Do you believe communism is good?

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

That's where the idea came from, they studied the evolution of society. Remember, Europe was still bands of tribes much later than the Mediterranean cultures, even when ruled by Rome there were remote tribes for a long time, look at 'Gypsies' today. You take that and pair it with the fact that capitalism will inherently lead to the consolidation of wealth, that's why they say socialism is inevitable. For most of human history communism has been our way of life, capitalism is the experiment and it is believed, intellectually, to be proven unsustainable. It's a theory. Capitalism is the exploitation of our communist nature, community, cooperation, concentrating wealth, the disparity only getting greater, it's the logical trajectory to capitalism: consolidation of wealth and power. 'Capitalism' is how all the great achievements have been done, even all the way back to Egyptian and Mayan pyramids, but look at every civilization, it concentrates wealth and power and they all fall. The essence of communism has always been present and underlaid capitalism, capitalism is just 'exploiting' that cooperation. Marx believed we'd eventually break this cycle and just cooperate.

 

Finland, Norway, Sweden Lapland today

 

 

 

Amazon

 

 

Africa today 

 

Mongolia today 

 

Afghanistan

 

 

Canada today

 

Australia

 

Islanders

 

"We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy."

"the struggle for the general franchise, for democracy, [is] one of the first and most important tasks of the militant proletariat"

"All forms of the state have democracy for their truth, and for that reason are false to the extent that they are not democracy"

"Universal Suffrage Would Serve the People” (universal right to vote)

"Democracy is the road to socialism and socialism ultimately leads to communism" 

-Marx

You can "just cooperate" within a small, impoverished primitive tribe, it's not gonna happen within the confines of enormous, complex society. It's not even gonna happen once the population reaches a small town - village seems to be the limit/extent of communism being somewhat workable. But even the village size is seriously starting to push it. If our nature was communist, we would just form effortlessly into a ant hill/bee hive, clearly we are selfish and individualistic first and foremost, we are working based on mutual incentives and disincentives, in other words, transactionally. We also have some drive to be good - but being good within the context of being a human within human society can be highly relative, and it's not nearly as big of a drive as our selfishness. Furthermore, you can achieve a lot positive things from a position of selfish altruism as I keep saying, so it's not so black and white

It is scientifically proven that you can only care about MAX 150 people, it's called the Dunbar's number. Realistically you're gonna care about much less. You think this doesn't translate into politics? That's very naive

Edited Friday at 02:57 PM by NewKidOnTheBlock

[Husseinisdoingfine]

Its not good n'or bad, but rather just an inevitable state. Likewise, feudalism n'or capitalism are evil, merely stages we had/have to go to through.

[Elliott]

8 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

You can "just cooperate" within a small, impoverished primitive tribe, it's not gonna happen within the confines of enormous, complex society. It's not even gonna happen once the population reaches a small town - village seems to be the limit/extent of communism being somewhat workable. But even the village size is seriously starting to push it. If our nature was communist, we would just form effortlessly into a ant hill/bee hive, clearly we are selfish and individualistic first and foremost, we are working based on mutual incentives and disincentives, in other words, transactionally. We also have some drive to be good - but being good within the context of being a human within human society can be highly relative, and it's not nearly as big of a drive as our selfishness. Furthermore, you can achieve a lot positive things from a position of selfish altruism as I keep saying, so it's not so black and white

It is scientifically proven that you can only care about MAX 150 people, it's called the Dunbar's number. Realistically you're gonna care about much less. You think this doesn't translate into politics? That's very naive

Even only caring about yourself, the better everyone else in the world is the better you will be. This is just a matter of entering this information into the majority of the population. I think you can see Scandinavian countries cooperating at the national level. Like I said though, we're talking about maybe 1,000 years. Slowly everyone would get their needs met, which greatly reduces crime and conflict, and then morals and ethics would need to be hammered into the global psyche, moral preaching Wokies abounding.

 

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 11:45 PM by Elliott

[Basman]

Fotball wished it fans had the stamina and conviction of communists. There's nothing you can tell them that'll stop making them root for communism. 

[enchanted]

6 hours ago, Basman said:

Fotball wished it fans had the stamina and conviction of communists. There's nothing you can tell them that'll stop making them root for communism. 

Lol exactly! Funny enough a great tell that someone is insecure about their worldview is how vehemently they are willing to argue for it. Staying busy arguing specific points is a good distraction from uncomfortable yet obvious contradictions in any given worldview. 

That's why religious people get so angry when you criticize their religion. When the facts and logic aren't favorable, religious people will simply dig their heels down as far as possible. If they admit even the slightest concession the whole story quickly falls apart.

That being said, if capatilists are to be intellectually honest, they too have to admit that communism might have some truth to it. As the title of the famous book by Haltom goes "The Others Fellow May be Right" 

Edited Saturday at 12:19 PM by enchanted

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

12 hours ago, Basman said:

Fotball wished it fans had the stamina and conviction of communists. There's nothing you can tell them that'll stop making them root for communism. 

No commie, nor socwokie here is really even arguing with a capitalist here, for all intents and purphoses that term is largely meaningless by now. Really, they're arguing with a human-naturalists; proponents of capitalism aren't really glazing capitalism or "capitalists" per ce, what they're doing is they believe and understand the concept of human nature, and think that capitalism is the framework/architecture that suits it most accurately. Whereas commies and socwokes think human nature is malleable, or they don't even believe in it - they just think human nature is an invention of capitalism/capitalists

[Basman]

1 hour ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

No commie, nor socwokie here is really even arguing with a capitalist here, for all intents and purphoses that term is largely meaningless by now. Really, they're arguing with a human-naturalists; proponents of capitalism aren't really glazing capitalism or "capitalists" per ce, what they're doing is they believe and understand the concept of human nature, and think that capitalism is the framework/architecture that suits it most accurately. Whereas commies and socwokes think human nature is malleable, or they don't even believe in it - they just think human nature is an invention of capitalism/capitalists

Thr neoliberal chud vs the npc "realist" vs the soy soccel

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

23 minutes ago, Basman said:

Thr neoliberal chud vs the npc "realist" vs the soy soccel

NPC realist for the win - he can become a neoliberal chud or the soy soccel depending on what the situation requires; since he is humannaturemaxxing. Blending in with the enviroment is an excelent evolutionary trait

[Basman]

1 hour ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

NPC realist for the win - he can become a neoliberal chud or the soy soccel depending on what the situation requires; since he is humannaturemaxxing. Blending in with the enviroment is an excelent evolutionary trait

Realism as in manufactured in Israel. Goyslop all the way down.

Edited Saturday at 10:05 PM by Basman

[Hojo]

On 4/17/2026 at 2:47 AM, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

But capitalism would work even better if all people involved were "100% self-responsible", capitalism is simply always high tier than socialist or communist equivalent of such system could ever be. 

Capitalism and self responsible are contradictive statements. Its the job of capitalism to take what you want its the job of the government to make them accountable. Capitalism is go as hard as you can without restriction an we need the government to stop them from destroying the environment.

If capitalist become self responsible they cant go as hard as they can and arent capitalist.

The government is there to put stoppers on them from going as hard as they can and make them responsible.

This allows the capitalist to still go as hard as they can but within limitation not set by the capitalist himself.

Edited Sunday at 04:19 AM by Hojo

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

2 hours ago, Hojo said:

Capitalism and self responsible are contradictive statements. Its the job of capitalism to take what you want its the job of the government to make them accountable. Capitalism is go as hard as you can without restriction an we need the government to stop them from destroying the environment.

If capitalist become self responsible they cant go as hard as they can and arent capitalist.

The government is there to put stoppers on them from going as hard as they can and make them responsible.

This allows the capitalist to still go as hard as they can but within limitation not set by the capitalist himself.

I was moreso reffering to a consumer being self responsible within caputalism; capitalism is a mirror pointed at you at all times, exposing how strong your values really are via your purchases. The "capitalists", whoever those are, wouldn't be able to make their profits if the demand changed. Obviously I don't expect them to be self responsible, but the consumer's purchases are exposing what the human nature is really like, without any guardrails by the daddy goverment.

You claim that it is a goverments job to enforce rules by providing incentives and dissincentives and regulations, and "stop a capitalist from destroying the enviroment", and yet all of the major enviromental crisies we are facing today (and have faced in the past), are either directly caused by the actions of goverments (global waming - majority of global oil and gas production, and coal mines/coal factories are state owned enterprises), or indirectly via no regulations/incorrectly placed incentives (fishing, deforestation, etc.). So, while it is one of the functions of the goverment to enforce regulations and incentives correctly and rule responsibly, it is doing a pretty poor job at it - and have, in fact, never done a good job at it really. Meanwhile, most of the practical research and deployment of innovations that can help with all of these crisies have company/capitalist origin, so you gotta wonder who really represents the will of the people? Isn't it goverments who are the ones that ACTUALLY do what they want? If the goverment does badly, who's going to stop them?

8 hours ago, Basman said:

Realism as in manufactured in Israel. Goyslop all the way down.

Nope. Just human nature

-------------------------------------

Yall are free to respond once you gather some facts and well crafted arguments lmao until then, my anti socwokie shield is activated

Edited Sunday at 07:01 AM by NewKidOnTheBlock

[Hojo]

@NewKidOnTheBlock The united states voted in a person that wants to turn the government into capitalism, he wants to run the government like its a company.

He dosent understand what a government is.

The people are supposed to hold the government accountable. but they dont do it perfectly, and are constantly under attack by the companies so they are confused. There is so much propghanda. The propghanda we get fed by companies defines who we are.

This is something the government really needs to go after, I cant beleive they just let it happen but USA would have to become more authoritarian in terms of freedom of speech.

Whatever propoghanda the corporations and news is putting out is really pushing the borders or even breaking what should be allowed.

Edited Sunday at 06:20 AM by Hojo

[Nercohype]

All i know is that capitalism sure dosen't work either. It is infact why our world is so broken. And there will be a great price to pay for what we have done to our mother in the name of capitalism.

[enchanted]

On 29/06/2026 at 5:15 AM, Nercohype said:

All i know is that capitalism sure dosen't work either. It is infact why our world is so broken. And there will be a great price to pay for what we have done to our mother in the name of capitalism.

Good point 

[Elliott]

Being subservient to other people is not "human nature".

[LordFall]

I think communism has some good ideas but ultimately it's flawed and doesn't work. I think a lot of the principles will take form when we have AI UBI and the tech singularity but it still will not eliminate wealth inequality as there are always more finite experience and goods and some people are better at business/finance than others. There will be a day soon though where all food and housing will be taken care of and everyone will get a monthly allowance type of thing based off AI tokens.

We are not far from world peace, even the iran conflict showed that war is not really profitable. 

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

24 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Being subservient to other people is not "human nature".

That's a very weirdo thing to keep emphasizing this. What does that even mean, you think transactional relationships are "subsurvience"? Doesn't make any sense. Maybe it's you who keeps thinking about it and projecting it onto us, the same way feminists do

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

34 minutes ago, enchanted said:

Good point 

It's really not though bro

[sholomar]

Our species like most animals is wired to get a dopamine boost for effort and other reward chemicals in the brain for achievement. To pay people to do nothing and give them free everything, there's no incentive to produce anything of value to society. Capitalism is not perfect, especially the rigged system we have where we privatize the gains and socialize the losses of the top via money printing, but it still is the best system to manage our nature in this physical universe, at least until we can make machines to replace all human labor, and in such a way they don't turn on us. 

Not even autocratic systems like China are really "communist" ... most people throw these terms around and they don't know what they mean, like calling trump a "dictator" (no he's not) ... China has had semi competent leadership and their nation has made strides to better their people, though they still have to work way too much for my liking... the thing about most autocratic systems, they make their people work.  It's mostly in the west where the idea of simply paying someone to exist is really a thing, and it creates a parasitic burden on the system for those who do work, causing inflationary pressure because no economic value is produced to society to hand out free money and circulate it into the economy.

We could certainly do a better job bleeding this liquidity from the top though, allowing wealth to concentrate in the manner we are is inflating asset bubbles, as they go and gobble up assets with this money like real estate, stocks, etc.  You can't take all their earnings away and expect them to want to keep producing value to society though, or great achievements and inventions where we say we're going to take away all their profit or effort and give it to the state, that would never work. 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by sholomar

[Elliott]

58 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

That's a very weirdo thing to keep emphasizing this. What does that even mean, you think transactional relationships are "subsurvience"? Doesn't make any sense. Maybe it's you who keeps thinking about it and projecting it onto us, the same way feminists do

Capitalism is based on subservience, where do you think the coins or dollar bills came from, they were just minted up.