Is Communism good?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Is Communism good?

Is Communism good? This poll is closed.
Yes	375	66.25%
No	191	33.75%
Total:	523 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Oh communism? Yeah, it's good, great potential, all the kids are into it these days. You're gonna love it. It's just...wow...just 'good', you know?

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 13:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:19

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Communism is real, and my friend.

Also technology owns, primitivists out.

# ¿ Jan 24, 2017 05:08

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

The biggest anticoms are always nazis, because the future of universal love & brotherhood is an existential threat to fascists.

Normal people tend to just have feasibility concerns, which actually aren't that hard to overcome, and are much less decisive than people think. Face it capitalistailures, there's no good argument against communism.

# ¿ Jan 25, 2017 12:26

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Marx was right

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 07:41

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

literally none of that is true

like quote marx saying what you think he says

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 12:00

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

You made a claim about Marx advocating 'transforming' people, and you failed to back it up. The quotes you have are dealing with alienation and freedom from oppression, not a magical utopian transition of people into a new and different kind of people.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 13:56

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

caps on caps on caps posted:

The labor theory of value isn't exclusive with marginal theory, in fact most every single criticism leveled at the ltv can be leveled against marginal theory.

Also marxist theory as a whole isn't inconsistent, and i'm going to need proof from you of that claim of yours.

rudatron fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Mar 29, 2017

# ¿ Mar 29, 2017 20:39

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

Claims of a 'religion following' is also nothing but ideological propaganda. Even in it's heyday, marx was treated as a major scientific figure of the marxist theory, not a prophet. Saying that marxism is 'religious' is based on absolutely nothing, and the only reason the accusation is leveled is pure ideology.

# ¿ Mar 29, 2017 20:41

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

hakimashou posted:

Even in places where communists failed to enact their gruesome plans, there was still often a lot of suffering and death as a result of the necessary resistance to their efforts.

Pretty much the only thing that has ever been able to legitimize far-right politics is its opposition to genocidal communism. Another proud achievement to display with all the corpses I suppose.

The harm communism has done is incalculable.

The USSR was the dominant reason that fascism was defeated. For saving the world from that despicable ideology, punishing them for their genocidal actions (and planned genocides), and forever proving that fascists themselves are weak and disgusting people, the world owes the soviet union a debt.

# ¿ Mar 29, 2017 20:43

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

steinrokkan posted:

Do people who claim Marx is a prophet of the radical left not realize that during his lifetime, Marx was only one of many competing socialist theorists and activists, engaged in a perpetual struggle to defend himself against intellectual opposition on the left as well as finding it hard to make any headway with leftist politicians of his day?

It follows in the long liberal tradition of claiming that anyone 'radical' is religious, because they act with 'zeal' (read: give a poo poo about more than their portfolio).

Bulgogi Hoagie posted:

the world owes central planning a debt as well for ridding the world of the awfulness that was USSR

The USSR didn't fall because of a clerical error, if fell because people lost faith in the system. Central planning as a method worked continuously for ~60 years. The fall occurred when people stopped believing it could maintain competitiveness with the West.

But there's plenty of room for improvement. A belief that a planned system can do no better than what the USSR achieved, no matter what other variables you changed, has no empirical basis.

# ¿ Mar 29, 2017 20:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:19

rudatron: May 31, 2011; by Fluffdaddy

asdf32 posted:

It's 2017, not 1894. The debates are over and the case is closed. You can be a religious fanatic about anything but the glove really fits when it's an ideology based around a guy who said a bunch of weird psudo-mystical poo poo two centuries ago. You can use more modern economic frameworks (or data) to say almost anything - there is no reason to self-identify with Marx unless you're deliberately trying to drape yourself in that weird flag.

Or that doesn't happen. Real life will tell.

The debate isn't over, and contemporary economists like Piketty are essentially having to rediscover Marx. I'll agree it's never a good idea to idealize people, but ideas can stick, and the idea that capitalism itself produces inequality, rather than merely being subject to it, matches what we have in the real world. The fantasy of capitalism as a pure meritocracy is nothing but self-serving bullshit.

# ¿ Mar 30, 2017 03:55

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Is Communism good?