Russia: Feudalism straight to Communism.China: Feudal top Communism.Cuba: Semi anarchic to Communism.Socialist countries such as current France, Canada or Denmark, have not become communist. Since the publication of the communist manifesto, not a single socialist country became communist. This means history proves socialism protects you from communism, while Feudalism attracts it.
>>530066877You don’t know what feudalism is.
>>530067215Irrelevant. Is it socialism? No? Then the point stands, no communism regime arose from socialism.
>>530067382>China>FeudalismNah, this is wrong. China definitely became communist.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBAPv97jxfM
>>530069442>China definitely became communist.But not from socialism.No socialist regime became communist.No communist regime came from the evolution of a socialist regime.How was China before Mao's victory? A country at war, and before and during the war it was a feudal society at large, except in cities which were capitalist.
No commie ever called me a broke junkie cunt
>>530069771China was definitely communist under Mao. 90% of their population lived in agriculture communes.You have to explain how forcing most people to live on common property, after abolishing private property, was not communism.
>>530066877You're making an argument against socialism. Communism turns colonies/slave-states into liberated ones, socialism keeps slaves content.
>>530070126They ironically almost lived the dream. Shame that retard in Russia tried to impart socialist ideas on crops.
>>530066877the goal of capitalism is judaism
>>530070126>China was definitely communist under Mao.Who said it wasnt? You are having an argument with yourself
>>530066877>China: Feudal top CommunismChina was a Socialist Republic before the Communists. The Qing had been out of power for over 30 years by then.
>>530070282Pretty much any country that didn't follow the Soviet model of collectivization didn't have a famine, but collective farming was never as optimal as private farming
>>530070278>You're making an argument against socialismTake it as you want, my intention isnt to promote or defend something. Just pointing out history disproves this myth that communism is some kind of end stage of socialism. That has never happened
>>530070600>China was a Socialist Republic before the Communists.It was feudal in the rural areas which was 95% of the country by population and extremely capitalist in the cities with nothing of the sort of any social program, of any kind.
>>530070644>didn't follow the Soviet model of collectivizationIt's entirely down to Trofim Lysenko. He was the moron responsible for evey agricultural fuckup in the USSR and even proposed the pest eradication program in China that caused locust swarms.
None achieved communism though. It just became Feudalism, or in Chinas case State Capitalism, in a different cloak. >Means if production arent seized by the working class>Private Property wasnt abolished>Society did not become moneyless>Hierarchy was not abolished>imb4 commieIm an Esoteric Hitlerist
>>530069442>>530070126>ywn work in a farming commune with your cute socialist chink waifuwhy even live. fuck my crapitalist amerimutt life.
>>530070278You are too clever to be here.
>>530070851>It was feudal in the rural areas>Feudal. >Republic of China.>Capitalist. You're not educated in the slightest to what those definitions mean. The hyper Capitalist sections of China weren't ruled by China until after WW2, they were Euro colonies.
>>530070126The state owns all the property, and they don't live on communal property with the peasants. The state also has monopolies on force, justice, media and all the means of production, so how can you say its communism or that communism is less exploitative than normal (capitalism) without comparing the input and output prices? You say the greedy capitalist takes unfair profit that should go to workers? Prove it. Show input prices, output prices and wages, with and without communism.
>>530066877>Socialist countries such as current France, Canada or Denmark,Brown hands typed this
>>530066877>Socialist countries such as current France, Canada or Denmark, have not become communist.Most of the West was National Socialist but we called it a mixed economy after WW2.Slowly though the Western ruling class has convinced the populations of the West to sell off public assets to the Western ruling class for pennies on the dollar.
>>530071323>>530071329>>530071455Irrelevant. The thread topic is that socialism never evolves into communism.This is important as communism is used as a scarecrow against socialism>Duh you want socialism but think about Gulags and the HolodomorIn real life, no socialist society, of any kind, became communist.
>>530066877>>530067382Russia had socialist. Commies co-operated with them. You are stupid./thread
>>530072553>Russia had socialist.Theres socialists everywhere, this is not the same as having a socialist government. Notice you cant write that, so cope out by saying "there were socialists in russia", as if it was the same thing.
>>530069442You can't even begin to imagine what actual communism looks like. For you Murricans, public _________ is communism.
>>530072704>as if it was the same thing.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_country
>>530073026Public masturbation is communism?
>>530073244>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_one_countryThats an idea, a concept, not a socialist government in Russia that actually existed. You are passing me that link only because it has the word socialism in it
Welfare pacifies the 'working class', and provides a further safety ground for risk taking. Social democracy is real capitalism.
>>530073579> was a Soviet state policy to strengthen socialism within the USSR rather than socialism globally.
>>530067215Doesn't really know what socialism is either.This is typical high school education level bullshit. Probably thought up between bong hits or shoving things up his ass for his OF.
>>530066877Yeah, because once you do the bare minimum to make sure your people aren't in a sink or swim society they tend to stop being so upset that they'd even THINK about communism.
>>530066877Stalin alleged that socialism is meant to stop communism but none of this matters because most Marxist thought is wrong and it's on display right now, this Iran war is destroying the economy for the sake of a Jewish empire being created. Hitler was right, it's not just about capital. This is why most fascists were former Marxists
>>530066877National Socialist Germany turned Communist
>>530073819>was a Soviet state policy to strengthen socialismYou are talking about texts and abstractions that have nothing to do with any reality.
>>530074361>Joseph Stalin developed and encouraged the theory of the possibility of constructing socialism in the Soviet Union alone.[1] The theory was eventually adopted as Soviet state policy. >adopted as Soviet state policy.
>>530074072>National Socialist Germany turned CommunistNot "turned", it was forced to by the victors of war. That isnt simply society one day self transforming into communism. The same thing happened to most of eastern europe, and one can say the same about China. Mao won the civil war so communism won, it was not because somehow society was socialist and then one day it just got extreme and became communist. That has never happened.Communism has also never been voted in in some kind of democratic election. Never happened, its always imposed in some war and isnt some evolution from socialism.
>>530074621>adopted as Soviet state policy.Again, you are talking about things that are not real. Dead text and abstract ideas.Look, if you want to argue that Stalinism is socialism, just do so.
>>530074912>you are talking about things that are not real.>Literal Soviet policy.
Marx predicted the natural course of things, from feudalism to capitalism to socialism to communism.Transition from socialism to communism isn't happening because capitalists are suppressing socialism. Have you noticed the rising 'the French Revolution was le bad' narrative? They are trying to revert everything back to feudalism to protect their interests.
>>530075290>Literal Soviet policy.Soviet policy isnt real. Soviet policy was the whims of Stalin. Just because you read a text about "soviet policy" doesnt make it real. You are simply reading a fiction.
>>530075690>Soviet policy isnt real.
>>530075428>Transition from socialism to communism isn't happening because capitalists are suppressing socialism.Lets play along and say this is true. So? I dont want to argue about the hows or whys. Just pointing out the alleged transition from socialism to communism has never been observed.When communism has existed it has never arose from socialism, but really just imposed in some war or armed revolution. Its simply a fact, and you can comment on why, or whos responsible. But the historical fact remains.
>>530075887Correct.
>>530073302For Americans. For everyone else it's just fun.
>>530076096>For Americans.So that's why Starbucks banned me.
>>530075988It ends in armed revolution because of this suppression. Unsuppressed, the transition from capitalism to socialism to communism would happen peacefully. But it never happens because it's not in the interests of the ruling class (in our case the billionaire capitalists).
>>530076294>It ends in armed revolution because of this suppression. Unsuppressed, the transition from capitalism to socialism to communism would happen peacefully.This is just conjecture, so irrelevant because anyone can conjure anything. Historical facts matter much more.
>>530076582Conjure isn't the past tense of conjecture.
>>530076294>>530076582Furthermore, none of these armed revolutions or wars have transformed a socialist country into a communist one. The transition is always from feudalism, capitalism or literally anything but socialism. It matters little if its a peaceful or violent transition, it just does not happen.Socialism->Communism has never been observed in real life, with or without violence.
>>530076702>past tense of conjecture.Conjecture is a noun so it has no tenses
>>530077021>Conjecture is a noun so it has no tensesIt's a verb. Else how is conjectured or conjecturing correct?
>>530077214>It's a verb.Conjecture is a noun. >conjecture (noun)conjectures (plural noun)an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information:"conjectures about the newcomer were many and varied""a matter for conjecture"
>>530077438>https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conjecture>2nd usage, verb. Ergo there is a past tense, and it's not conjure.
>>530069771> How was China before Mao's victory? A country at war, and before and during the war it was a feudal society at large, except in cities which were capitalist.The regime that ruled before the PRC was *explicitly* anti-capitalist and socialist.
>>530076908Russia would have already been capitalist, or even socialist by the time the revolution happened. But the ruling elite had been suppressing the transitions, which in turn caused the unrest that lead to revolution. This has been happening in the west for decades now, the ruling class through lobbying and corruption is trying to undo all socialist policies because they're afraid to giving more power to the working class, and are slowly turning societies hypercapitalistic or even feudal if they can in the process.
>>530077605>2nd usage, verb.Guess what retard, the one i used and wrote is a noun which makes sense in the text it was used.
>>530066877how are canada, france and denmark socialist?
>>530066877France and Nordic countries are capitalist countries with socialist public servicesthe US is a capitalist country with Public services that are half socialist and then for whatever reason the cheaper parts of socialist services are sub contracted to shitty overpriced private companies
>>530077662>The regime that ruled before the PRC was *explicitly* anti-capitalist and socialist.Which regime would that be, out of several ones?>>530077804>Russia would have already beenMore useless conjecture and imagination
>>530077662China went from socialism to communism
>>530066877Eastern Bloc Countries : capitalist forcibly turned socialist by military means.
>>530077976They have extensive social programs such as socialized healthcare, education and unemployment programs. Extensive public transportation investments so that a person can move without owning a vehicle.All of these things redistribute wealth.
>>530078040The one that directly preceded the PRC.
>>530077988>France and Nordic countries are capitalist countries with socialist public servicesThats what socialism is. What else would that be? The social programs in every form are what makes a government socialist.
>>530077892>the one i used and wrote is a nounThat's irrelevant, it's a conversion word. You'd be wrong to use the incorrect tense in place of it's usage when using it as a noun, but it's still not derived from conjure so that's the issue.
>>530078269Chiang Kai Shek was not socialist
Om a similar note, people always like to point out how communism always fails but think about it, has a single fascist/authoritarian regime been "successful" either?Is it just "not real fascism" or what?
>>530078421>That's irrelevant, it's a conversion word.Its completely relevant. If i use a word that is a noun, as a noun, it is a noun.
>>530066877The goal of socialism is oligarchy with the promise/religion replacement of "communism" to trick useful idiotsIt's not that fucking complicated
>>530078494Chiang Kai Shek was a self described revolutionary socialist actually. His nickname was literally “The Red General” because of his socialist leanings.
>>530078511real free market capitalism has NEVER been triedwe need MORE deregulation (actually regulation that kills all competition for megacorporate oligarchs) or else you're a commie
>>530078564>Its completely relevant.No, you still used conjure as it's root. >This is just conjecture, so irrelevant because anyone can conjure anything.Should be >This is just conjecture, so irrelevant because anyone can conject anything.
>>530078494>Chiang Kai Shek was not socialistYes he was? Again the ROC was a Socialist republic, the Communists did a whole song and dance how evil they were as a propaganda campaign.
>>530078690>His nickname was literally “The Red General” because of his socialist leanings.He had no social programs of any kind. He studied in Russia, and toyed around with social ideas. He still had nothing that could be called social programs, which are the only "socialism" that actually means something in real life. Like public healthcare or public X. Understand that "This text said Chiang Kai Shek having said a thing once" isnt the same as "China was socialist".
>>530078262I've never heard of socialism defined as having social services. All the definitions I've read have to do with how the economy and industry is organized. It usually has something to do with collective ownership of businesses and industry by workers, however that is done. I get that it is somewhat related to social services, but more like if every business was run as either as a social service or co-operative (where employees own equal shares of the business)
>>530078983>Again the ROC was a Socialist republic,No it was not. Socialism requires social programs, not simply stamping the word socialism on some text.
>>530079432>Socialism requires social programsNo?>Socialism is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of production
>>530079390>, but more like if every business was run as either as a social service oIts all about redistribution. Nobody cares who runs a company, only what is done with the wealth produced. Socialists want to tax it and spread the money around, communists say they want to run and own the companies. Fundamentally different in structure, one isnt just a stronger version of the other.Communism isnt super socialism
>>530079568>Socialism is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of productionThats communism. Socialism isnt public ownership of any means of production, and this goes to the early used of the word socialism.
>>530066877Lenin was not the master of socialism
>>530080004every country has social programs and redistribution. We know that even ancient Rome had those, so you can't say that makes a country socialist. Otherwise you would need to conclude that United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait are all socialist countries because they are all welfare states with social programs: even though they are monarchies. I don't think that's what most socialists mean when they say they want socialism, and no socialist would want to live under a monarchy even if it meant good social programs.
>>530080447>every country has social programs and redistribution. We know that even ancient Rome had those, so you can't say that makes a country socialist.Matter of degree, socialism isnt yes/no, a country is either more or less socialist based on how many social programs there are. This goes for Rome too.Since these gulf states have tons of social programs, then they are socialist. They just dont attach the labels and aesthetics you expect about social programs. They dont brag about that either, nor host "socialist international" conventions. You are simply obsessed about soviet visuals and all the governments that have emulated them
>>530079306Chiang was consider one the world’s top socialist leaders in his time and was celebrated right alongside Lenin and Stalin. You are just rewriting history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_ideology_of_the_Kuomintang
>>530080159Where are you getting these definitions from?
>>530080982>Chiang was consider one the world’s top socialist leaders in his time and was celebrated right alongsideHe had no social programs, he was just another communist much like Mao. >Along Lenin and StalinBoth of which were also communist, not socialist.
>>530081217Quick, give me the difference between communism and socialism.Should be easy, write down the definitions and find the differences.
>>530080840Okay sure it's a spectrum but I'm just using the term how it's followers use it. Just as there are different levels of socialism there are different forms and they aren't all only about state ownership of industry/resources, but how those industries/resources are organized internally with respect to workers.I'm not focusing at all on the socialist aesthetics here.You can have an absolute monarchy with really good social services and wealth redistribution, but every business is owned by the King and the law is based on a religious scripture. Would this be socialist? Maybe but only by one metric?And you could have a republic where every business is a worker-owned cooperative, but but there are no free social services provided by the state (other than possibly military and police). Although extreme and unlikely to be a real world country: this would probably be accepted as socialism much more widely by actual socialists/communists. And you can already see socialist/anarchist communes follow this model and are more accepted as socialism by others than the previous example.
>>530081755>Okay sure it's a spectrum but I'm just using the term how it's followers use it.Propaganda that muddled the difference between communism and socialism. Lenin did it too, its simply an attempt at merging both concepts.This is why you cant tell them apart. You dont even have a word for a government with a lot of social programs, you call something like Denmark "capitalist but with social programs". Your language doesnt have a word for that concept. Meanwhile you refer to socialism and communism as synonyms, with communism simply being implied as being "harder".
>>530066877Communism doesn't exist, retard.It is a UTOPIA. Just like "Free capitalism" doesn't exist, it is also a UTOPIA.>you cannot have "free capitalism" today , you'd have MONOPOLIES everywhere
>>530081755>You can have an absolute monarchy with really good social services and wealth redistribution, but every business is owned by the King and the law is based on a religious scriptureThis never happens, stop talking shit. You talk about this nonsense and dont have a word about "normal governent that has more social programs". Just dont have it. You are here distracted about fictions of some monarchy with really good services where the king owns everything. Doesnt exist. Doesnt exist in Europe, doesnt exist in the persian gulf. Doesnt exist in any country that has a king or some dictator for life.
>>530081606>>530081606>>Along Lenin and Stalin>Both of which were also communist, not socialist.Ah , you are retrarded. Lenin lived in SWITZERLAND for 10 years before 1917 .He was a front for euro and british Red Color Revolution in Russia. They killed 2 mln Russian elites. It was IRRELEVANT how foreign color revolutionaries would call it.>everybody is foreign - Trotsky-Bronshtein, Lenin , Marx, Engels etc.Pic related - foreign color revolutionaries.
>>530082596Irrelevant
>>530082746Let me try again: >>530082340>Communism doesn't exist, retard.>It is a UTOPIA.>Just like "Free capitalism" doesn't exist, it is also a UTOPIA.>>you cannot have "free capitalism" today , you'd have MONOPOLIES everywhere
>>530082803NOTHING EXISTS GOY STOP REFERING TO CONCEPTS STOP USING WORDS
>>530082746>IrrelevantRead what I posted above again, >>530082596>everybody is foreign - Trotsky-Bronshtein, Lenin , Marx, Engels etc.>Pic related - foreign color revolutionaries.German rich guy who was married to one of the richest women in Germany, Karl Marx, wrote Communist Manifesto, when he lived in LONDON. >next to london kings, london banks and london glowies."Communism" is a UTOPIA that glowniggers use to do color revolutions and overthrow foreign governments. >Publication place United Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto
>>530082928Your arse was handed to you. You are either a retard , or glowing. Which one are you? >>530083128
