Communism never killed 100M people

[Doctor Amadeus]

If you say so. I don't even know what inforwars is, but I do know what socialism is. The second you start with ad hominems, which you just spewed, you lost the arguments. Say what you will, but the fact that Nazi's are an offshoot of the left, not the right, must make you frustrated.

Well follow the address, I promise it isn't a virus or porn, and see for yourself Infowars dot com, take a look for yourself. The Nazi's aren't a fucking offshoot of the left, they are right, they are self identified as fucking right, I am not exactly sure how this is confusing unless it's on purpose.

Maybe you have a hypothesis as to what and where it should be, but it sounds as if you reject Authorianism, which can be left or right.

And no it doesn't make me frustrated because you are fucking wrong, if you want to go on believing whatever bullshit go right ahead Inforwars would be a great place for you HAH!

[primalmatter]

The starvations happened in the Russian part of the country.

Alright....?

So your a killem all kind of guy I take it?

I am not really sure what you are trying to refute here.

[Deleted]

Alright....?

So your a killem all kind of guy I take it?

I am not really sure what you are trying to refute here.

You claimed it was an ukrainian genocide, and I pointed out that the starvations was in the russian part of the country, south n east, not in western ukraine which is the most pro-ukraine of the country. You were wrong that it was "ukrainian" and that it was a "genocide" unless you want to now claim that russians wanted to genocide themselves.

This "communism killed 100 mil people" is full of propaganda and inflating numbers every year...and this comes from someone who hates communism, my grand father was lynched by communists, I am a nationalist, and no I'm not Russian. I want the truth, not bullshit numbers made by douchebags who clamor for attention or to sell bullshit books who arrive at a nice round number "100 million"

[Deleted]

No, they flatly don't exist. There is no similarity to be drawn. Capitalism as an ideology simply isn't responsible for the evils that communism is - communism is an ideology that explicitly demands abolition of private property and forced labor for those that previously had it. This inevitably results in mass murder. There's no analog in capitalism.

That is not what communism is about, nor does abolition of private property means what you think it means.
And capitalism is the direct cause of multiple famines that all caused millions of deaths. Not giving food to people who need it because it is your food and you want money for it has caused allot of grief in this world. Famines that could have been helped if only people weren't as focused on making money instead of helping people.

Maoism is absolutely what a legitimate Marxist revolution looks like. There's really nothing to debate about the matter - only the most historically illiterate tankies argue otherwise.

Yes, you not understanding and wanting to understand the matter leaves very little to debate. And no, that has nothing to do with Marxist revolution nor has it anything to do with communism or socialism what you are looking for is called "state capitalism". In state capitalism the state becomes the capitalist, it owns and profits of the company, not the people.

No, a government owning hospitals (and employing the staff therein) is socialism. A single-payer system doesn't imply government ownership of production.

I don't particularly object to truly socialized healthcare either, but equating it with the totalizing force of fully applied Marxist ideology is dishonest bullshit.

And again you are plainly wrong here, a government owning a hospital is state capitalism, not socialism. In a socialist state the hospital would be owned by the people working in it, just like any other enterprise.
Although there is a lot to say for state ownership of necessities like healthcare and other things like water and all that jazz, it is not socialism as socialism would give the means of production to the people, and not to government as an exploiting entity.

[Nadiru]

That is not what communism is about, nor does abolition of private property means what you think it means.
And capitalism is the direct cause of multiple famines that all caused millions of deaths. Not giving food to people who need it because it is your food and you want money for it has caused allot of grief in this world. Famines that could have been helped if only people weren't as focused on making money instead of helping people.



Yes, you not understanding and wanting to understand the matter leaves very little to debate. And no, that has nothing to do with Marxist revolution nor has it anything to do with communism or socialism what you are looking for is called "state capitalism". In state capitalism the state becomes the capitalist, it owns and profits of the company, not the people.



And again you are plainly wrong here, a government owning a hospital is state capitalism, not socialism. In a socialist state the hospital would be owned by the people working in it, just like any other enterprise.
Although there is a lot to say for state ownership of necessities like healthcare and other things like water and all that jazz, it is not socialism as socialism would give the means of production to the people, and not to government as an exploiting entity.

How does a Marxist economy determine the value of something?

[primalmatter]

You claimed it was an ukrainian genocide, and I pointed out that the starvations was in the russian part of the country, south n east, not in western ukraine which is the most pro-ukraine of the country. You were wrong that it was "ukrainian" and that it was a "genocide" unless you want to now claim that russians wanted to genocide themselves.

Alright I get what you mean now.

It was a artificial scarcity of food while it is referred to as the Ukrainian genocide I get the point you are making I just don't think it really changes the amount of innocent people who died as a result.

[bison91]

Venezuela was more of a socialist country (people keep confusing communist and socialist) who put all of their eggs in one basket economically speaking with other important factors that led to it's harsh decline and like Dys said, 7 million less deaths isn't exactly a point in your corner.

if it was only 7 million means it is best system coz it killed less then any other :P

[Northy]

Putting aside that fact that 7m millions is the lowest estimate for the fraud

I'm astonished to see how you brush it as 7 millions potential victims is nothing

Do you support genocide ?

Fuck this nazi forum seriously

You don't seem like you read much history or philosophy. Communism and socialism always seem to be just one execution away from utopia.

[Tijuana]

Whenever you speak with neo mccarthyists about communism you will hear 2 things : "venezuela" and "100 million dead".

If you know your ideology can't rival communism it is convenient to use debate silencing fallacies.

Venezuela has already been debunked plenty so I wanted to take a look at the 100 million dead claim and its sources.

Well it turns out it comes from... only one single book.

Suddenly all seems fishy. So I read the wiki article and stumble on this :



I'd lie if i said i was genuinely surprised. It was suspicious from the start that very average people suddenly became super educated about historical figures and events. Well it turns out that 100 million number was just another convenient scheme sourced from 1 single author whose collaborators disavowed, and singled out for use in us propaganda.

So, the crime is saying Communism killed 100 million people, when the total is only 93 million people? You are upset about a variance that is the ball park of a rounding error? Is there something magic that happens at 100 million, that doesn't happen at 93 million?

Also, you are shocked that "average people" can just fucking google a fact, if they want to know it?

[primalmatter]

So, the crime is saying Communism killed 100 million people, when the total is only 93 million people? You are upset about a variance that is the ball park of a rounding error? Is there something magic that happens at 100 million, that doesn't happen at 93 million?

Also, you are shocked that "average people" can just fucking google a fact, if they want to know it?

At 100M we finally reach a communist utopia.

[Tijuana]

That is not what communism is about, nor does abolition of private property means what you think it means.
And capitalism is the direct cause of multiple famines that all caused millions of deaths. Not giving food to people who need it because it is your food and you want money for it has caused allot of grief in this world. Famines that could have been helped if only people weren't as focused on making money instead of helping people.



Yes, you not understanding and wanting to understand the matter leaves very little to debate. And no, that has nothing to do with Marxist revolution nor has it anything to do with communism or socialism what you are looking for is called "state capitalism". In state capitalism the state becomes the capitalist, it owns and profits of the company, not the people.



And again you are plainly wrong here, a government owning a hospital is state capitalism, not socialism. In a socialist state the hospital would be owned by the people working in it, just like any other enterprise.
Although there is a lot to say for state ownership of necessities like healthcare and other things like water and all that jazz, it is not socialism as socialism would give the means of production to the people, and not to government as an exploiting entity.

There is no such thing as state capitalism. There is capitalism, and there is not-capitalism. When the state runs the economy, that is not-capitalism. Period.

[Mistame]

Don't really need a second communism thread.

[Tijuana]

At 100M we finally reach a communist utopia.

When I was a kid, there was much discussion among themselves about achieving "full communism", as Marxism is intended to be transitional philosophy. The great Ronaldus Magnus used to tell this joke in that regard:



But this was always my favorite of his:

[Deleted]

How does a Marxist economy determine the value of something?

Just like you determine the value of anything, the resources you use and the time you put into it. Why would this be any different?
There really aren't that many differences between capitalism and marxist socialism other then then who owns the means of production. It is not that private property will be completely abolished for everything, you still get to keep your clothes, your bike or car or a home or any of that stuff, it is just that the means of production will not be allowed to be in private hands.

It would do more to the mindset of companies, it wouldn't be all about profit anymore. It would be about staying relevant, making sure that the company survives and survives in a way that doesn't fuck over the environment that we have to live in.
You want the company that you work in (and therefore own a piece of) to pollute the very place you are living, were a company now would be likely to cut corners to be more profitable, it would now make sure that you and your kids can safely live close to it.
You want the company that you work in (and therefore own a piece of) not to relocate in order to become more profitable, as when it moves you won't work there anymore. So you want your company to stay relevant.
And last but not least, the company will be able to make stuff at cost, there is no real need to make more money then you need to keep everything working. You want to be paid fairly for your work, but, you do not want it to become so expensive that no body will buy it. But there is no need to make additional money of the product that goes straight to the owners of the company as it does now.

- - - Updated - - -

There is no such thing as state capitalism. There is capitalism, and there is not-capitalism. When the state runs the economy, that is not-capitalism. Period.

That is not how things work, when the state owns the means of production and acts as a capitalist then we call that state capitalism. It is still capitalism but it is done by the state.

[Shibito]

Its funny how people always claim socialism is good and that socialism is europe, we are SOCIALDEMOCRATIC not socialist

[Mister Cheese]

Putting aside that fact that 7m millions is the lowest estimate for the fraud

I'm astonished to see how you brush it as 7 millions potential victims is nothing

Do you support genocide ?

Fuck this nazi forum seriously

I don't support either ideology. But when you have a thread that says "Antifa's body count is still 0." One has to fucking ask. When is someone gonna get killed when these nutjobs are beating someone's head in? 63 million, which is the lowest estimate is nothing to sneeze at. When you look at WW2s deaths soviet russia takes a huge amount of the pie compared to other countries, with 8 million to up to 11 million deaths. Compared to Germany who lost from 4.4 to 5.3 million.



Why is this? Well just watch this video.



They used their men as fodder. They didn't have enough guns to hand out so either they would tell their soldiers to go to the battlefield and scavenge or do what they are doing in this video.

[Deleted]

I feel genuinely sorry for you kurata. Your life must be really shitty. :-(

[Vyxn]

hm, like WW1, WW2, West's Asian and middle east affairs, countless deaths due to slavery, colonization, famines during Great depression, millions of Irish people dead due to GB affairs. Also add here deaths occurred as a direct result or consequences of various capitalist revolutions and their "termidors".

source please ?

[Dracullus]

Because nazism vs communism is a false dichotomy

Fun fact, the nazis called for bans on dissenting opinions too
Maybe you are the bad guy here

I live in Poland. My country (and most in this region) suffered both from Nazi Germany and communist. Almost everyone here have people in family that were brutally murdered by nazi or communist (sometimes both).

You are troll that doesn't know what he is talking about. You should crawl under a rock and never come back.

For anyone here that isn't a troll and genuine think that communism wasn't so bad, I suggest to read two books (...for the start):

"The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
"A World Apart: The Journal of a Gulag Survivor" by Gustaw Herling-Grudziński

[AlphaOut]

At 100M we finally reach a communist utopia.

Damn, we were so close