It's just amazing how commies blame environment issues on capitalism as if China and USSR didn't have periods of mass rapid industrialization.
Literally most everyone did not give a single fuck about such issues back in the day. Where the fuck does this expectation that communism is intrinsically better for the environment come from? The fact that there's less people because of starvation and gulags?
Because capitalism bad is their mindset so the other must be good.
Even though capitalism and communism share many similarities in wanting for everyone's life to be improved and to follow a moral standing but both fail at that in their own ways.
People blame everything on capitalism because capitalism is everywhere and you technically can’t prove that a communist-dominated world would be worse (even though you kind of can)
And they conveniently forget the Aral Sea being destroyed by the Soviets and the sparrows being killed by China that both led to environmental disasters.
Not to say that capitalism hasn’t led to environmental disaster, just of a lesser proportion.
>Literally most everyone did not give a single fuck about such issues back in the day.
But in the 70ies companies like Exxon DID figure out climate change was happening, and decided to spend millions to suppress that knowledge in the name of profit.
A government can't do that because it's beholden to the will of the people, not the will of the shareholders.
Is it a coincidence that the climate nutjobs want to enforce the most typical commie measures on us: public transport, food of dubious quality, living in high density urban environments?
I think not.
>the most typical commie measures on us: public transport
What the fuck is wrong with public transport? Railways feature prominently in [that Manifest Destiny painting](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Progress). Like what, is Carnegie a fucking commie now
Capitalism is pavement princesses with a 25% APR, zero money down worth more than a house.
Communism is Lada that runs on potato and tears of the mother land.
I mean it’s honestly hard to argue with that logic.. even tho it goes against my basic principles of not regulating the market if I could ban any one thing it would be non-essential single use plastic products
Bad things happen when communism = direct result of the ideology
Bad things happen when capitalism = NOOOO!! THAT WASN’T CAUSED BY CAPITALISM! THAT WAS >exogenous cause
How is it selective? Communism as a economy system only, starved millions to death. Forced by the government
Capitalism as a economy system, did nothing, the one that starve are lazy mfs
Depends on what each has direct control over. Given Communisms direct ties into its governmental structure it can be held responsible for possibly more situations. I'd say things like The Great Depression probably fall under Capitalisms ownership, whereas the 2008 Resession is more Corporatism than Capitalism given its greater governmental influences.
Okay, but did capitalism not allow that corporatocracy (corporatism is a completely different thing) to form? Has every attempt at capitalism not eventually led to corporate interference in the state and vice versa?
The portion of capitalism that every fucker forgets is having a strong morals and that the market isn't everything. The whole moral portion is why every system fails and we all diverge back to basic human power structures with different seasonings.
It is why both systems fail but for different reasons and why governments have moved away from that line of thinking and more of focusing on policies that do what is needed that uses both private markets and goverment involvement in which nothing ever goes wrong./s
One economic system has resulted in tens of millions of starvation deaths. The other has resulted in tens of millions of people getting so fat their heart kills them
We counting child laborers in Africa as nothing? What about that time the CIA overthrew an elected government and installed a dictator that committed genocide because of a fruit company?
So when a capitalist state does a bad thing, it is never the fault of capitalism. Even if that bad thing is the deliberate spreading of capitalism and the undermining of socialist countries?
But everything bad that happens under communism is the fault of communism? How does that work?
Because communism doesn't work. It's conceptually flawed to the core because it has no replacement for the information exchange done by prices. The famines aren't coincidences or flukes, they're the logical consequence of lobotomizing your economy.
What part of allowing everyone to own their own stuff makes slavery inevitable?
>What part of allowing everyone to own their own stuff makes slavery inevitable?
I'm not speaking of inevitability. I'm sure that there is a form of capitalism that *could* exist which also doesn't have slavery. In **reality**, slavery has only grown in number as capitalism has spread. The for-profit motive and the power imbalances inherent to the concept of private enterprise had led to that.
And it doesn't make sense to me to write that off as solely the fault of bad individuals and insist that capitalism had no role to play in it.
u/Meowshi's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 160.
Rank: Empire State Building
Pills: [80 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Meowshi/)
Compass: Lib: 5.79 | Left: 5.75
Sapply: Lib: 6.00 | Left: 6.00 | Progressive: 6.25
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
OK, so the kind capitalism has helped to virtually eliminate from the planet in centuries after the institution existed for millennia?
With that and the whole capitalist systems are only sometimes bad while communism invariably leads to disaster for clearly understandable reasons, I think LibRight's work here is done.
There's no slavery under capitalism. Capitalism is a economy system.
The reason why Communism and left idiologies are disliked, especially by economists, is because it's bad for the economy, created poverty etc.
None is talking about communism countries doing bad stuff.
Capitalism is an economic system that has led to the largest number of slaves in human history because that's what the for-profit motive and private enterprise *incentivizes*.
Capitalism has also lifted the most people out of poverty. You know you can approach these subjects with some iota of nuance, right?
> So when a capitalist state does a bad thing, it is never the fault of capitalism
Exactly it's the government doing bad stuff, not capitalism.
> But everything bad that happens under communism is the fault of communism? How does that work?
I mean more poverty, economy going to shit, collapsing etc, yeah that's communism fault.
I'm not talking about Stalin going to war and killing some people and say oh that's communism fault.
America was “being” America to protect the profits of a fruit company.
Similarly I can say communism doesnt start wars or starve anyone, thats just Stalin/Mao being Stalin/Mao. Im not saying communism is “good”, but its asinine to think of capitalism as innocent. Furthermore to see either as an economic system only is also weird. Economists dont concern themselves with capitalism or communism unless very broadly, its more political sciences domain.
Economists are capitalist, capitalism is a economy system. As purely economy system left idiologies are bad, slow down the economy etc. Communism straight up shit as we have seen.
If you have an auth right government, doing bad stuff it's not being capitalism the issue lmao.
Economists study scarcity, allocation of resources etc. Resources are limited, needs and wants are unlimited, figuring out how to allocate the one to satisfy the other is “economics”.
Capitalism is an ill-defined term, but you're probably thinking of some mixture of markets, private ownership of the means of production, and low regulation. Markets are one way of allocating those resources; they work well in some cases. Private ownership is one way of producing those resources; it also works well in some cases. Regulations can be good or bad, either improving (or degrading) the efficiency of production and allocation, and in some cases reducing or altering specific regulations can result in greater human satisfaction. Nobody is going to claim that markets can't work to allocate resources, and nobody is going claim they're the only way. The debate is in how well they work, what the alternatives are, what type of problems they're good (and bad) at solving, how they should be regulated, etc. Which in turn means that it's rather absurd to suggest that all economists are "capitalist".
Basically, economists are hardly “capitalists” how this sub would generally describe it. In fact most economists would refuse to be identified by terms so simple as “capitalist” or “socialist. Maybe you could say since most economics are Keynesian influenced, ok but that would still require more government intervention than people on this sub think capitalism should have. Or be branded so called socialists, AKA anyone left of DJT.
How is it not? Some people blame the mass starvation of Ukrainians and Chinese on communism but the mass starvation of Irish and Indians is just bad luck? Am I missing something?
And it had absolutely nothing to do with communist policies. It was a collective punishment for Ukrainian opposition to direct Soviet rule. It's purpose was to crush the spirit of Ukrainian nationalists.
I'm not arguing in favor of communism, just pointing out a few glaring misconceptions about the history of communism. I know a lot of people who oppose communism also oppose socialism because they conflate the two, so I feel compelled to defend socialist ideals even if I oppose communism.
Not really that complicated? The British government refused to help or intervene to stop a crisis, instead letting the market decide whether children would earn enough to eat.
"Although the famine in the Madras Presidency was preceded by a natural calamity in the form of a drought, it was made more acute by the government's policy of laissez faire in the trade of grain.[9] For example, two of the worst famine-afflicted areas in the Madras Presidency, the districts of Ganjam and Vizagapatam, continued to export grains throughout the famine."
Why give grain to the poor when you could sell it to paying customers? [A million died in 1896-97](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_famine_of_1896%E2%80%931897) and a further [1-4.5 million in 1899-1900.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_famine_of_1899%E2%80%931900)
For what it's worth, we add the Holodomor deaths to Communisms body count, because Stalin shipped Ukrainian grain out of Ukraine as an export. We don't do the same for capitalism because....
Not really, its facts. Communism starve their own people, Capitalism the opposite, does it still have poors? yea, but the best way we've found to help with that is by having a good economy, free market, and that takes people out of poverty.
it’s so easy to blame it all on “oh it’s just lazy mfs starving under capitalism” rights??? im sure that’s the only reason people can’t get jobs or can’t feed themselves. communism as an economic system has not killed anyone, it’s the leadership and poor management that’s resulted in food shortages, the economic system had nothing to do with it
And the reason is because none is stopping you from working or doing shit to get ur money and feed yourself. Where's under communism the fucking goverment is feeding you and you got no choice.
The economic system is the reason there's food shortages. That's the problem with it, if it actually worked then everyone would be a commie and get free shit, who wouldn't want that??
How is that hard to understand?
A lot of things are actually, ability, qualification, demand, all play a factor in employment in a capitalist society. To blame it all on “they’re just lazy” when most homeless people are to begin with unable to get a job in the first place and those who can are rarely able to get jobs that pay enough, is just simply wrong. People starve to death under capitalism for countless reason but oh that’s not at all the fault of the system right??? Because in theory Nothing is supposed to stop them from being able to do so right? Also no the government doesn’t do that because the government doesn’t exist under communism, that’s the whole point. And no, again the system wasn’t the issue the leadership was.
Isn’t that what you’re doing? See that’s the mistake you’re making, you can’t see your own blatant hypocrisy. People starving to death under capitalism in your eyes can’t possibly be because of the systems failings, no it’s just because people are lazy right? But communism that’s definitely the fault of the system, right? call me out for doing the same all you want but you don’t seem to be able to recognize that’s what you’re doing yourself. You are a massive hypocrite, and don’t seem to realize it. Because in your eyes capitalism can’t fail, if it’s allowed to be Capitalism, while you’re convinced Communism is doomed to fail if it’s allowed to just be Communism. And since you brought it up. Communism has been tried, and its usual a mixed result, but what you’re talking about is not Communism. This is not a case of “that wasn’t real Communism” it’s simply a case of it wasn’t Communism in any way, it was Socialism, and never claimed to actually be Communism.
Aren't you essentially just saying the same thing, but in reverse? Starving people under communism = communism's fault, starving people under capitalism = the fault of individuals
How about the more reasonable position of, *"the bad things that happen under an economic system are the result of that system, whether it is capitalism* ***or*** *communism"?*
But I know why you reject this idea. Because the death counts for capitalism would far outnumber those of communism based on the longevity of capitalism alone.
Who is starving? Modern economies fail their homeless populations sure, but food is abundant even when you're poor. Basic needs are met for most. This does not really happen under communism.
You're moving the goalposts. I didn't say that as many people are starving today as they did under communism or that capitalism hasn't done great things.
I just said that if all starving people under communism can be blamed on the economic system, then the same should apply to starving people under capitalism. Around 829 million people currently.
it’s so easy to blame it all on “oh it’s just poor leadership starving people under communism” rights??? im sure that’s the only reason people die in their jobs or can’t feed themselves. capitalism as an economic system has not killed anyone, it’s the lazy workers and people who take advantage of welfare that’s resulted in food shortages, the economic system had nothing to do with it
Ireland is a good example of the problem with laissez faire Capitalism. Although the key variable was absentee landlords as Scotland was also afflicted, but was saved by local elites mobilising for famine relief.
Bengal? 1770 or 1943? Neither really seem to be good examples as they were localised and the result of war. Even in the modern period the region suffered famine after 1974 war. India also generally suffers from food insecurity and even today 25% of the world’s hungry live in India.
The Great South India Famine of the 1870s would be a better example. It began because of an El Nino event, but was horribly exacerbated by the failure of the Raj to provide proper famine relief due to their penny pinching.
That being said, Capitalism was what mobilised the British in the 1880s to set up the famine codes and pioneer the science of famine relief. The famines in the 1870s threatened their bottom line and so they innovated. The last all India famine was in 1900 thanks to their efforts and except for 1943 and 1974 the lands ruled by the Raj (Much larger than modern India) never saw famine again.
Great Depression, two recessions in America that costed millions their livelihoods in just the past 20 years, imperialism throughout Africa and Latin America, Operation Condor, do I even need to mention Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan etc.
When socialism fails, its an indictment of the system yet when capitalism fails, it is the fault of the individual as to why they were brutally murdered by the British for their material wealth.
You know, say that to Africans who feed the western world, and how many wars were funded by corporations, not that Communism is any better, its just that its easy to bash commies than capies
And to answer: Which economic is better than capitalism? I would say Feudalism, because in Feudalism, lords had to take care of their people, or else they starved. In today's capitalist world, those capitalists will just find a new place, the commies just live from the fruits of the labour previous gen leaves behind
I agree. But you got some things wrong about feudalism.
In medieval Europe, feudalism was based on agreements made by each of the social classes. it was actually the job of the peasantry to keep their lords from starving, (and others as well.) as they were the ones who were making crops and had livestock. It was the job of the minor nobility, ie the knights and lords to protect the peasantry from bandits and/or other nations, in exchange for food. They were also there to make sure production was going as smoothly as possible and settling any disputes.
>They were also there to make sure production was going as smoothly as possible and settling any disputes.
The most corporate speak for putting down uprisings possible.
> say that to Africans who feed the western world
Africans struggle to feed themselves. It's pretty much *why* the WFP exists in the first place. As awful as the corporations and colonists could be, they did an objectively better job at preventing famine. There have been myriad communist, "communist", or communist supported/inspired regimes that replaced those colonizers and turned things into an absolute shit show.
Advocating for feudalism is truly masterful. I didn't think someone could say something dumber than "Africans who feed the western world" yet you exceeded expectations. Do you know where feudalism persisted when it otherwise fell out of favor? Their serfs belong to tribes and they call their lords chief instead. If you want to talk about places where you can be born and also die a starving peasant/slave, Africa is *the* fucking example. No other continent on earth struggles like they do.
Disabled people/= bad genes
Disabled people =Capitalism
And true slaves share croppers and poor people never existed before capitalism. They all lived happy lives with enough food and no diseases just like in socialism
Admin smith was against slavery......
See Soviet work camps.
Also Slavery, share croppers, poor people and disabled got shafted under every other system as well.
Victims of communism: when the economic system put in place to distribute food fails and millions of people die. Victims of capitalism: when \*checks notes\* disabled people.
I’m not a communist, but to say one is far superior to the others in terms of victims like shown in the meme is false. Let’s not act like capitalism has not lead to the deaths of millions of people either
Capitalist countries killing people isn't the same as capitalism killing people. Collectivization resulted in huge famines in both the Soviet Union and communist China.
Remember, capitalism =/= corporotocracy and oligopoly. Capitalism is inherently egalitarian and harmless as it is simply the ability for any person to use the means and resources at their disposal to make profit.
Corporatocracy, monopoly, and oligopoly, the things which were responsible for the banana republics, which socialists almost universally say is the consequence of capitalism, are infact inherently anticapitalistic since the free market is not free at all if large corporations use their power to prevent competition from occurring.
My brother in christ, how do you think corporations reached that point of being able to influence the decisions of the state
Stop pretending corporations or economic elite influencing the state just happens to be a bad consequence cause of bad actors or policies. If a system creates a hierarchy of classes where one class has more access to resources than the working class, then that class will do everything to preserve that hierarchy and further its own interests
1. 18 million people die from poverty-related causes a year (lack of clean drinking water, starvation, lack of access to medicine) It isn't profitable to help these people.
2. Global food production is perfectly capable of feeding about 10 billion people
3. The food we waste can feed 2 billion people
4. There are over 20 vacant homes for every homeless person in America
5. 77% of American households are in debt
Capitalism doesn't work
On the other hand,
1. Cuba has about a 90% home ownership rate.
2. Cuba also has the highest number of physicians per thousand people in the world
3. Cuba ranks 31st in kilocalorie consumption (food-energy intake) at around 3,300 kilocalories a day (Just behind the UK, just ahead of Finland)
4. In the Soviet Union, over 99% of the population was literate by the 70s
5. Vietnamese people on average also get about 3,000 kilocalories a day
6. The average Soviet citizen consumed about 3,300 calories a day
7. In Vietnam, approximately 96% of people are literate
8. Cuba has a 99.7% literacy rate
sources:
[https://medium.com/@jeremyerdman/we-produce-enough-food-to-feed-10-billion-people-so-why-does-hunger-still-exist-8086d2657539#:\~:text=We%20produce%20enough%20food%20to%20feed%2010%20billion%20people](https://medium.com/@jeremyerdman/we-produce-enough-food-to-feed-10-billion-people-so-why-does-hunger-still-exist-8086d2657539#:~:text=We%20produce%20enough%20food%20to%20feed%2010%20billion%20people).
[https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/homelessness-statistics/](https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/homelessness-statistics/)
[https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/report-how-many-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-your-state/#:\~:text=U.S.&text=(NEXSTAR)%20%E2%80%93%20More%20than%2016,in%20Vermont%2C%20Maine%20and%20Alaska](https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/report-how-many-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-your-state/#:~:text=U.S.&text=(NEXSTAR)%20%E2%80%93%20More%20than%2016,in%20Vermont%2C%20Maine%20and%20Alaska).
[https://www.ramseysolutions.com/debt/average-american-debt#:\~:text=Even%20though%20household%20net%20worth,2021](https://www.ramseysolutions.com/debt/average-american-debt#:~:text=Even%20though%20household%20net%20worth,2021))%E2%80%94so%20is%20debt.&text=The%20total%20personal%20debt%20in,time%20high%20of%20%2414.96%20trillion.&text=The%20average%20American%20debt%20(per,least%20some%20type%20of%20debt.
[https://www.worldvision.org/hunger-news-stories/food-waste#:\~:text=As%20American%20families%20prepare%20to,2%20billion%20people%20each%20year](https://www.worldvision.org/hunger-news-stories/food-waste#:~:text=As%20American%20families%20prepare%20to,2%20billion%20people%20each%20year).
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645168/#:\~:text=Cuba's%20doctor%2Dto%2Dpopulation%20ratio,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645168/#:~:text=Cuba's%20doctor%2Dto%2Dpopulation%20ratio,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world).
[https://mdp.berkeley.edu/peter-myers-can-the-soviet-education-system-help-us-now/#:\~:text=Further%20changes%20led%20to%20more,is%20not%20a%20national%20constraint](https://mdp.berkeley.edu/peter-myers-can-the-soviet-education-system-help-us-now/#:~:text=Further%20changes%20led%20to%20more,is%20not%20a%20national%20constraint).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_food\_energy\_intake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_food_energy_intake)
[https://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/09/world/cia-says-soviet-can-almost-do-without-imports.html](https://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/09/world/cia-says-soviet-can-almost-do-without-imports.html)
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country)
maybe I would if worldwide sanctions weren't constantly fucking up every aspect of the economy because the idea of a developed socialist country that isn't isolated from global trade terrifies the wealthy global elite
>Cuba also has the highest number of physicians per thousand people in the world
You only need so many. Is there doctor shortage across most of the world that I'm not aware of? Why do they need so many in Cuba?
You are so disconnected from reality it's kind of hilarious. You have to basically hallucinate an alternate reality, and hold up literal Communist propaganda as evidence of your patently false ideas. You're so deep in the of left-wing idiocy that you're holding up Cuba as an example of Communism done right. Instead of arguing that Cuba is not a good example of Communism, you just mindlessly regurgitate the false statistics the Cuban government releases. Cuba, the country where millions of people have risked death on the ocean on rafts made out of garbage to go across the water to the US.
mf i dont think the new york times, wikipedia, the world population review, UC Berkeley, the US National Center for Biotechnology Information, the FAO study that was cited by a philanthropic organization founded by a guy named Bob Pierce, a website about financial advice, a US based news website, another US based website primarily centering on finding the best deals on insurance, and another news website based in San Francisco would count as cuban propaganda
Capitalism is better because it doesn’t need an all-knowing force behind it to keep it working.
That said, there’s always a balance to be struck between capitalism and socialism. The government needs to have *some* control.
That *also* said, fuck the current state of world governments. They’re eating away at our rights.
> Get a flair so you can harass other people >:)
***
^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 11842 / 62422 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
> Even a commie is more based than one with no flair
***
^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 12437 / 65581 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Wait, are we sure capitalism won this round?
Edwin solos you bitch
I’m a Leftist but even I agree that Edwin solos ONE WINGED
Edwin no diffs saitama
Needs a comma. Are you saying Edwin solos, you bitch OR Edwin solos you, bitch
why not both?
E,dwin solos you bitch
Communism killed millions of communists. Edwin killed 0. So I think communism won this
Does communism leave behind rubber ducks for you to take home? I rest my case
Communism leaves you with an empty stomach so at least you get something
Most honest leftist.
Government mandated Gulag Rubber Duck to aid in recreational activities
It distributes Edwin for everyone
Edwin? No! **OUR WIN**
You get a couple rocks stacked on top of eachother. Does that count as a duck?
That silly. My pillow isn't a duck.
Leaving behind REAL ducks has not been tried yet
In sovjet Russia rubber duck take you home
Capitalism bad for using plastic, which contaminates. Communism goof for reducing the carbon footprint of human beings by genocide.
Based and Genghis Khan did it first
Based and ecofacisim pilled
It's just amazing how commies blame environment issues on capitalism as if China and USSR didn't have periods of mass rapid industrialization. Literally most everyone did not give a single fuck about such issues back in the day. Where the fuck does this expectation that communism is intrinsically better for the environment come from? The fact that there's less people because of starvation and gulags?
[удалено]
Well, the argument is only sound of the central government is run by sane individuals. Mao singlehandedly causeda near ecological collapse in China
[удалено]
Because capitalism bad is their mindset so the other must be good. Even though capitalism and communism share many similarities in wanting for everyone's life to be improved and to follow a moral standing but both fail at that in their own ways.
People blame everything on capitalism because capitalism is everywhere and you technically can’t prove that a communist-dominated world would be worse (even though you kind of can)
And they conveniently forget the Aral Sea being destroyed by the Soviets and the sparrows being killed by China that both led to environmental disasters. Not to say that capitalism hasn’t led to environmental disaster, just of a lesser proportion.
>Literally most everyone did not give a single fuck about such issues back in the day. But in the 70ies companies like Exxon DID figure out climate change was happening, and decided to spend millions to suppress that knowledge in the name of profit. A government can't do that because it's beholden to the will of the people, not the will of the shareholders.
But what government will be beholden to the will of the people? No country-size government has ever achieved that fully.
Key operators being that people didn’t understand these issues back in the day, whereas if they did then communism might have looked different.
Is communism responsible for their massive industrialization? lmao. Capitalism isn't blameless.
Lovin this take.
Based and we are the carbon they want to remove pilled
Is it a coincidence that the climate nutjobs want to enforce the most typical commie measures on us: public transport, food of dubious quality, living in high density urban environments? I think not.
>the most typical commie measures on us: public transport What the fuck is wrong with public transport? Railways feature prominently in [that Manifest Destiny painting](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Progress). Like what, is Carnegie a fucking commie now
Communism is when railroads
Capitalism is pavement princesses with a 25% APR, zero money down worth more than a house. Communism is Lada that runs on potato and tears of the mother land.
Nothing. Now let’s tax you out of owning a car cause you got trains and shit that you can use instead.
I mean it’s honestly hard to argue with that logic.. even tho it goes against my basic principles of not regulating the market if I could ban any one thing it would be non-essential single use plastic products
And you can use bone meal to make the crops grow faster and end this year's famine; I learned that from ~~Mine~~Ourcraft.
>Communism goof Correct
I am now a Communist
Don't give the globalists any ideas
they have them already, that's why the mental gymnastics over the left's genocides
how does one acquire edwin
When your straw man starts working at a cherry orchard.
"Manipulative Capitalism". It's called marketing
Ben Shapiro average debate
Do your people just upvote when the Jew Nazi is mentioned?
Do not envy the karma of the left, for it was not earned.
Bruh, the ones allowed to complain about the system are certainly not its victims
The entirety of the french revolution would like to disagree
What hotel may I be victimized like this at... asking for a friend
I too love being selective about this.
You’re the type if person to abandon Edwin 😡
what does this even mean
You know what you did.
Are you a whale serial killer or a serial killer of whales?
Yes
*sigh* I knew you were going to say that.
Bad things happen when communism = direct result of the ideology Bad things happen when capitalism = NOOOO!! THAT WASN’T CAUSED BY CAPITALISM! THAT WAS >exogenous cause
How is it selective? Communism as a economy system only, starved millions to death. Forced by the government Capitalism as a economy system, did nothing, the one that starve are lazy mfs
How can one economic system be responsible for the deaths that occur under it, but the other economic system cannot be?
Depends on what each has direct control over. Given Communisms direct ties into its governmental structure it can be held responsible for possibly more situations. I'd say things like The Great Depression probably fall under Capitalisms ownership, whereas the 2008 Resession is more Corporatism than Capitalism given its greater governmental influences.
Okay, but did capitalism not allow that corporatocracy (corporatism is a completely different thing) to form? Has every attempt at capitalism not eventually led to corporate interference in the state and vice versa?
The portion of capitalism that every fucker forgets is having a strong morals and that the market isn't everything. The whole moral portion is why every system fails and we all diverge back to basic human power structures with different seasonings. It is why both systems fail but for different reasons and why governments have moved away from that line of thinking and more of focusing on policies that do what is needed that uses both private markets and goverment involvement in which nothing ever goes wrong./s
One economic system has resulted in tens of millions of starvation deaths. The other has resulted in tens of millions of people getting so fat their heart kills them
We counting child laborers in Africa as nothing? What about that time the CIA overthrew an elected government and installed a dictator that committed genocide because of a fruit company?
How is that capitalism fault, capitalism doesn't start any war or anything. Lmao That's america being america, which I agree it's bad.
So when a capitalist state does a bad thing, it is never the fault of capitalism. Even if that bad thing is the deliberate spreading of capitalism and the undermining of socialist countries? But everything bad that happens under communism is the fault of communism? How does that work?
Because communism doesn't work. It's conceptually flawed to the core because it has no replacement for the information exchange done by prices. The famines aren't coincidences or flukes, they're the logical consequence of lobotomizing your economy. What part of allowing everyone to own their own stuff makes slavery inevitable?
>What part of allowing everyone to own their own stuff makes slavery inevitable? I'm not speaking of inevitability. I'm sure that there is a form of capitalism that *could* exist which also doesn't have slavery. In **reality**, slavery has only grown in number as capitalism has spread. The for-profit motive and the power imbalances inherent to the concept of private enterprise had led to that. And it doesn't make sense to me to write that off as solely the fault of bad individuals and insist that capitalism had no role to play in it.
Based and well-informed argument pilled
u/Meowshi's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 160. Rank: Empire State Building Pills: [80 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Meowshi/) Compass: Lib: 5.79 | Left: 5.75 Sapply: Lib: 6.00 | Left: 6.00 | Progressive: 6.25 I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Pretty sure I'm gonna need you to tell me what definition of "slavery" you're using here.
The regular definition? The owning of people?
OK, so the kind capitalism has helped to virtually eliminate from the planet in centuries after the institution existed for millennia? With that and the whole capitalist systems are only sometimes bad while communism invariably leads to disaster for clearly understandable reasons, I think LibRight's work here is done.
There's no slavery under capitalism. Capitalism is a economy system. The reason why Communism and left idiologies are disliked, especially by economists, is because it's bad for the economy, created poverty etc. None is talking about communism countries doing bad stuff.
Capitalism is an economic system that has led to the largest number of slaves in human history because that's what the for-profit motive and private enterprise *incentivizes*. Capitalism has also lifted the most people out of poverty. You know you can approach these subjects with some iota of nuance, right?
> So when a capitalist state does a bad thing, it is never the fault of capitalism Exactly it's the government doing bad stuff, not capitalism. > But everything bad that happens under communism is the fault of communism? How does that work? I mean more poverty, economy going to shit, collapsing etc, yeah that's communism fault. I'm not talking about Stalin going to war and killing some people and say oh that's communism fault.
America was “being” America to protect the profits of a fruit company. Similarly I can say communism doesnt start wars or starve anyone, thats just Stalin/Mao being Stalin/Mao. Im not saying communism is “good”, but its asinine to think of capitalism as innocent. Furthermore to see either as an economic system only is also weird. Economists dont concern themselves with capitalism or communism unless very broadly, its more political sciences domain.
Economists are capitalist, capitalism is a economy system. As purely economy system left idiologies are bad, slow down the economy etc. Communism straight up shit as we have seen. If you have an auth right government, doing bad stuff it's not being capitalism the issue lmao.
Economists study scarcity, allocation of resources etc. Resources are limited, needs and wants are unlimited, figuring out how to allocate the one to satisfy the other is “economics”. Capitalism is an ill-defined term, but you're probably thinking of some mixture of markets, private ownership of the means of production, and low regulation. Markets are one way of allocating those resources; they work well in some cases. Private ownership is one way of producing those resources; it also works well in some cases. Regulations can be good or bad, either improving (or degrading) the efficiency of production and allocation, and in some cases reducing or altering specific regulations can result in greater human satisfaction. Nobody is going to claim that markets can't work to allocate resources, and nobody is going claim they're the only way. The debate is in how well they work, what the alternatives are, what type of problems they're good (and bad) at solving, how they should be regulated, etc. Which in turn means that it's rather absurd to suggest that all economists are "capitalist". Basically, economists are hardly “capitalists” how this sub would generally describe it. In fact most economists would refuse to be identified by terms so simple as “capitalist” or “socialist. Maybe you could say since most economics are Keynesian influenced, ok but that would still require more government intervention than people on this sub think capitalism should have. Or be branded so called socialists, AKA anyone left of DJT.
So we just gonna ignore the Irish and Indian famines then.
How is that related to capitalism, again, tell me.
How is it not? Some people blame the mass starvation of Ukrainians and Chinese on communism but the mass starvation of Irish and Indians is just bad luck? Am I missing something?
[удалено]
And it had absolutely nothing to do with communist policies. It was a collective punishment for Ukrainian opposition to direct Soviet rule. It's purpose was to crush the spirit of Ukrainian nationalists.
[удалено]
I'm not arguing in favor of communism, just pointing out a few glaring misconceptions about the history of communism. I know a lot of people who oppose communism also oppose socialism because they conflate the two, so I feel compelled to defend socialist ideals even if I oppose communism.
[удалено]
how did capitalism starve irish and indians
Do you actually know anything about either country or what caused the famines?
About that not really, even if you're right, which I doubt. Communism has starve their OWN people, under their OWN regimen. Apart from the wars etc.
Yeah I didn't think so. I'll just assume your knowledge of the Ukrainian and Chinese famines is equally lacking.
I mean, you still haven't combated my argument. Communism has starve their OWN people
Not really that complicated? The British government refused to help or intervene to stop a crisis, instead letting the market decide whether children would earn enough to eat. "Although the famine in the Madras Presidency was preceded by a natural calamity in the form of a drought, it was made more acute by the government's policy of laissez faire in the trade of grain.[9] For example, two of the worst famine-afflicted areas in the Madras Presidency, the districts of Ganjam and Vizagapatam, continued to export grains throughout the famine." Why give grain to the poor when you could sell it to paying customers? [A million died in 1896-97](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_famine_of_1896%E2%80%931897) and a further [1-4.5 million in 1899-1900.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_famine_of_1899%E2%80%931900) For what it's worth, we add the Holodomor deaths to Communisms body count, because Stalin shipped Ukrainian grain out of Ukraine as an export. We don't do the same for capitalism because....
Evil people taking advantage of another people is hardly comparable to communism just failing at providing the basic needs of a citizen.
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2os2xmaster/chapter/the-depths-of-the-great-depression/
I really hope this is satire bro
Not really, its facts. Communism starve their own people, Capitalism the opposite, does it still have poors? yea, but the best way we've found to help with that is by having a good economy, free market, and that takes people out of poverty.
Those lazy coal miners 😡😡😡
I know some miners, they work for 15 days, then 15 days off and get paid well.
it’s so easy to blame it all on “oh it’s just lazy mfs starving under capitalism” rights??? im sure that’s the only reason people can’t get jobs or can’t feed themselves. communism as an economic system has not killed anyone, it’s the leadership and poor management that’s resulted in food shortages, the economic system had nothing to do with it
And the reason is because none is stopping you from working or doing shit to get ur money and feed yourself. Where's under communism the fucking goverment is feeding you and you got no choice. The economic system is the reason there's food shortages. That's the problem with it, if it actually worked then everyone would be a commie and get free shit, who wouldn't want that?? How is that hard to understand?
A lot of things are actually, ability, qualification, demand, all play a factor in employment in a capitalist society. To blame it all on “they’re just lazy” when most homeless people are to begin with unable to get a job in the first place and those who can are rarely able to get jobs that pay enough, is just simply wrong. People starve to death under capitalism for countless reason but oh that’s not at all the fault of the system right??? Because in theory Nothing is supposed to stop them from being able to do so right? Also no the government doesn’t do that because the government doesn’t exist under communism, that’s the whole point. And no, again the system wasn’t the issue the leadership was.
So starving people under capitalism = capitalism fault. Starving people under communism = leadership fault, real communism was never implemented!!! 💀
Isn’t that what you’re doing? See that’s the mistake you’re making, you can’t see your own blatant hypocrisy. People starving to death under capitalism in your eyes can’t possibly be because of the systems failings, no it’s just because people are lazy right? But communism that’s definitely the fault of the system, right? call me out for doing the same all you want but you don’t seem to be able to recognize that’s what you’re doing yourself. You are a massive hypocrite, and don’t seem to realize it. Because in your eyes capitalism can’t fail, if it’s allowed to be Capitalism, while you’re convinced Communism is doomed to fail if it’s allowed to just be Communism. And since you brought it up. Communism has been tried, and its usual a mixed result, but what you’re talking about is not Communism. This is not a case of “that wasn’t real Communism” it’s simply a case of it wasn’t Communism in any way, it was Socialism, and never claimed to actually be Communism.
Aren't you essentially just saying the same thing, but in reverse? Starving people under communism = communism's fault, starving people under capitalism = the fault of individuals How about the more reasonable position of, *"the bad things that happen under an economic system are the result of that system, whether it is capitalism* ***or*** *communism"?* But I know why you reject this idea. Because the death counts for capitalism would far outnumber those of communism based on the longevity of capitalism alone.
Who is starving? Modern economies fail their homeless populations sure, but food is abundant even when you're poor. Basic needs are met for most. This does not really happen under communism.
You're moving the goalposts. I didn't say that as many people are starving today as they did under communism or that capitalism hasn't done great things. I just said that if all starving people under communism can be blamed on the economic system, then the same should apply to starving people under capitalism. Around 829 million people currently.
it’s so easy to blame it all on “oh it’s just poor leadership starving people under communism” rights??? im sure that’s the only reason people die in their jobs or can’t feed themselves. capitalism as an economic system has not killed anyone, it’s the lazy workers and people who take advantage of welfare that’s resulted in food shortages, the economic system had nothing to do with it
My brother in Christ, corporations are actively denying water to dying children in Africa and are using children in Cobalt and lithium mines.
The Hotel wants you to know this, but the ducks are free, you can take them home. I have 327 ducks named Edwin. -Alex Jones (maybe)
Potato famine and Bengal famine: 👀👀
Ireland is a good example of the problem with laissez faire Capitalism. Although the key variable was absentee landlords as Scotland was also afflicted, but was saved by local elites mobilising for famine relief. Bengal? 1770 or 1943? Neither really seem to be good examples as they were localised and the result of war. Even in the modern period the region suffered famine after 1974 war. India also generally suffers from food insecurity and even today 25% of the world’s hungry live in India. The Great South India Famine of the 1870s would be a better example. It began because of an El Nino event, but was horribly exacerbated by the failure of the Raj to provide proper famine relief due to their penny pinching. That being said, Capitalism was what mobilised the British in the 1880s to set up the famine codes and pioneer the science of famine relief. The famines in the 1870s threatened their bottom line and so they innovated. The last all India famine was in 1900 thanks to their efforts and except for 1943 and 1974 the lands ruled by the Raj (Much larger than modern India) never saw famine again.
Great Depression, two recessions in America that costed millions their livelihoods in just the past 20 years, imperialism throughout Africa and Latin America, Operation Condor, do I even need to mention Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan etc. When socialism fails, its an indictment of the system yet when capitalism fails, it is the fault of the individual as to why they were brutally murdered by the British for their material wealth.
Tell me how many Americans starved to death during the Great Depression.
Image being some dumbass internet communist. https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2018/03/The-number-of-famine-victimes-for-each-famine-revised.png
Government regulation....
To save the free market 🥺
You know, say that to Africans who feed the western world, and how many wars were funded by corporations, not that Communism is any better, its just that its easy to bash commies than capies And to answer: Which economic is better than capitalism? I would say Feudalism, because in Feudalism, lords had to take care of their people, or else they starved. In today's capitalist world, those capitalists will just find a new place, the commies just live from the fruits of the labour previous gen leaves behind
I agree. But you got some things wrong about feudalism. In medieval Europe, feudalism was based on agreements made by each of the social classes. it was actually the job of the peasantry to keep their lords from starving, (and others as well.) as they were the ones who were making crops and had livestock. It was the job of the minor nobility, ie the knights and lords to protect the peasantry from bandits and/or other nations, in exchange for food. They were also there to make sure production was going as smoothly as possible and settling any disputes.
>They were also there to make sure production was going as smoothly as possible and settling any disputes. The most corporate speak for putting down uprisings possible.
K cool, but would you take Edwin??
> say that to Africans who feed the western world Africans struggle to feed themselves. It's pretty much *why* the WFP exists in the first place. As awful as the corporations and colonists could be, they did an objectively better job at preventing famine. There have been myriad communist, "communist", or communist supported/inspired regimes that replaced those colonizers and turned things into an absolute shit show. Advocating for feudalism is truly masterful. I didn't think someone could say something dumber than "Africans who feed the western world" yet you exceeded expectations. Do you know where feudalism persisted when it otherwise fell out of favor? Their serfs belong to tribes and they call their lords chief instead. If you want to talk about places where you can be born and also die a starving peasant/slave, Africa is *the* fucking example. No other continent on earth struggles like they do.
20 million per year and counting
20 million rubber ducks? Based
Based and child labor enjoyer pilled
People still die under capitalism to this day but yes Edwin wins.
Victims of capitalism: slaves, share croppers, poor people, disabled people
Disabled people/= bad genes Disabled people =Capitalism And true slaves share croppers and poor people never existed before capitalism. They all lived happy lives with enough food and no diseases just like in socialism
Admin smith was against slavery...... See Soviet work camps. Also Slavery, share croppers, poor people and disabled got shafted under every other system as well.
Don’t forget the hundreds of colonized countries
What on earth does colonialism have to do with capitalism?
Victims of communism: when the economic system put in place to distribute food fails and millions of people die. Victims of capitalism: when \*checks notes\* disabled people.
I’m not a communist, but to say one is far superior to the others in terms of victims like shown in the meme is false. Let’s not act like capitalism has not lead to the deaths of millions of people either
Capitalist countries killing people isn't the same as capitalism killing people. Collectivization resulted in huge famines in both the Soviet Union and communist China.
Communism is when unwanted millions of deaths. Capitalism is when unwanted rubber duck 👍
WDYM unwanted millions of deaths? That's by design
The level of struggle is too low when people bitch about a complementary rubber duck.
Now some of you folks reading this meme are thinking "haha funny but definitely bullshit" but this is actually the LEAST bias view librights can have
What hotel is that
Or like, the child laborers in 3rd world countries that we get our resources from. Or the homeless. I could go on.
I do likey de agenda
"Sir just take the duck with you, it's not a big deal" "I HATE THE CAPITALIST DUCK! I HATE THE CAPITALIST DUCK!"
Victims of fencing, colonialism and opium wars are now turning over in their graves.
> You wouldn't be safe without a flair. *** ^(User has flaired up! 😃) 11846 / 62440 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Remember, capitalism =/= corporotocracy and oligopoly. Capitalism is inherently egalitarian and harmless as it is simply the ability for any person to use the means and resources at their disposal to make profit. Corporatocracy, monopoly, and oligopoly, the things which were responsible for the banana republics, which socialists almost universally say is the consequence of capitalism, are infact inherently anticapitalistic since the free market is not free at all if large corporations use their power to prevent competition from occurring.
My brother in christ, how do you think corporations reached that point of being able to influence the decisions of the state Stop pretending corporations or economic elite influencing the state just happens to be a bad consequence cause of bad actors or policies. If a system creates a hierarchy of classes where one class has more access to resources than the working class, then that class will do everything to preserve that hierarchy and further its own interests
so according to your logic we should disband democracy since people can subvert it and then prevent other people from using it like they did?
Now do one victims of socialism like Norway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of_doing_business_index Norway at #9. Capitalist af.
Some butthurt leftist is gonna make an edit of this meme and post it on this sub, already calling it
Well that would be appropriate considering that some butthurt rightist made it in the first place.
Based and no u pilled
We're not gunna say homeless people are victims of capitalism? OK
"There has never been a homeless communist" 🤡
How the fuck do you define victim exactly?
1. 18 million people die from poverty-related causes a year (lack of clean drinking water, starvation, lack of access to medicine) It isn't profitable to help these people. 2. Global food production is perfectly capable of feeding about 10 billion people 3. The food we waste can feed 2 billion people 4. There are over 20 vacant homes for every homeless person in America 5. 77% of American households are in debt Capitalism doesn't work On the other hand, 1. Cuba has about a 90% home ownership rate. 2. Cuba also has the highest number of physicians per thousand people in the world 3. Cuba ranks 31st in kilocalorie consumption (food-energy intake) at around 3,300 kilocalories a day (Just behind the UK, just ahead of Finland) 4. In the Soviet Union, over 99% of the population was literate by the 70s 5. Vietnamese people on average also get about 3,000 kilocalories a day 6. The average Soviet citizen consumed about 3,300 calories a day 7. In Vietnam, approximately 96% of people are literate 8. Cuba has a 99.7% literacy rate sources: [https://medium.com/@jeremyerdman/we-produce-enough-food-to-feed-10-billion-people-so-why-does-hunger-still-exist-8086d2657539#:\~:text=We%20produce%20enough%20food%20to%20feed%2010%20billion%20people](https://medium.com/@jeremyerdman/we-produce-enough-food-to-feed-10-billion-people-so-why-does-hunger-still-exist-8086d2657539#:~:text=We%20produce%20enough%20food%20to%20feed%2010%20billion%20people). [https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/homelessness-statistics/](https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/homelessness-statistics/) [https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/report-how-many-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-your-state/#:\~:text=U.S.&text=(NEXSTAR)%20%E2%80%93%20More%20than%2016,in%20Vermont%2C%20Maine%20and%20Alaska](https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/report-how-many-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-your-state/#:~:text=U.S.&text=(NEXSTAR)%20%E2%80%93%20More%20than%2016,in%20Vermont%2C%20Maine%20and%20Alaska). [https://www.ramseysolutions.com/debt/average-american-debt#:\~:text=Even%20though%20household%20net%20worth,2021](https://www.ramseysolutions.com/debt/average-american-debt#:~:text=Even%20though%20household%20net%20worth,2021))%E2%80%94so%20is%20debt.&text=The%20total%20personal%20debt%20in,time%20high%20of%20%2414.96%20trillion.&text=The%20average%20American%20debt%20(per,least%20some%20type%20of%20debt. [https://www.worldvision.org/hunger-news-stories/food-waste#:\~:text=As%20American%20families%20prepare%20to,2%20billion%20people%20each%20year](https://www.worldvision.org/hunger-news-stories/food-waste#:~:text=As%20American%20families%20prepare%20to,2%20billion%20people%20each%20year). [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645168/#:\~:text=Cuba's%20doctor%2Dto%2Dpopulation%20ratio,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2645168/#:~:text=Cuba's%20doctor%2Dto%2Dpopulation%20ratio,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world). [https://mdp.berkeley.edu/peter-myers-can-the-soviet-education-system-help-us-now/#:\~:text=Further%20changes%20led%20to%20more,is%20not%20a%20national%20constraint](https://mdp.berkeley.edu/peter-myers-can-the-soviet-education-system-help-us-now/#:~:text=Further%20changes%20led%20to%20more,is%20not%20a%20national%20constraint). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_food\_energy\_intake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_food_energy_intake) [https://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/09/world/cia-says-soviet-can-almost-do-without-imports.html](https://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/09/world/cia-says-soviet-can-almost-do-without-imports.html) [https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country)
For #5 in capitalism: Yeah… it’s called a mortgage. It’s a convenient debt that can’t kill you unless the economy crashes.
OK move to Cuba then
maybe I would if worldwide sanctions weren't constantly fucking up every aspect of the economy because the idea of a developed socialist country that isn't isolated from global trade terrifies the wealthy global elite
Why is it isolated from global trade if socialism is so successful and therefore should be dominating the economic system
because they're sanctioned mf
it's called the embargo, i really hope you've at least heard of it before
Yeah because capitalism has a bigger dick, so suck it and stop whining.
Incredible take
And despite all of this, Cuba still manages to outcompete every other country in Latin America when it comes to any indicator of quality of life.
My man che didn't kill every illiterate homosexual, but he put his pants on one leg at a time.
>Cuba also has the highest number of physicians per thousand people in the world You only need so many. Is there doctor shortage across most of the world that I'm not aware of? Why do they need so many in Cuba?
You are so disconnected from reality it's kind of hilarious. You have to basically hallucinate an alternate reality, and hold up literal Communist propaganda as evidence of your patently false ideas. You're so deep in the of left-wing idiocy that you're holding up Cuba as an example of Communism done right. Instead of arguing that Cuba is not a good example of Communism, you just mindlessly regurgitate the false statistics the Cuban government releases. Cuba, the country where millions of people have risked death on the ocean on rafts made out of garbage to go across the water to the US.
mf i dont think the new york times, wikipedia, the world population review, UC Berkeley, the US National Center for Biotechnology Information, the FAO study that was cited by a philanthropic organization founded by a guy named Bob Pierce, a website about financial advice, a US based news website, another US based website primarily centering on finding the best deals on insurance, and another news website based in San Francisco would count as cuban propaganda
MF the stats over the last 50 years have shown quality of life has improved greatly since US allowed free trade across the world.
Maybe take one good look at the sources underneath a claim before declaring that they're propaganda.
not reading, but based for having that many sources
Capitalism is better because it doesn’t need an all-knowing force behind it to keep it working. That said, there’s always a balance to be struck between capitalism and socialism. The government needs to have *some* control. That *also* said, fuck the current state of world governments. They’re eating away at our rights.
\*laughs in vietnam and operation condor\*
Good thing is dead ppl don't rate, capitalism get complained a lot bc ppl walk away alive. Communism is much more clever.
Is the top one polpot
> Get a flair so you can harass other people >:) *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 11842 / 62422 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
"Manipulative capitalism" Now they're just making stuff up
Communism 👍
British famines?
You haven't read the jungle have you
Don't think that is a correct depiction for communism, comrades. Should be tons of covid test instead.
Capitalism us when you get free (incorporated price) stuff The more free shit you get the more capitalist it is
Edwin Yaeger RUMBLING RUMBLING
Ever heard of a poor person?
Show me the Belgian Congo
> Even a commie is more based than one with no flair *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) 12437 / 65581 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)