germany got plenty of assistance from the US through its Marshal Plan, unlike the Soviets who were forced to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps, from the devastation of WW2. Despite that and your denials of reality, the Soviets became a nuclear superpower rivaling the US, with the world's second-largest economy. The Soviets despite their flaws had some impressive accomplishments, notwithstanding your disingenuous denials.

Your observations ignore much of the context, hence your false, shallow conclusions. There are plenty of capitalist-run countries on Earth where you have no waiting list for a car, you just have to go without one for all of your life. At least in Marxist socialist countries, they have a robust public transit system and other infrastructure that really doesn't make car ownership that important. I live here in NYC, and the only reason I own two vehicles is for my wife and kids. I ride the train and bus. When a city has a good public transit system, covering the whole city, you don't need to drive. I don't.

Weird, the entire world wants to hold US Dollars, but no one wants to hold Venezuelan Bolivars, Cuban Pesos or Russian Rubles.

It's not weird at all, it makes perfect sense. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Asia. It's good to have your country between two HUGE oceans.

The Bretton Woods Conference, held in July 1944 in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, set the foundation for a post-World War II economic framework aimed at fostering international economic cooperation and preventing the kind of instability that contributed to the Great Depression and the war. Representatives from 44 allied nations met to create a new global monetary system, which eventually led to the U.S. dollar being established as the world's reserve currency.

The conference established the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, two institutions meant to stabilize global finances and fund economic development in a way that greatly empowered the USA. The Bretton Woods system pegged global currencies to the U.S. dollar, which was, in turn, convertible to gold at a fixed rate of $35 per ounce. This arrangement made the U.S. dollar effectively as stable as gold and gave the dollar a unique role in global finance, facilitating international trade and investment.

As a result, the U.S. became the world's primary manufacturing and economic powerhouse for several decades, ushering in a period often called the "Golden Age of Capitalism." This era saw rapid economic growth, increased productivity, rising wages, and an expansion of the American middle class. American industries flourished, and the U.S. emerged as a leader in manufacturing, technology, and culture. The Bretton Woods system held until 1971, when the U.S. abandoned the gold standard, transitioning to the floating exchange rates we have today.

The so-called "Golden Age" of the American economy was built on strong foundations: a booming manufacturing sector, a well-organized labor force, and a sense of shared prosperity. But supply-side Reaganomics dismantled these pillars, and with it, America's economic security and middle-class strength. The policies of Ronald Reagan and his successors replaced a balanced economic system with one skewed toward corporate profits and the financial elite, all under the guise of “trickle-down” benefits that never came.

Todd:

​

First, let’s address how we got here. The stagflation of the 1970s had roots in external shocks like the Vietnam War and the OPEC oil crisis. The 1973 Yom Kippur War spurred the U.S. to support Israel in a massive airlift of military supplies, infuriating OPEC nations, who retaliated with the oil embargo. This action threw the U.S. into an energy crisis, and, coupled with the costly Vietnam War, led to inflation that eroded middle-class purchasing power.

Enter Reagan and supply-side economics. Reaganomics argued that cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations would generate investment and growth that would “trickle down” to everyone. But in reality, these tax cuts fueled unprecedented wealth concentration among the top 1%, starving essential public services, gutting unions, and leaving working Americans with stagnant wages and fewer protections. These policies didn’t just miss the mark, they actively dismantled the structures that had previously made the U.S. economy much more productive and stable.

Unions were a cornerstone of the mid-century American economy. At its peak, nearly a third of American workers were unionized, and this collective bargaining power ensured decent wages, benefits, and fair working conditions. Reagan’s administration, however, attacked unions directly and indirectly, most notably with the 1981 firing of over 11,000 air traffic controllers. This set the stage for decades of anti-union legislation and eroded workers' rights. When you dismantle unions, you dismantle bargaining power, and workers suffer for it. This paved the way for an economy now reliant on low-wage, precarious jobs in the service sector instead of stable, well-paying manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing base that once made America prosperous was shipped overseas, aided by tax incentives that made it cheaper to outsource than to keep production at home.

In this new era, where manufacturing was replaced with speculative trading and financial engineering, Wall Street flourished while Main Street withered. Instead of building real value through manufacturing or infrastructure, corporations began focusing on stock buybacks and mergers, inflating stock prices to benefit executives and shareholders at the expense of workers. The financialization of the U.S. economy led to the rise of hedge funds and private equity, which became notorious for extracting wealth from companies and communities, often leaving employees jobless and towns hollowed out.

Meanwhile, income inequality exploded. In the golden age, CEOs made about 30 times what the average worker earned, a reasonable gap by modern standards. Today, however, Fortune 500 CEOs earn, on average, 400 times what their employees do, with some earning over 1,000 times as much. This gross disparity in income is not only morally questionable but economically disastrous, creating a class divide unseen since the Gilded Age.

This shift also crippled public education and social mobility. Education, once a pathway to prosperity, was affordable, even free in many cases. But as taxes for the rich were slashed, so was public funding. Now, higher education often leaves students in crippling debt, limiting their economic potential from the start. This reality stands in stark contrast to the promise of the American Dream that was once feasible for many.

Reaganomics didn’t just fail to deliver, it set the stage for decades of wealth inequality, the decimation of unions, and an economy now dominated by low-wage, low-security jobs. What was once an economy built on production and shared prosperity is now one of financial speculation, with working people bearing the brunt of policies that have enabled a narrow elite to grow wealthier at everyone else’s expense. Reclaiming a balanced economy means moving away from this failed trickle-down experiment and returning to policies that invest in the working and middle class, the true backbone of any prosperous nation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In the reality of practically all of scholarship. Anyone can pick up a book published by Western academics who are experts on Soviet history and economics, and they will admit with few exceptions, that by the mid-1930s, the Soviets had heavily mechanized food production and were no longer having food shortages.

And still low productivity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What does East Germany have to do with the Third Reich or National Socialism? There are different ways of doing socialism. You have this erroneous idea that all socialism is the same. But anyway, even your criticism of East Germany is wrong.

East Germany shows that socialism sucks, even when Germans try it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Durrrr, the Soviets were allies of the US in WW2. Did the US not fight a Cold War with the Soviets after that?

A convenient agreement between Bolshevic Jewish-run Russia and national socialist Germany to split Poland wasn't necessarily a friendly alliance or arrangement, it was out of necessity, for practical reasons. Your question is dumb, because the facts are that Germany did indeed invade the USSR in Operation Barbarossa on June 22nd, 1941. The worst mistake Hitler made, ensuring Germany's defeat.

Stalin unlike Marx and Lenin (i.e. two liberal communist "internationalists") was a nationalist, and unlike the Jewish intelligentsia and many Jewish communist party leaders, including Trotsky, he had much in common with Hitler ideologically. They could've been allies and we would now be speaking German or Russian, not English. A German-Soviet alliance would've meant sure defeat for Britain and the US.

View attachment 1041738

View attachment 1041739

View attachment 1041740​

In the reality of practically all of scholarship. Anyone can pick up a book published by Western academics who are experts on Soviet history and economics, and they will admit with few exceptions, that by the mid-1930s, the Soviets had heavily mechanized food production and were no longer having food shortages. Food shortages in the Soviet Union were caused by war or capitalism in the 1980s. When you start fully privatizing farms and factories, the government's central planning office doesn't have the same degree of control or collaborative capacity with workers as before. This decreases production, causing shortages.

Today thanks to advanced computing, automation, and artificial intelligence, socialist central planning is much more effective and efficient, than it was 50, or 80 years ago. The situation today is completely geared, and 100% compatible with socialist central planning. China's economy is heavily dependent upon central planning, and it utilizes all of the advanced technology available to achieve it. They're running circles around the United States and Western Europe and if we don't wakeup we're going to lose, economically and otherwise.

Trump has enough courage and intelligence to see that, and he's imposing tariffs on China and forcing companies to manufacture everything here in the US. Trumpism is "fascism light". He's a little fascist, not too much, just enough.


What does East Germany have to do with the Third Reich or National Socialism? There are different ways of doing socialism. You have this erroneous idea that all socialism is the same. But anyway, even your criticism of East Germany is wrong.

West Germany got plenty of assistance from the US through its Marshal Plan, unlike the Soviets who were forced to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps, from the devastation of WW2. Despite that and your denials of reality, the Soviets became a nuclear superpower rivaling the US, with the world's second-largest economy. The Soviets despite their flaws had some impressive accomplishments, notwithstanding your disingenuous denials.

Your observations ignore much of the context, hence your false, shallow conclusions. There are plenty of capitalist-run countries on Earth where you have no waiting list for a car, you just have to go without one for all of your life. At least in Marxist socialist countries, they have a robust public transit system and other infrastructure that really doesn't make car ownership that important. I live here in NYC, and the only reason I own two vehicles is for my wife and kids. I ride the train and bus. When a city has a good public transit system, covering the whole city, you don't need to drive. I don't.



It's not weird at all, it makes perfect sense. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Asia. It's good to have your country between two HUGE oceans.

The Bretton Woods Conference, held in July 1944 in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, set the foundation for a post-World War II economic framework aimed at fostering international economic cooperation and preventing the kind of instability that contributed to the Great Depression and the war. Representatives from 44 allied nations met to create a new global monetary system, which eventually led to the U.S. dollar being established as the world's reserve currency.

The conference established the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, two institutions meant to stabilize global finances and fund economic development in a way that greatly empowered the USA. The Bretton Woods system pegged global currencies to the U.S. dollar, which was, in turn, convertible to gold at a fixed rate of $35 per ounce. This arrangement made the U.S. dollar effectively as stable as gold and gave the dollar a unique role in global finance, facilitating international trade and investment.

As a result, the U.S. became the world's primary manufacturing and economic powerhouse for several decades, ushering in a period often called the "Golden Age of Capitalism." This era saw rapid economic growth, increased productivity, rising wages, and an expansion of the American middle class. American industries flourished, and the U.S. emerged as a leader in manufacturing, technology, and culture. The Bretton Woods system held until 1971, when the U.S. abandoned the gold standard, transitioning to the floating exchange rates we have today.

The so-called "Golden Age" of the American economy was built on strong foundations: a booming manufacturing sector, a well-organized labor force, and a sense of shared prosperity. But supply-side Reaganomics dismantled these pillars, and with it, America's economic security and middle-class strength. The policies of Ronald Reagan and his successors replaced a balanced economic system with one skewed toward corporate profits and the financial elite, all under the guise of “trickle-down” benefits that never came.

View attachment 1041785

View attachment 1041786

Todd:

View attachment 1041787​

First, let’s address how we got here. The stagflation of the 1970s had roots in external shocks like the Vietnam War and the OPEC oil crisis. The 1973 Yom Kippur War spurred the U.S. to support Israel in a massive airlift of military supplies, infuriating OPEC nations, who retaliated with the oil embargo. This action threw the U.S. into an energy crisis, and, coupled with the costly Vietnam War, led to inflation that eroded middle-class purchasing power.

Enter Reagan and supply-side economics. Reaganomics argued that cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations would generate investment and growth that would “trickle down” to everyone. But in reality, these tax cuts fueled unprecedented wealth concentration among the top 1%, starving essential public services, gutting unions, and leaving working Americans with stagnant wages and fewer protections. These policies didn’t just miss the mark, they actively dismantled the structures that had previously made the U.S. economy much more productive and stable.

Unions were a cornerstone of the mid-century American economy. At its peak, nearly a third of American workers were unionized, and this collective bargaining power ensured decent wages, benefits, and fair working conditions. Reagan’s administration, however, attacked unions directly and indirectly, most notably with the 1981 firing of over 11,000 air traffic controllers. This set the stage for decades of anti-union legislation and eroded workers' rights. When you dismantle unions, you dismantle bargaining power, and workers suffer for it. This paved the way for an economy now reliant on low-wage, precarious jobs in the service sector instead of stable, well-paying manufacturing jobs. The manufacturing base that once made America prosperous was shipped overseas, aided by tax incentives that made it cheaper to outsource than to keep production at home.

In this new era, where manufacturing was replaced with speculative trading and financial engineering, Wall Street flourished while Main Street withered. Instead of building real value through manufacturing or infrastructure, corporations began focusing on stock buybacks and mergers, inflating stock prices to benefit executives and shareholders at the expense of workers. The financialization of the U.S. economy led to the rise of hedge funds and private equity, which became notorious for extracting wealth from companies and communities, often leaving employees jobless and towns hollowed out.

Meanwhile, income inequality exploded. In the golden age, CEOs made about 30 times what the average worker earned, a reasonable gap by modern standards. Today, however, Fortune 500 CEOs earn, on average, 400 times what their employees do, with some earning over 1,000 times as much. This gross disparity in income is not only morally questionable but economically disastrous, creating a class divide unseen since the Gilded Age.

This shift also crippled public education and social mobility. Education, once a pathway to prosperity, was affordable, even free in many cases. But as taxes for the rich were slashed, so was public funding. Now, higher education often leaves students in crippling debt, limiting their economic potential from the start. This reality stands in stark contrast to the promise of the American Dream that was once feasible for many.

Reaganomics didn’t just fail to deliver, it set the stage for decades of wealth inequality, the decimation of unions, and an economy now dominated by low-wage, low-security jobs. What was once an economy built on production and shared prosperity is now one of financial speculation, with working people bearing the brunt of policies that have enabled a narrow elite to grow wealthier at everyone else’s expense. Reclaiming a balanced economy means moving away from this failed trickle-down experiment and returning to policies that invest in the working and middle class, the true backbone of any prosperous nation.

Communism sucked because the Jews did it or it sucked despite the Jews doing it?

 

[TruthNotBS]

View attachment 1041894

Communism sucked because the Jews did it or it sucked despite the Jews doing it?

Materialist, reductionist Atheism, social liberalism, democratic egalitarianism, national nihilism, internationalism, post-modernism, Jewish supremacism, Zionism..That's really what made Soviet Bolshevism and Marxist-Leninism "suck", not so much its critique of capitalism, which for the most part is quite accurate.

Marxists are ideologically and theoretically obsessed with the notion of marketless production and democratizing every aspect of human life. In practice, this is impossible, proven by Marxists themselves. Not " Centralizing democracy " is impossible due to the instability and inefficiency created by direct, open "people's rule." The so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat" can't function without strong leaders like Stalin.

Look at our country, where it's fallen socially, due to liberalism. The people seek order and hence vote for someone like Trump, despite how crass or insincere he might be, the mere hope that he's a populist strong leader and patriot, nationalist, concerned about America, wanting to make it great again, is enough to win politically. American self-sufficiency, productivity, getting people back to work, family values, love for God and country..etc. National socialists unlike Marxists, realize that all of the aforementioned social elements create a cohesive, functional, purpose-driven society, able to overcome adversity, and actualize its fullest potential, ascending to the highest state possible.

National socialists, or "fascists," are much more reasonable and pragmatic than Marxists. They allow private property (profit-oriented property) markets and capitalists to exist and even flourish, provided capitalism is well-regulated and primarily serves the country rather than a small group of wealthy elites at the expense of the working class (Volksgemeinschaft). It's right-wing, National Socialism, that will allow private property and markets to exist, irrespective of advanced automation and AI. National socialism will prevent techno-feudalism or capitalists and their cronies in the US government, from reducing the American working class to worthless consumer serfs living off of a government UBI check.

 

[TruthNotBS]

East Germany shows that socialism sucks, even when Germans try it.

Not all socialism is Marxist, and all you're proving is that you're unable, or stubbornly unwilling, to recognize that there are different forms of socialism. The Third Reich was socialist and was quite successful in transforming Germany into the most advanced, productive country in Europe. In case you didn't know, the Third Reich was German.

 

[Soupnazi630]

You're delusional.

No I am correct and far smarter than you

 

[Soupnazi630]

I don't write this for pieces of shit like you but for others, who might be interested in this topic.

What the Soviets did in WW2 was spare America from having to fight 7 out of 10 German soldiers in Western Europe along with thousands of more tanks, artillery pieces..etc. If it weren't for the Soviets the American death toll wouldn't have been just 460K (less than half a million), but rather 10 million KIA, 30 million KIA..etc. The Soviets lost 28 million people, 14% of its population and we only lost 0.03% of ours. To say that WW2 is irrelevant is retarded, but of course, that's what SoupNazi is, a retard.

Without the war, the American economy would've remained in recession. The US became the world's manufacturing hub, and exclusive issuer of the international reserve currency, thanks to WW2. It developed the wealthiest workforce in the world, enjoying the highest standard of living, thanks to coming out of WW2 unscathed, unlike Europe and Japan. That's the benefit of having your country located between two large oceans thousands of miles away from the battlefields of a world war. You get the privilege of not being invaded by millions of enemy troops as the Soviets were.

SoupNazi's claim that the Soviets never eliminated famine is a bald-faced lie. First of all, there were plenty of famines before Soviet socialism, under the Tsars, why doesn't he mention that? He's an ignorant hypocrite.

By the late 1930s, the Soviet Union was more mechanized in its food production than the US and Western Europe. The Soviets eliminated food shortages by the mid-1930s. It was a world war that caused famines in the USSR, not socialism. Today as well, any famines or shortages that occur in places like Cuba, are due to war. The economic terrorism of the capitalist-run America causes small, developing nations like Cuba to suffer economically and otherwise.

If we had been invaded by four million Germans, as the Soviets were, we too would've suffered food shortages. In the 1980s, food shortages in Russia were due to Perestroika or market reforms, not socialism. The capitalist reforms pushed by Soviet government liberals like Gorbachev and Yeltsin, in their misguided attempt to placate the US, thinking that would end the Cold War, destroyed the Soviet economy. Most of the images we have online of breadlines in the USSR are in the 1980s. The less socialist the USSR became the more it undermined its production output.

Germany's National Socialism turned Germany into one of the most technologically advanced, wealthiest, most productive nations on Earth. Socialism whether right-wing or leftist, is always much better than capitalism. American capitalism creates gross inequality and debt. Over half of Americans live paycheck to paycheck and have less than $500 in savings. Tens of millions of Americans are medically uninsured and haven't had a checkup in over ten years, if not more. Americans get seriously ill and run to the emergency room, that's "primary care" in this country. Don't see a doctor until the shit hits the fan.



He's ignoring the fact that most nations can't establish regular diplomatic or economic relations with Cuba for the reasons I already covered in previous posts. The US controls the world's reserve currency and international banking system, hence banks that in the past have tried to open accounts for Cuba have been heavily fined. Cuban assets are frozen by the US and Cuba is essentially a financial leper in the international community.

If any company or government sends its expensive cargo ships to anchor in a Cuban port, they will be barred for six months from anchoring in any port on American territory. All technology that is patented under US law, or machines that contain 14% or more American parts or patented technology, is prohibited from being sold or imported into Cuba. There's a long list of raw materials, technology, and machinery that the US prohibits to be sold to Cuba, and countries and companies that refuse to comply with the US government-imposed sanctions, are liable to pay fines, and can be banned from conducting business with the USA.

If a country or business has a choice between conducting commerce with Cuba or the American empire, which one do you think they're going to choose? Obviously, they're going to see Cuba as an unnecessary liability and do business with the American empire, that controls the world's reserve currency and banking system, maintaining good relations with Washington, not Havana.



He continues to assert that socialist nations don't need to trade with others and that's ridiculous. Socialism is when the means of production is either 100% owned by the working class or at least half of every business enterprise is partly owned by its employees. It's when capitalists are forced by law, to serve their country through their businesses, hiring workers, and producing goods and services for the community. That's socialism, whether it's leftist Marxism or right-wing nationalist/fascist socialism (national socialism).

Socialism is the future, whether "SoupShitHead" likes it or not. You're not going to stop socialism, it's the natural, inevitable result of advanced automation and AI. Industrialization and automation always lead to socialism or war. Choose, but you'll lose anyways if you fight against socialism. It always wins, one way or another. Right now Western Europe is essentially socialist. They have mixed socialist economies, not Milton Friedman's "free-market capitalism".



Soupidiot is confused.



Keep dreaming.

Hey dumbass it is irrevant what they did in WWII it was one evil socialist nation fighting another one.

They never elimnated famine AND THAT IS FACT. Throughout the cold war the US sent millions of tons of grain to the uSSR every year to fend off starvation.

Socialism always fails because MArx was a fool and his critique of capitalism has been proven cartoonishly false
You post because you ar e afucking child wgho is wrong and you KNOW IT but you cannot admit it.


You are a liar Cuba is free to trade with anyone except the US and they DO.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Not all socialism is Marxist, and all you're proving is that you're unable, or stubbornly unwilling, to recognize that there are different forms of socialism. The Third Reich was socialist and was quite successful in transforming Germany into the most advanced, productive country in Europe. In case you didn't know, the Third Reich was German.

All marcisim or socialism fails

 

[TruthNotBS]

No I am correct and far smarter than you

 

[TruthNotBS]

Hey dumbass it is irrevant what they did in WWII it was one evil socialist nation fighting another one.

They never elimnated famine AND THAT IS FACT. Throughout the cold war the US sent millions of tons of grain to the uSSR every year to fend off starvation.

Socialism always fails because MArx was a fool and his critique of capitalism has been proven cartoonishly false
You post because you ar e afucking child wgho is wrong and you KNOW IT but you cannot admit it.


You are a liar Cuba is free to trade with anyone except the US and they DO.

Keep repeating your lies, if it makes you feel better. I'm done here going back and forth with you, so have the last word if you want and delude yourself into thinking you've "won" something.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Keep repeating your lies, if it makes you feel better. I'm done here going back and forth with you, so have the last word if you want and delude yourself into thinking you've "won" something.

I won nothing but i did defeat you with facts and pproved you to be the liar