Global Warming Liars

Communism, not a great winning percentage.

Let's see if you can answer the question with a logical, rational argument. The USSR failed in the 20th century to defeat capitalism and the United States capitalist empire. On what grounds do you assert that socialism will never replace capitalism?
 
Let's see if you can answer the question with a logical, rational argument. The USSR failed in the 20th century to defeat capitalism and the United States capitalist empire. On what grounds do you assert that socialism will never replace capitalism?

On what grounds do you assert that communism will ever replace capitalism?
 
On what grounds do you assert that communism will ever replace capitalism?

That's a legitimate question that I have been answering throughout this thread and others as well. Your response to the answer to the question you've just asked is that I am wrong because the USSR failed to defeat the US capitalist-run empire in the 20th century. Socialism has not yet replaced capitalism, hence, according to you, everything that I've proposed with respect to why socialism will replace capitalism is wrong. My question is why do you believe that I am wrong on the basis of the USSR not defeating the United States in the 20th century or socialism not replacing capitalism in the past?
 
That's a legitimate question that I have been answering throughout this thread and others as well. Your response to the answer to the question you've just asked is that I am wrong because the USSR failed to defeat the US capitalist-run empire in the 20th century. Socialism has not yet replaced capitalism, hence, according to you, everything that I've proposed with respect to why socialism will replace capitalism is wrong. My question is why do you believe that I am wrong on the basis of the USSR not defeating the United States in the 20th century or socialism not replacing capitalism in the past?

Communism, not a great winning percentage.
 
Communism, not a great winning percentage.

Not communism, socialism. Communism is stateless, without classes or the need for money. We haven't seen that type of society yet, what we have attempted is socialism. Can you define what it would mean for socialism to "win" or beat capitalism?
 
Not communism, socialism. Communism is stateless, without classes or the need for money. We haven't seen that type of society yet, what we have attempted is socialism. Can you define what it would mean for socialism to "win" or beat capitalism?

So all the non-stateless communist states failed, but that's not the fault of communism.
Thanks for clearing that up.
 
In your opinion what would constitute a decisive victory for socialism over capitalism?

Well, if any of the commie shitholes weren't such shitholes would be a step in the right direction.

Maybe not prohibiting their prisoners...err...citizens from escaping their commie shithole, another.
 
So all the non-stateless communist states failed, but that's not the fault of communism.
Thanks for clearing that up.
There was never a "communist state", that's oxymoronic. A communist society doesn't have a state according to Marx. The USSR was socialist. UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS = USSR / SOVIET UNION.
 
Well, if any of the commie shitholes weren't such shitholes would be a step in the right direction.

Maybe not prohibiting their prisoners...err...citizens from escaping their commie shithole, another.

So the USSR was a "shithole" and so are other countries that identify as being Marxian socialists. In your opinion, why are these countries shitholes? What makes them "shitholes"?
 
Communism needs to work after socialism is established, in one year, ten years, perhaps one hundred years? Tell us, in your estimation, when does a socialist society have to transition to communism?

Maybe a thousand years.
Meanwhile, the slaves...err...prisoners...err...citizens suffer.
 
Maybe a thousand years.
Meanwhile, the slaves...err...prisoners...err...citizens suffer.
So in your estimation, it can take up to 1000 years for a socialist society to transition to communism. Why then are you complaining:

"So all the non-stateless communist states failed, but that's not the fault of communism.
Thanks for clearing that up."

"Even the USSR couldn't get communism to work."
You are criticizing socialist states for not getting communism to work or transitioning to communism already, but then you say that it can take up to 1000 years for the transition between socialism and communism to take place. Which one is it? Convert to communism ASAP, barabing-baraboom, or are you affording it a 1000-year window of socialist development?
 
So in your estimation, it can take up to 1000 years for a socialist society to transition to communism. Why then are you complaining:

I hate to see people enslaved by evil governments.

You are criticizing socialist states for not getting communism to work

I'm mocking socialist states for not getting communism to work.

but then you say that it can take up to 1000 years for the transition between socialism and communism to take place.

Could be a million years.
 
I hate to see people enslaved by evil governments.

You are criticizing socialist states for not getting communism to work

I'm mocking socialist states for not getting communism to work.

but then you say that it can take up to 1000 years for the transition between socialism and communism to take place.

Could be a million years.

Socialism as well as communism require certain material conditions to be present for them to function and develop. Do you know what the material conditions for high communism to function are?
 
That's unfortunate. As we saw, the Warsaw Pact wasn't very good at producing material goods.
The Warsaw Pact was a military alliance. Are you referring to the Soviet Union? For socialism and later communism to exist there has to be certain conditions in place or else, it won't function. It needs the support and participation of most of the people, advanced technology, and adequate. effective defense against its capitalist enemies, militarily and otherwise.
 
Opinions? Fking opinions? I thought science was about science?
Lord Acton, then president of the Royal Society, said in 1895, "Heavier than air human flight is impossible."
Seven years later, two bicycle mechanics flew at Kitty Hawk, NC. Neither had a high school diploma.

THERE IS NO CONSENSUS!!!

Hundreds of peer reviewed papers published in 2016 were skeptical of the “consensus” of human caused climate change.​

Skeptic Papers 2016


“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.” – Dr. Richard Lindzen​


The long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” – United Nations International Panel on Climate Control, 2007

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” – Ottmar Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015


“The inconvenient truth is that it’s not about carbon – it’s about capitalism. … we can seize this existential crisis to transform our failed economic system and build something radically better [socialism, of course].” – Naomi Klein, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate


“If present trends continue, the world will be … eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Kenneth E.F. Watt, in “Earth Day,” 1970.​

 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top