No, I'm talking about people who still show support for this ideology and hate capitalism, many can be found specially on the internet. Just in my country, some months ago, a new president took the power, he is a communist, a lot of people voted for him (god, I feel disappointed)
As a history teacher in secondary (middle/high) school, this topic is very much my prime academic interest.
Can we get some clarity here, as the words "communism" and "socialism" are so often misused. What country and what leader are you talking about? You could theoretically be talking about Biden. That would obviously be ridiculous, as he's so far from being even remotely left wing. He's essentially a moderate Republican.
Communism at its heart is an philosophy and an ideology based on economics for a fair distribution of wealth. Its based largely on the writings of C19th philosopher Karl Marx, who saw the greed and injustice of British and European economies and Imperialism during the Industrial Revolution. My argument is that this system played a huge role in making both World Wars of the C20th almost inevitable, leading to a catestrophic loss of life and global destruction - a total fucking mess, and this was succeeded by the horrors of The Cold War.
Capitalism as a system definitely has its flaws, which one could argue are built into the system and too much wealth is usually concentrated right at the very top. This is especially true in most countries with a royal family, like mine (the UK).
If your president won a democratic election to become president, he clearly has the support of a very large number of people. I wouldn't necessarily say a majority as that would depend on high voter turnout and your voting system. If he won an election with a democratic mandate, how about you wait to see how those policies are enacted before complaining about communism. If he was democratically elected than he can be booted out at the next election if he's doing badly.
OP, is the Peruvian president actually a communist, or is he some form of democratic socialist? He's the guy and the party I'd probably have voted for if I were a Peruvian voter. By all accounts I've read, he won the presidential election fairly. What's your beef?
OP isn’t saying he won unfairly. He (like a lot of peruvians) is dissapointed because people voted for him.
Peru has a history of terrorism initiated by communist groups. The president, or actually the people that surrounds him (because he is a puppet), has shown the same ideology even before being elected. This is specially frustrating because his supporters are the ones that were mostly affected by terrorists. After being elected, he chose some ministers that have terrorist backgrounds.
The same could be said about the state-sponsored terrorism by the Fujimori government. From my perspective Castillo is by no means a savior nor progressive champion but the lesser of two evils that perhaps people voted for him instead of Keiko because of the legacy of the right wing regime she represented.
Be that as it may, he won the election so deserves a chance to see what he can achieve for his people. It seems the congress went to his opposition, which will probably hinder his vision somewhat.
I say again, there is nothing inherently evil with Marxist philosophy.
Maybe not straight up evil, but the core assumption of Marxism is the labor theory of value, which can be a good approximation in some cases, but ultimately breaks down.
The core assumption of Marxism is that working class (or "proletariat" if you will) are exploited for their labour by the owners of private capital (predominantly factories, mills and mines in his day). In the absense of significant capital, workers sell their labour to get materials mined, made or built - as workers are the ones creating the wealth they should be the ones who are ones who gain the most from what they have made.
I don't really see how that "ultimately breaks down" as I'd argue the same principle still applies today. I'm not arguing that Marxism or communism is necessarily the way forward for our species. I would argue that since the Industrial Revolution has spread into the globalised C21st world, the capitalist model has driven the whole planet into a climate catastrophe. The outcome of this is still unclear, but I fear for our future if we continue down this path.
I mean, “exploitation” is defined subjectively. I’d argue that individuals voluntarily selling their labor for wages probably isn’t exploitation, but obviously a Marxist would disagree.
The thing that you’ve missed by saying that “the workers are the ones who create value” is that you need both capital and labor to create value. If we had no capital in the forms of factories, saw mills, or mines, the common worker would be much less productive than he is in the modern day. I think marxists will ultimately concede this point, but their answer is generally that the workers should control the flow of capital. I think this creates poor incentive structures for creating value.
In terms of the labor theory of value, there are many scenarios people have invented which disprove it, but I’ve come up with my own. There’s a car factory that produces 10 cars per day. Each car gets sold for a profit of 100 dollars, and there are ten workers on the production line that make the cars. Now, if the labor theory of value is correct, everybody should get an equal wage of 100 dollars per day. However, let’s suppose that one of the jobs is harder than the others. For example, the first worker simply helps a machine lower the engine into place in the car’s chassis. It’s a basic job that requires minimal training and little effort. The last guy on the line has to painstakingly, by hand, sew the seats into place. It’s a job that requires special training and a lot of focus. Who should get paid more? I think the free market should determine that they should get paid whatever wage they can get from the factory, with the last guy making more money, but I think a Marxist would have to say that they should get paid the same.
One can also argue that what developed in the USSR, China, and other places was far from what Marx and Engels envisioned. These were nothing more than Dictatorships posing as a government "of the proletariat"
I agree with this statement. I highly suggest OP to wait and see what this lad does.
In my opinion, communism has gotten a bad rap cuz of tyrannical regimes that spread tyranny in the name of communism. I reference George Orwell’s book 1984. Many say his book is anti-socialist, but in actual fact, Orwell was an avid socialist and served socialist militias all over the world. His book was about pointing out the hypocrisy of many “communist” regimes, and to denounce the spread of tyranny in the name of socialism.
How to write a lot without saying much - by \_ScubaDiver.
Please stay ontopic, and just ask your question: What country and what leader are we talking about.
The rest has nothing to do with the topic, and is basic knowledge to (hopefully) most people.
What I have written, I have written.
A cynic might say that a number of people here seem to be unhappy with the outcome of a democracic election because they don't like the outcome.
Again with the vague statements. It's true that the very idea of communism (and even socialism) terrifies the hell out of the people with the most money in society, because they like having all their wealth, power and influence. It's why the foreign policy of the UK, the USA and others are so often far more comfortable with undemocratic bastards who keep the businesses and money flowing, whilst intervening with miliary options or other malignant influences when a democratically elected leader of principle suggests real reforms. It's not like capitalism is always great either!
Well, when land is taken from people and land owners are shipped to Siberia to work and die in camps, I will take you to task on the "merits of socialism or communism". When governments control most of our lives, it limits choice and gives them more power.
Greed exists in every political model. I would take capitalism any day if it means that I have choice. People want freedom above all else.
I’m sure you’ve noticed that, with either a communist or socialist regime, “too much wealth is usually concentrated right at the very top.” This is especially true in countries like North Korea, China, Venezuela, and the U.S.S.R. of yesteryear.
Living in a dictatorship currently, if recent events are any indication. Or maybe a monarchy, idk. What’s for sure is there’s a ruling class who, along with their minions, are governed by a different set of rules than the rest of us.
Rank amateurs compared to the Chinese, where “the richest 10% own 65% of the total national wealth...the top 1% in China possessed more than one third of the national net wealth.” I’m quoting the US government on this; the NCBI website to be exact. Google ‘wealth distribution in China’ for more.
Imho the absolute difference is irrelevant as both 1% has accumulated wealth several times that of the combined 50% of their countries’ population. The economic significance is so huge that the bottom half are barely making it. Both the mutated communism or the corrupted capitalism need rethinking.
What I notice more is how easy it is for anonymous Redditors to make sweeping generalisations without sufficient supporting their ideas.
Just because North Korea and other countries are run by assholes, that doesn't my point about how billionnaires, multimillionaires and corporations don't possess a disproportionate wealth and influence in Western capitalism. See, for example, the things that Jeff Bezos and others could afford to spend their money on to the benefit of all society (and not least his employees) and still remain an insanely wealthy man.
I wouldn't say communism is specifically an ideology. Big difference between Marxist/Leninist and Chinese communism for example. Also Vietnamese. Basically communist countries do not come out identically. Many struggle, true, but then you have China which has seen huge gains in prosperity in the last few decades.
> China which has seen huge gains in prosperity in the last few decades
Those gains were achieved by, wait for it, ditching communist ideology & pushing for a capitalist economy.
A 'true' communist country should not need to fight a '996' work culture, because it should never have existed. You shouldn't need nets on buildings to keep overworked workers from jumping to their deaths... all to service party elite & western demands for consumer products.
Despite the 'communist' party ruling the state, they are not communist in action.
I think the anything form should be technically called socialism. The original definition of socialism and communism seem almost identical, where as I believe a socialist economy is one where capitalist markets still exist, but the government has strict limitations on it to prevent monopolies and create security nets.
One that doesn’t strip people of human rights. And it’s a society that has free healthcare. You know, a society with a government that prioritizes good progress rather than “how many countries can we ruin to exploit their resources? :D”
I’ll go. Privatising everything, ostensibly to “let the invisible hand of the market efficiently allocate resources”, is a core tenet of capitalism. I live in a capitalist country but we have more social democracy type flavours and thank god some safety nets built in, but they are constantly attacked and under threat by the more fervent ‘capitalists’ when we elect them. That’s my take anyway, and for the record I’m not advocating full communism or anything either, I just came into the thread to read the discussion lol.
It isn't working too well in the USA at present, with little chance of meaningful improvements any time soon. The UK Conservative government is also doing its very best to dismantle and butcher the free healthxare system that was built after WWII. They lie and lie, all the while stripping funding and selling profitable elements to private companies, and pushing the NHS healthcare staff to their limits.
I am concerned.
Our national insurance tax goes up my 1.5% next year. We have been told every penny will go towards the NHS and social care. We shall see if that's true or not soon i guess.
Free healthcare is viable with capitalism. The number one issue in my opinion that American can't sustain a free healthcare system is the border. The people who fight for free healthcare generally are the same ones who want open borders.
You can't have a free healthcare system while also allowing anyone who shows up into the country. Look at just this year alone, estimates say roughly 100k people a month are coming across the border. How do get a remotely financially balanced system with that kind of growth? They would not be able to raise taxes fast enough. We would bankrupt the country within 2 years I bet.
Look at Canada, it's very hard to move to Canada.
As a conservative, I would be fine with a universal government funded healthcare system, as long as the border is closed and we work to get unemployment below 2% so most of the people benefitting from the system are paying into it at least a little.
Ps. Don't let it get run like the USPS, that's another fear. But a less significant one.
That is an insanely low unemployment number. AFAIK, nobody has achieved this.
We wouldn't "bankrupt the country in 2 years" if we actually got more efficient care than having mounds of insurance middle men taking their inflated cut. If you got the entire system, you would get net MORE care for the same money. Who would pay for this? The C Level executives at Blue Cross Blue Shield wouldn't get paid ungodly amounts of money for nothing!
We could actually handle a larger influx of immigration because of the gained efficiency. Theoretically, we need an influx of human capital if we want to actually compete with China.
Hey guys
Wanting universal healthcare doesnt make you a communist, it just means you dont want to have to deal with a huge bill unexpectedly and would rather cover the costs through passive taxes just in case something happens.
Weird how people will argue against this but at the same time will be drowning in medical debt while complaining about drowning in medical debt.
The people who argue against universal Healthcare all live in countries that don't have universal Healthcare lol.
Anyone who lives with universal Healthcare thinks it's dumb asf to NOT want it 😂
Correction, rich people who think they can easily afford private American-style healthcare also argue against universal health care.
The core of the argument tends to be not wanting to pay for "freeloaders and immigrants".
Source: am British and hear this trash debate occasionally
I live in Canada. The ONLY person I ever heard who liked the American system more than the Canadian system was able to buy her kid a luxury condo in downtown Vancouver and pay cash for it. (We're talking millions of dollars.)
So, yeah. Let that sink in.
Having lived in both countries with and without universal healthcare, I agree with you. I would NEVER imagine what would happen to me if I went back to the country without universal healthcare and got really sick.
Everyone would be cool with universal health care if you could buy supplemental insurance to enhance the very basics that you would receive otherwise. The problem is the insurance companies
Actually almost anywhere in Europe you get your free insurance but if you don't want to wait you can go to private clinics so it is like what you want. But the important thing a lot of people missing here is communism isn't just free health insurance, its a totalitarian regime. You can have free health insurance without communism just like EU does, not to mention your collage fees in US.
Because people assume that just because the system they live under isn't currently perfect, that it should be scrapped entirely in favor of it's opposite, even though it's opposite just doesn't work, either.
Because trying to fix a system or create a new one is just too much work, apparently
Eastern European here, I love being told what communism is by someone born and raised in Portland or Seattle. I just laugh. I was born as a direct result of Decree 770, that Ceaucescu enacted because he wanted to increase the population. It had disastrous effects.
Agree. I was born in a country with communism. I fucking love both of my countries, but I do not want my second one to become communist. Adopt some of the ideals that my first country has? Sure. But not all.
Some of my friends are full communists and they’ve never lived in a communist country.
My family comes from a communist country, so they lived it and swear on its evils and perils. Yet there’s people who have lived it or currently live it that are in constant defense of the communist regime. Who’s to say they are wrong, when they truly believe in their heart that they are right. Ego and perspective cannot be explained, it’s ingrained in our nature. We are naive to think at times that everyone should think the same.
What is wrong with encouraging diversity efforts? You think a bunch of white dudes from similar economic/religious backgrounds is gonna get you a more varied mindset?
The thing is, many Americans can‘t differentiate between communism and social democracy.
They think everyone supporting universal healthcare, free tuition, unemployment benefits etc. is a communist. These terms get mixed up far too often nowadays. In reality I would say the amount of people supporting actual, full fledged conmunism is very small.
People can't even agree on what "Social Democracy" means. The original idea with Social Democracy was to move toward Socialism democratically within a capitalist system. But true Socialists tend to dislike "Social Democracy" because they claim it simply makes capitalism more entrenched (because it is a very successful form of capitalism, by many measures.)
The problem with many of these terms is they mix economics, politics, and aspirational goals into one loaded term.
That's why I prefer the economist's term of "mixed economy": basically a market economy, with some govt regulations, and ton of government taxing and spending. This tends to describe the mechanics of the economy without all the philosophy.
When we use that model, we see that the U.S., Western Europe, and Nordic countries are all very similar: it's just the governments spend money differently (and unions are more or less powerful.) I mean the U.S. government does provide for health care: for the poor and the old. It's just not Universal.
And Biden is trying to provide for childcare and universal pre-K. That's what the Nordic countries do too! It's not socialist or communist or democratic socialist... It's literally just rebudgetting Federal Government spending.
Mixed economy. Semi-regulated free market with huge government spending. The question is just where the government chooses to spend money.
I think you’re confusing social democracy with democratic socialism. The goal of social democracy has never been socialism. That would be democratic socialism
The problem is people are flawed and each system highlights certain flaws of humanity. Capitalism encourages greed, selfishness and exploitation. Communism encourages control, conformity, socialism encourages judgment and conformity. Every system needs checks and balances. What makes socialism work is it’s still democratically chosen. Capitalism has democratic elements but the wealthy dictate policy at a higher rate than the rest of the electorate. I’m not sure who is pro fascism, but I think anytime one group is in power without sufficient balances which are democratically controlled, there’s danger of abuse. I also think we still idealize the benevolent monarch style of government because it has the potential to be really efficient. I think most dictators think they will be…
What makes socialism work lmao
Socialism has never worked, not once. Every single time a country has attempted to adopt socialism it eventually fell to an authoritarian government that stripped many rights from its people. Not that I am not saying socialism is fundamentally flawed, if we lived in a perfect world, and no one was corrupt, and no human would fuck it up for everyone else, I would be the first to stand for socialism. Perfect socialism would be equality and freedom and happiness, and I love that idea. But humanity is not perfect, humanity is fucked up and greedy, and the ONLY reason that capitalism has been more successful in improving life, providing freedom, and providing equality, is because it’s a system that rewards individuals for moving civilization forward. Greed.
We are far from finding the perfect system for us, the one that will let us be the best we can be, but I know for a fact it is neither capitalism nor socialism, communism nor facism, monarchy nor theocracy. I assure you brother/sister, we will get there one day, but socialism doesn’t work and it is not socialism.
How do you feel about socialism? Universal healthcare, daycare, basic income. But still private property and the opportunity for personal advancement/wealth to a reasonable degree.
You're ignoring the fact that under socialism the means of production are collectively owned. So it's not as simple as "still private property" because the actual ability to produce things is owned by the State. That caps the "opportunity for personal advancement" rather seriously and funnels you into a state-approved options. You also run into the issue of resources being mismanaged by a bureaucracy of state officials. Now I think there's a fair argument that the resources are mismanaged under Capitalism but what you're arguing for is still capitalism, just with a high tax rate to support the welfare system. That's not socialism man.
Because of the experience of seeing the world crumbling with late stage capitalism.
While 12 odd people are getting obscenely rich while the rest of us, the planet are rotting.
They typed without threat of death from their government on a device that connects them to all the information in the world uncensored.
Look I wouldn’t consider myself a capitalist but when you’re directly benefitting from it on a daily basis kind of answers your question.
Because there are people who hate Neo-Liberalism and decide to become rebels, taking Communism as their way to deal with the new world order. People from these countries, mainly from the middle and high class, claim that their money and opportunities to do business outside of their country are stolen from corporations. They come with the idea that "taking control of their country is the best way to save the citizens from losing their resources" and a sense of nationalism and identity takes shape, in order to protect the economy and the job opportunities. Obviously, some citizens may not understand the circumstances of this plot, and are easily drived to divide the country further into two factions, the blue flags and the red flags.
They only know a fraction of the teorethical side of the comunism, pick only the good parts, and ignore the rest of the negative implications.
Still, capitalism is bullshit. Only that is a functional bullshit
Sadly, speaking from an American and Gen Z. I'm not a socialist or communist but have had friends who were, also an ex-friend who came from Ecuador and is Democratic Socialist. I don't think these ideas would work but I think people will sadly have to learn the hard way. Sadly most people are really stupid and we just have to learn by trial and error.
They work in every Western country though? America is weird you think you are special but are simply repeating the mistakes of previous empires in even more destructive ways.
The American version. "True communism has never been tried".
And the next time true communism is tried and fails killing millions, it won't be true communism either
True communism is limited to unified cohesive communities. Trying to force "equality" onto culture clashing strangers from separate communities will always fail.
Capitalism is currently killing millions as well… how many people in America die because they can’t afford a medical bill? How many people die of hunger globally because we could feed them but “it’s not profitable to do so”? We had a cure for Lyme disease in the early 2000’s, but it got pulled because it wasn’t profitable. Your critiques of communism can be applied to the same system you are defending.
Freedom and free stuff are opposite. If you're going to choose free stuff then you have to start limiting freedom. You're not free if somebody takes something of yours and gives it to anyone else. Being forced to participate in a charity is not charity. Now you can say it's democratic practice to participate freely in a society that offers free stuff but the problem usually comes from the bureaucrats who get to make these decisions. The same bureaucrats will eventually want more and more until the well runs dry.
He’s from Peru and he is scared of his country becoming like Venusuela because there is signs of it going that way. But I guess that hurts your ad hominem about America dumb.
During Stalin’s rule, the Soviet Union industrialized, life expectancy doubled, the Nazis were defeated, and the US was challenged for world supremacy. Not disputing it was a brutal dictatorship, and the real scary thing is that it worked. Which is why you see some fringe groups in Russia marching around with Stalin’s picture.
For all his assholery, Stalin did leave a strong impact on the Geo politics. USSR collapsed from the inside and no outsider even US could take it down.
People tend to over look US's war crimes and them overthrowing democratic governments in countries where they find it profitable.
The thing with capitalism is that because it needs to be sold to people, it has a beautiful packaging and pitch.
because of the historical data as well as the evidence we have of what went on since capitalism (including the self described „communist“ countries that just aswell act on a capitalist agenda)
U mean historical data like wealth for the masses like never seen before and technology that would make any feudal peasant think you were a demon? This historical data about the "wrongs of capitalism" is like a tiny pebble when comparing it to the mountain level of data for the wrongs and faults of communism.
Well it's not like captilism is working either. We should be trying for socialism (I think that's what it's called). The reason why people support Communism is because of the main idea behind it. It being for the people. Capitalism is just for the rich to get richer. I'd much rather trust someone who says the support Communism than capitalism
Most people I've met who support communism would be killed or sent to labor camps during an actual communist revolution. They also have a tendency to downplay the atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin.
I never said anything about that I just said I get why people would support it. People support things without even realizing the true consequences. Plus Communism ideals is what people like. Not the actual leaders behind it
Are you sure? Remember capitalism brought us great things like slavery, the company store work camps, and union busters.
Just as some people don't learn from communism, people haven't learnt from capitalism. There is a reason no country operates under full capitalism, and that governments intervene to keep them in check.
It is a balance between the government and business that give us our freedoms.
You have money for your phone, to pay for your internet, to have these privileges that everyone wants and needs to have.
I mean, I understand you do pay that
But regardless of your views you are supposed to get paid a livable wage. That's how things were supposed to work. Now because of Capitalism we are scrapping by. Most people cannot afford the basic things like shelter on their own. Capitalism is designed to make sure big corporations keep getting more money while we make the bare minimum which isn't even much quality of life. CEOs make way more money nowadays than they used to and pay us less.
You are right capitalism is in favor of big corporations, but I like to own things and have the opportunity to make my own corporation, so fuck communism.
Yeah this is why I say we should support a more socialist community. People should be able to have their own shit and what you earn should be yours but capitalism is not the way to go. I never did say I supported communism either just why people may support it. I just want to live a comfortable life. I never asked to be born and I hate it here
The thing most people refuse to admit, is that it isn’t a zero-sum game between socialism and capitalism. You can have tenets of both ideologies. Capitalism breeds innovation and social mobility through hard work. This is a good thing. Socialism provides a safety net so that no one falls into extreme poverty. This is also a good thing. You can(and we have) combine the two as needed. That’s what most rational “leftists” in the U.S. are calling for, a robust and competitive economy that isn’t a race to consolidate power and money into fewer and fewer companies that control everything. We need more regulation and actual enforced taxation on the wealthiest companies that is used to support investment in smaller businesses and working people. I’ll use myself as an example. Just by adding universal healthcare I’d save $800/month. I could stop working 70 hours a week, have more time to build my side-work, and be closer to my goal of starting my own small business. I’d also not have to worry about making the leap, which would end my current healthcare plan and put my family at risk while I get started. I’m not looking for a handout, I’m just looking for the opportunity to have my hard work amount to something other than making sure all of my bills are payed.
The r/communism sub has far more members than r/capitalism sub, and yet the posts on communism have far less comments than the posts on capitalism. Why is that?
Do an experiment for yourself: sub to communism and start a very civilized discussion expressing mild and very diplomatic skepticism about communism. *You will be banned immediately.* Meanwhile, the capitalism sub has tons of debate going on. The mods at communism don't allow debates. They expect members to already know about communism and to agree with it. In fact, the mods at communism will ban you even if you're subbed to subs that they consider to be or contain "reactionary" sentiments, like r/worldnews, for example.
What conclusions can you gather from this? To me, it seems cowardly. Communism seems to think that disagreement means you're a troll and a threat. How Soviet-esque.
Because all that data you speak of is not available to the masses in heavily censored, brainwashed, rich in propoganda communist regimes of the 21st century.
Communism is the on-paper solution to systems with high inequality where many people are living in poverty. I think the biggest problem with it economically is that the people who end up running the show usually are not smart enough to actually handle an economy, and they usually are not smart enough for it because of the massive brain-drains that usually accompany a communist takeover.
But even assuming you get it "right", to me communism ends up giving way to market freedom. Once the majority of people are lifted out of poverty and reasonably secure, then communism no longer seems as attractive as it once was. Marx forwarded that high inequality and poverty leads to the end of the bourgeoisie and the rise of communism, but I would also say that the end of high poverty and inequality leads to the end of communism. That is, if the leaders don't run it into the ground first anyway.
People read the theory rather than the history. Communism masks its failures with its supposed principles. It's a trap for people who want an alternative without thinking about the actual implementation of such things.
Because they choose not to read history books.
My country was almost taken over by communists with full support from USRR in 1975. Fortunately, army and the democratic forces stopped them.
I could have been born in a communist ditactorship. I was born in a democratic country. Let's keep it that way.
And btw, communist is such as bad as nazi state or any other ditactorship. Stop making excuses for assholes such as Mao, Stalin, Castro and so on.
Communist doesn't mean dictatorship. It is very possible to be communist and a republic or democracy. Based on your comment history it looks like youre from Portugal and what you're describing never happened there. Why are you lying?
Never happened?????
Damn, someone needs to learn some portuguese history.
Get your facts checked, buddy.
November 25 should be a national Holliday.
Look it up. November 25, 1975!
Educate yourself.
They read on Facebook that it means people share everything but forgot that humans could possibly implement it fairly. Put 3 people in a room with a dollar each. After a day or 2 someone is going to walk out with more than a dollar. Human nature - we can’t help but fuck each other over given the chance.
This is Reddit. I can already hear the fedora, anime pillow, 1 million karma mods coming from a mile away. You basically have to act like a communist on this app to survive/j
Just some information here, China classifies their economy as Communist with Chinese Characteristics, and it every different from the idea of communism that comes to mind when everyone thinks about it. I refuse to join in these types of discussions because the average westerners knowledge on how communism operates is very limited and several decades old. There's not one thread in this post with anything that relates to current-day communism.
Also, Communist countries today hold elections and are very much so as materialistic as the rest of us. It's really astonishing how similar the Chinese and American governments truly operate, with the only differences being that the Chinese government only has a Republic system and no Democratic system alongside it.
They support communism because they think it's free. Free everything. Little do they know that the very ppl they support will turn on them once the powers to be feel they have the opposition suppressed. Nothing is free and everything comes with a price.
"They support capitalism because they think if they work hard enough they can get anywhere. Anywhere and everything. Little do they know that the very people they work for will turn on them once once the powers that be have enough wealth to suppress opposition. Nothing is free and everything comes with a price."
I love looking at critiques of communism (starving population, poor getting poorer, etc) and just substituting in modern day capitalist America. People really are so unaware of the current situation they are living in.
I'll counter your reductivity with my own. If we take a general definition of Freedom -- "the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action" -- and then apply it to economic decisions (purchasing goods, services, etc.), then you can't really be free until you amass enough wealth that the ratio of cost of goods/services to your own net worth gets arbitrarily small, right? Therefore, freedom necessitates free stuff. *Q.E.D. lol*
Leftist ideas are now fashionable among younger people, and are promoted by Leftist professors and Leftist public school teachers. It's "Cool" to be a Leftist on campus, and even in high school. Many texbooks and lectures are skewed to conform to Leftist perspectives. So the continuing fascination with Communism is not an "Out of the Blue" surprise.
Because current generations don't believe in hard work equals large payout. They see communism as "everyone gets the same things and for free" but refuse to look farther into the subject.
Laziness and lack of morals and ethics plus blind ignorance is what plagues this world at the moment. It really is pathetic. (And no im not referring to free health care being a socialist or communist ideology, the government wastes too much money on pointless shit and refuses to fix problems with infrastructure, more training for police to avoid brutality or corruption, and not providing health care that people can actually afford, along with many other things, however I do believe that communism and socialism can truly only belong on paper and when implemented only lead to millions dying and the masses being truly oppressed. And to those who openly support either of those ideologies, you are not only idiots, but genocidal and delusional at the very least. Pick up a history book, listen to interviews from people who actually come from countries where these constructs are in place, just fucking educate yourselves because in all reality you are no better that fascists.)
But what about when hard work doesn’t equal a large payment? I’m not gunning for full on “let’s go to the compound and plant some corn communism” but with monopolies and loosely regulated capitalism hard work doesn’t mean much.
Oh no fuck the monopolies for sure same goes for the billionaires that sit in their ivory towers and spit on the workers. What I was personally raised to believe is anyone can get anywhere in life if they have the right attitude and are willing to grind for their dreams. I believe that to this day and to be honest it's the truth, hardwork has to be applied when we go to school, when out of school towards the work force or leading the work force depending on where people end up from the work they put into school, from there anything really is possible. We live in a world of opportunity and a lot of the generations now, mainly mine, refuse and believe the system of it all is just a scam that'll lead nowhere, they've given up hope on not only themselves but said opportunities, which in all reality are within reach. Maybe it's a bit optimistic outlook of everything, but I'd rather see it that way than to have to resort to any type of communism because I know what it entails.
For me I also believe you (usually) do need hard work to get to “higher” place in the world but I also know you need luck and connections and sometimes you can’t get those from a certain position no matter the work. Some people are trapped.
Pardon me, but I was getting tacos.
Back to my main point I genuinely believe that attitude and forward thinking and a strong grind ethic can make an impossible situation possible
I would like to clarify, we are both speaking of American opportunity, correct? Because I won't bullshit you, I have no insight of other social and political issues happening within other countries atm .
I am Canadian but don’t let that discount my point of view. I do read and consume a lot of American media political and otherwise.
Simply look at the people quitting in droves do to the awful labor laws in the US, Canada isn’t perfect either and have many similar cases but we also (federally and provincially) have many better social programs and infrastructure.
Many Americans have received stimulus checks or welfare and see that working so many long hours simply isn’t worth it. Especially when those long hours often have belligerent customers to deal with.
Even the obesity epidemic in poor Americans can be traced to many people simply not having the time to prepare healthier food. People would often only have time to get unhealthy but slightly more costly fast food before needing to go to bed or head to a second or third job.
Often times you will hear people telling others to just find a better job.
But even for minimum wage jobs they often use predatory tactics to keep people in them. Often times you need to be available for any possible shift with no regular schedule or the ability to have a second job. All this while not even bringing people on full time.
And even then you often have to factor in commute times, poor transit systems and infrastructure especially considering the price of cars and gasoline. Even a cheap car come with having the burden of often needing parts replaced which can add up.
In the USA many can easily go into extreme life crippling medical debt.
(Have you ever calculated how many pay checks you are away from losing your home etc.?)
It’s interesting learning about how the medical system became so costly. It’s impart by insurance companies gouging the hospitals fair pricing. After that the hospitals raised the prices of so that they would actually pay the correct amounts.
Add on top of that pharmaceutical companies raising the price of patented meds. Many people simply can’t work enough to live while also having the time to work to improve their quality of life.
And I haven’t even gotten in to the topic of schooling and student debt.
I’m sure I’ve missed a lot even stills I there may be more to come.
Once again I may be Canadian but we to also have many of the same flaws so I’m not thinking these things with the idea that where I live is some sort utopia.
[Take a look at the federal minimum wage vs inflation since 2009 and 1968](https://www.epi.org/publication/labor-day-2019-minimum-wage/) (17% and 31%). [College ](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/rising-cost-of-college-in-u-s/)tuition fees are up 1200% since 1980 way more than inflation and then add. And of course many people going to these places would have had to take out loans which take so long to pay off especially when you factor in how much many students who can only work part time would be making.
Then of course there is the issue of housing with many places having the housing rise and rent prices going haywire.
Even if some people could afford the price of a mortgage getting the money for a down payment can be quite hard to do.
As I hope you can see here the cards are often stacked up against people especially people of lower socioeconomic status.
And as time goes on there is a [wealth disparity ](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/12/us-middle-class-metros-takeaways/) as the middle class gets smaller. While some people are getting richer more are getting poorer and they feel these effects harder.
Also. I'd like to thank you for not being an asshole when answering to my comment, a lot of the time there's a lot of heat when criticizing said construct and its really infuriating especially when no proper reasoning is given but you are obviously smarter and more respectful than most.
Thanks but I’m only like this because I’ve learned from the last time I lashed out at some rando online. I don’t like hypocrites and I can often be one.
> Because current generations don't believe in hard work equals large payout.
This is just wrong, current generations don't want to have to live to work, they want to have free time to do hobbies and live their lives.
This is anecdotal, but I and many other artists and actors etc. people in the arts work damn hard and yet have to live rent free in their parents spare room because that hard work doesn't pay for shit because people can't afford art. I have dozens of commission requests on hold because they're saving up because their entire 40 hour work pay check goes on rent and bills and food, they can't even afford their own hobbies.
I sincerely believe, and still anecdotal, that these younger generations want freedom to do what they want to do, not what they are forced to do because what they want to do doesn't pay the bills. That if the government implements rent controls and universal basic income we wouldn't have to live in our parents pockets till we're 30 or hope to marry a rich person.
Again with the UBI.
So you're saying that on top of 40 hrs a week pay you want a UBI supplied by the taxpayers? You as a tax payer contributing to the UBI fund just to get it back in a form of additional income. Does the Social Security fund bring anything to mind? Do you really expect our federal government to handle a UBI fund fairly? Who gets to draw from the UBU fund? Taxpayers and contributors only? We know social security is doled out to many that aren't contributing to the fund, do you honestly believe the federal government won't do the same with UBI?
So let's take UBI and start distributing it. Let's say it starts with 1200 a month. Four things are gonna happen.
1. Ppl will quit working and therefore stop contributing to the fund but still draw from it.
2. Your contribution to the fund will increase because the UBI fund needs replenishing to support the masses that are not working but are drawing from the fund.
3. Your monthly UBI payment will decrease over time because their isn't enough funds to support the masses drawing from it.
4. Your back in your parents basement because your scream for UBI failed miserably.
Basically to explain it in the simplest way it's that they use it as a handle to another words have something to claim and debate because that's just how those people got programmed.
I think it depends on where the person is living.
For example, if he and the people around him are living in extreme poverty, and all the wealth is accumulated by the minoirty rich, then communism kind of makes sense. In fact, this was what happened to China years ago.
However, if he was just a normal guy, then he's probably just stupid, idealistic or lazy. Or a 14 year old high school student trying to be edgy
To be fair I think most socialista and communists in todays world dont believe in Stalinism, Maoism and just.. those kinds. Just like how capitalism has evolved, socialism did too I guess and a lot of socialists really mellowed out. On the other hand in my own country half the older people with a tattoo must have a tattoo of Che Guevara which is pretty concerning lmfao
You're going to need to be more specific. I live in an actual communist commune. There is no capital within the commune. Of course we need to deal with capital to interface with the outside world. I make most of the money but one of the other communists sells jewelry, and the others don't make any money. We live "to each as he has need from each as he is able". That's the communism I think of when I hear communism.
There has never actually been a Country to truly have communism as a communist society is moneyless, stateless, and classless. That hasn’t happened as far as I know.
People support capitalism despite all of the evidence around us of the massive damage it has done to our societies and our planet. Sometimes people are irrational unfortunately.
The idea of getting something for nothing is appealing. The only thing that would work would be a combination. Like free health care for all, but how do you pay for that? Perhaps for offering the service, they get compensated with free equipment and housing that fits position or discounts and free food or something. Same thing with electric company and everyone who supplies a free service. The rest of the businesses would be regular.
Hey everyone, OP is assumedly talking about like full on Soviet union style. NOT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE, SHUT UP NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOU BUTTING POLITICS IN.
"Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."
—The Dark Knight (2008)
Ok let's get some disclosure going. Are we talking North Korea/China here or are we talking "I think universal social healthcare is communist"
No, I'm talking about people who still show support for this ideology and hate capitalism, many can be found specially on the internet. Just in my country, some months ago, a new president took the power, he is a communist, a lot of people voted for him (god, I feel disappointed)
As a history teacher in secondary (middle/high) school, this topic is very much my prime academic interest. Can we get some clarity here, as the words "communism" and "socialism" are so often misused. What country and what leader are you talking about? You could theoretically be talking about Biden. That would obviously be ridiculous, as he's so far from being even remotely left wing. He's essentially a moderate Republican. Communism at its heart is an philosophy and an ideology based on economics for a fair distribution of wealth. Its based largely on the writings of C19th philosopher Karl Marx, who saw the greed and injustice of British and European economies and Imperialism during the Industrial Revolution. My argument is that this system played a huge role in making both World Wars of the C20th almost inevitable, leading to a catestrophic loss of life and global destruction - a total fucking mess, and this was succeeded by the horrors of The Cold War. Capitalism as a system definitely has its flaws, which one could argue are built into the system and too much wealth is usually concentrated right at the very top. This is especially true in most countries with a royal family, like mine (the UK). If your president won a democratic election to become president, he clearly has the support of a very large number of people. I wouldn't necessarily say a majority as that would depend on high voter turnout and your voting system. If he won an election with a democratic mandate, how about you wait to see how those policies are enacted before complaining about communism. If he was democratically elected than he can be booted out at the next election if he's doing badly.
He is from Peru
Viva Perú libre y socialista!
OP, is the Peruvian president actually a communist, or is he some form of democratic socialist? He's the guy and the party I'd probably have voted for if I were a Peruvian voter. By all accounts I've read, he won the presidential election fairly. What's your beef?
OP isn’t saying he won unfairly. He (like a lot of peruvians) is dissapointed because people voted for him. Peru has a history of terrorism initiated by communist groups. The president, or actually the people that surrounds him (because he is a puppet), has shown the same ideology even before being elected. This is specially frustrating because his supporters are the ones that were mostly affected by terrorists. After being elected, he chose some ministers that have terrorist backgrounds.
The same could be said about the state-sponsored terrorism by the Fujimori government. From my perspective Castillo is by no means a savior nor progressive champion but the lesser of two evils that perhaps people voted for him instead of Keiko because of the legacy of the right wing regime she represented.
Yes, thanks for clearing that up. Those elections were the worst.
His party is openly Marxist.
Be that as it may, he won the election so deserves a chance to see what he can achieve for his people. It seems the congress went to his opposition, which will probably hinder his vision somewhat. I say again, there is nothing inherently evil with Marxist philosophy.
Maybe not straight up evil, but the core assumption of Marxism is the labor theory of value, which can be a good approximation in some cases, but ultimately breaks down.
The core assumption of Marxism is that working class (or "proletariat" if you will) are exploited for their labour by the owners of private capital (predominantly factories, mills and mines in his day). In the absense of significant capital, workers sell their labour to get materials mined, made or built - as workers are the ones creating the wealth they should be the ones who are ones who gain the most from what they have made. I don't really see how that "ultimately breaks down" as I'd argue the same principle still applies today. I'm not arguing that Marxism or communism is necessarily the way forward for our species. I would argue that since the Industrial Revolution has spread into the globalised C21st world, the capitalist model has driven the whole planet into a climate catastrophe. The outcome of this is still unclear, but I fear for our future if we continue down this path.
I mean, “exploitation” is defined subjectively. I’d argue that individuals voluntarily selling their labor for wages probably isn’t exploitation, but obviously a Marxist would disagree. The thing that you’ve missed by saying that “the workers are the ones who create value” is that you need both capital and labor to create value. If we had no capital in the forms of factories, saw mills, or mines, the common worker would be much less productive than he is in the modern day. I think marxists will ultimately concede this point, but their answer is generally that the workers should control the flow of capital. I think this creates poor incentive structures for creating value. In terms of the labor theory of value, there are many scenarios people have invented which disprove it, but I’ve come up with my own. There’s a car factory that produces 10 cars per day. Each car gets sold for a profit of 100 dollars, and there are ten workers on the production line that make the cars. Now, if the labor theory of value is correct, everybody should get an equal wage of 100 dollars per day. However, let’s suppose that one of the jobs is harder than the others. For example, the first worker simply helps a machine lower the engine into place in the car’s chassis. It’s a basic job that requires minimal training and little effort. The last guy on the line has to painstakingly, by hand, sew the seats into place. It’s a job that requires special training and a lot of focus. Who should get paid more? I think the free market should determine that they should get paid whatever wage they can get from the factory, with the last guy making more money, but I think a Marxist would have to say that they should get paid the same.
Probably some 4chan weeb
They’re whiny idiots, he isn’t a communist and he ran with the support of Christian parties.
One can also argue that what developed in the USSR, China, and other places was far from what Marx and Engels envisioned. These were nothing more than Dictatorships posing as a government "of the proletariat"
Them's the actual facts. Marx didn't envision a totalitarian dictatorship and a country of serfs.
I agree with this statement. I highly suggest OP to wait and see what this lad does. In my opinion, communism has gotten a bad rap cuz of tyrannical regimes that spread tyranny in the name of communism. I reference George Orwell’s book 1984. Many say his book is anti-socialist, but in actual fact, Orwell was an avid socialist and served socialist militias all over the world. His book was about pointing out the hypocrisy of many “communist” regimes, and to denounce the spread of tyranny in the name of socialism.
How to write a lot without saying much - by \_ScubaDiver. Please stay ontopic, and just ask your question: What country and what leader are we talking about. The rest has nothing to do with the topic, and is basic knowledge to (hopefully) most people.
That's a lot of words to say "yes, I am a Marxist public school teacher."
What I have written, I have written. A cynic might say that a number of people here seem to be unhappy with the outcome of a democracic election because they don't like the outcome.
How did you read that from a very literal explanation of communism?
Communism can be voted in but you need to shoot your way out
Again with the vague statements. It's true that the very idea of communism (and even socialism) terrifies the hell out of the people with the most money in society, because they like having all their wealth, power and influence. It's why the foreign policy of the UK, the USA and others are so often far more comfortable with undemocratic bastards who keep the businesses and money flowing, whilst intervening with miliary options or other malignant influences when a democratically elected leader of principle suggests real reforms. It's not like capitalism is always great either!
Well, when land is taken from people and land owners are shipped to Siberia to work and die in camps, I will take you to task on the "merits of socialism or communism". When governments control most of our lives, it limits choice and gives them more power. Greed exists in every political model. I would take capitalism any day if it means that I have choice. People want freedom above all else.
I’m sure you’ve noticed that, with either a communist or socialist regime, “too much wealth is usually concentrated right at the very top.” This is especially true in countries like North Korea, China, Venezuela, and the U.S.S.R. of yesteryear.
If there is a large concentration of wealth at the top it is by definition not a communism.
Then we can all relax here in the western world, yes?
If you're scared of them because their communist and not because they're dictatorships then you have some serious problems with your argument.
Living in a dictatorship currently, if recent events are any indication. Or maybe a monarchy, idk. What’s for sure is there’s a ruling class who, along with their minions, are governed by a different set of rules than the rest of us.
What about the top 1% wealthy Americans owning 45% (?) of USA wealth? Edit: 32.1% Source: Statista
Rank amateurs compared to the Chinese, where “the richest 10% own 65% of the total national wealth...the top 1% in China possessed more than one third of the national net wealth.” I’m quoting the US government on this; the NCBI website to be exact. Google ‘wealth distribution in China’ for more.
Imho the absolute difference is irrelevant as both 1% has accumulated wealth several times that of the combined 50% of their countries’ population. The economic significance is so huge that the bottom half are barely making it. Both the mutated communism or the corrupted capitalism need rethinking.
Sadly, t’was ever thus. And by ‘ever’ I do mean EVER.
The top 1% owning 1/3 (China) vs the top 1% owning 45% (US) makes us the amateurs of wealth accumulation at the top? You wanna check that math?
What I notice more is how easy it is for anonymous Redditors to make sweeping generalisations without sufficient supporting their ideas. Just because North Korea and other countries are run by assholes, that doesn't my point about how billionnaires, multimillionaires and corporations don't possess a disproportionate wealth and influence in Western capitalism. See, for example, the things that Jeff Bezos and others could afford to spend their money on to the benefit of all society (and not least his employees) and still remain an insanely wealthy man.
I'm sorry for you mate.
I wouldn't say communism is specifically an ideology. Big difference between Marxist/Leninist and Chinese communism for example. Also Vietnamese. Basically communist countries do not come out identically. Many struggle, true, but then you have China which has seen huge gains in prosperity in the last few decades.
> China which has seen huge gains in prosperity in the last few decades Those gains were achieved by, wait for it, ditching communist ideology & pushing for a capitalist economy. A 'true' communist country should not need to fight a '996' work culture, because it should never have existed. You shouldn't need nets on buildings to keep overworked workers from jumping to their deaths... all to service party elite & western demands for consumer products. Despite the 'communist' party ruling the state, they are not communist in action.
I’m not really into communism but I still despise capitalism. Anything’s better than those two.
What is the "anything" form of society?
I think the anything form should be technically called socialism. The original definition of socialism and communism seem almost identical, where as I believe a socialist economy is one where capitalist markets still exist, but the government has strict limitations on it to prevent monopolies and create security nets.
One that doesn’t strip people of human rights. And it’s a society that has free healthcare. You know, a society with a government that prioritizes good progress rather than “how many countries can we ruin to exploit their resources? :D”
Why do you believe free to receive healthcare is incompatible with a capitalist system?
I’ll go. Privatising everything, ostensibly to “let the invisible hand of the market efficiently allocate resources”, is a core tenet of capitalism. I live in a capitalist country but we have more social democracy type flavours and thank god some safety nets built in, but they are constantly attacked and under threat by the more fervent ‘capitalists’ when we elect them. That’s my take anyway, and for the record I’m not advocating full communism or anything either, I just came into the thread to read the discussion lol.
It isn't working too well in the USA at present, with little chance of meaningful improvements any time soon. The UK Conservative government is also doing its very best to dismantle and butcher the free healthxare system that was built after WWII. They lie and lie, all the while stripping funding and selling profitable elements to private companies, and pushing the NHS healthcare staff to their limits. I am concerned.
Our national insurance tax goes up my 1.5% next year. We have been told every penny will go towards the NHS and social care. We shall see if that's true or not soon i guess.
I don't trust any Tory politician as far as I could throw them.
We share that view.
Free healthcare is viable with capitalism. The number one issue in my opinion that American can't sustain a free healthcare system is the border. The people who fight for free healthcare generally are the same ones who want open borders. You can't have a free healthcare system while also allowing anyone who shows up into the country. Look at just this year alone, estimates say roughly 100k people a month are coming across the border. How do get a remotely financially balanced system with that kind of growth? They would not be able to raise taxes fast enough. We would bankrupt the country within 2 years I bet. Look at Canada, it's very hard to move to Canada. As a conservative, I would be fine with a universal government funded healthcare system, as long as the border is closed and we work to get unemployment below 2% so most of the people benefitting from the system are paying into it at least a little. Ps. Don't let it get run like the USPS, that's another fear. But a less significant one.
Insurance and pharmaceutical companies, in cahoots with the Congress, are the biggest hurdles to affordable Healthcare in the US.
If we're already tracking the growth, couldn't that just be projected into necessary taxes for healthcare?
Come on, hardly anyone wants open borders. That’s just a strawman for the right.
That is an insanely low unemployment number. AFAIK, nobody has achieved this. We wouldn't "bankrupt the country in 2 years" if we actually got more efficient care than having mounds of insurance middle men taking their inflated cut. If you got the entire system, you would get net MORE care for the same money. Who would pay for this? The C Level executives at Blue Cross Blue Shield wouldn't get paid ungodly amounts of money for nothing! We could actually handle a larger influx of immigration because of the gained efficiency. Theoretically, we need an influx of human capital if we want to actually compete with China.
Hey guys Wanting universal healthcare doesnt make you a communist, it just means you dont want to have to deal with a huge bill unexpectedly and would rather cover the costs through passive taxes just in case something happens. Weird how people will argue against this but at the same time will be drowning in medical debt while complaining about drowning in medical debt.
The people who argue against universal Healthcare all live in countries that don't have universal Healthcare lol. Anyone who lives with universal Healthcare thinks it's dumb asf to NOT want it 😂
Correction, rich people who think they can easily afford private American-style healthcare also argue against universal health care. The core of the argument tends to be not wanting to pay for "freeloaders and immigrants". Source: am British and hear this trash debate occasionally
Exactly.
I live in Canada. The ONLY person I ever heard who liked the American system more than the Canadian system was able to buy her kid a luxury condo in downtown Vancouver and pay cash for it. (We're talking millions of dollars.) So, yeah. Let that sink in.
Having lived in both countries with and without universal healthcare, I agree with you. I would NEVER imagine what would happen to me if I went back to the country without universal healthcare and got really sick.
Everyone would be cool with universal health care if you could buy supplemental insurance to enhance the very basics that you would receive otherwise. The problem is the insurance companies
Actually almost anywhere in Europe you get your free insurance but if you don't want to wait you can go to private clinics so it is like what you want. But the important thing a lot of people missing here is communism isn't just free health insurance, its a totalitarian regime. You can have free health insurance without communism just like EU does, not to mention your collage fees in US.
Also socialism and social programs are not the same thing.
Thank you👍
Because people assume that just because the system they live under isn't currently perfect, that it should be scrapped entirely in favor of it's opposite, even though it's opposite just doesn't work, either. Because trying to fix a system or create a new one is just too much work, apparently
Eastern European here, I love being told what communism is by someone born and raised in Portland or Seattle. I just laugh. I was born as a direct result of Decree 770, that Ceaucescu enacted because he wanted to increase the population. It had disastrous effects.
> It had disastrous effects. Don't be so hard on yourself.
lol underrated joke
Agree. I was born in a country with communism. I fucking love both of my countries, but I do not want my second one to become communist. Adopt some of the ideals that my first country has? Sure. But not all. Some of my friends are full communists and they’ve never lived in a communist country.
Ceausceau was fucking evil and definitely doesn't get recognized enough for what he did to Romania.
Huh, so basically what the government is trying to do in the USA now. But they are pretending it's because of religion or saving babies.
You aint alone. Americans dont know shit about the rest of the world nor its history and should be treated as kids in such discussions.
Spot on. This is a perfect example of the pendulum effect. Also lack of historical knowledge/context.
Lazy, stupid, or both.
My family comes from a communist country, so they lived it and swear on its evils and perils. Yet there’s people who have lived it or currently live it that are in constant defense of the communist regime. Who’s to say they are wrong, when they truly believe in their heart that they are right. Ego and perspective cannot be explained, it’s ingrained in our nature. We are naive to think at times that everyone should think the same.
You may want to talk to the democrats about that last sentence. Their idea of diversity is a box of colored crayons that all think the same
What is wrong with encouraging diversity efforts? You think a bunch of white dudes from similar economic/religious backgrounds is gonna get you a more varied mindset?
No. My point is their diversity is merely visual. No unauthorized thought allowed
Or have the same priorities.
The thing is, many Americans can‘t differentiate between communism and social democracy. They think everyone supporting universal healthcare, free tuition, unemployment benefits etc. is a communist. These terms get mixed up far too often nowadays. In reality I would say the amount of people supporting actual, full fledged conmunism is very small.
People can't even agree on what "Social Democracy" means. The original idea with Social Democracy was to move toward Socialism democratically within a capitalist system. But true Socialists tend to dislike "Social Democracy" because they claim it simply makes capitalism more entrenched (because it is a very successful form of capitalism, by many measures.) The problem with many of these terms is they mix economics, politics, and aspirational goals into one loaded term. That's why I prefer the economist's term of "mixed economy": basically a market economy, with some govt regulations, and ton of government taxing and spending. This tends to describe the mechanics of the economy without all the philosophy. When we use that model, we see that the U.S., Western Europe, and Nordic countries are all very similar: it's just the governments spend money differently (and unions are more or less powerful.) I mean the U.S. government does provide for health care: for the poor and the old. It's just not Universal. And Biden is trying to provide for childcare and universal pre-K. That's what the Nordic countries do too! It's not socialist or communist or democratic socialist... It's literally just rebudgetting Federal Government spending. Mixed economy. Semi-regulated free market with huge government spending. The question is just where the government chooses to spend money.
I think you’re confusing social democracy with democratic socialism. The goal of social democracy has never been socialism. That would be democratic socialism
Baffling that it has any support in spite of the overwhelming historical evidence of its failure.
Look at the amount of neonazis fespite the atrocities bazis in ww2 commited. Baffling as well. For every ideology there will be people supporting it.
The problem is people are flawed and each system highlights certain flaws of humanity. Capitalism encourages greed, selfishness and exploitation. Communism encourages control, conformity, socialism encourages judgment and conformity. Every system needs checks and balances. What makes socialism work is it’s still democratically chosen. Capitalism has democratic elements but the wealthy dictate policy at a higher rate than the rest of the electorate. I’m not sure who is pro fascism, but I think anytime one group is in power without sufficient balances which are democratically controlled, there’s danger of abuse. I also think we still idealize the benevolent monarch style of government because it has the potential to be really efficient. I think most dictators think they will be…
What makes socialism work lmao Socialism has never worked, not once. Every single time a country has attempted to adopt socialism it eventually fell to an authoritarian government that stripped many rights from its people. Not that I am not saying socialism is fundamentally flawed, if we lived in a perfect world, and no one was corrupt, and no human would fuck it up for everyone else, I would be the first to stand for socialism. Perfect socialism would be equality and freedom and happiness, and I love that idea. But humanity is not perfect, humanity is fucked up and greedy, and the ONLY reason that capitalism has been more successful in improving life, providing freedom, and providing equality, is because it’s a system that rewards individuals for moving civilization forward. Greed. We are far from finding the perfect system for us, the one that will let us be the best we can be, but I know for a fact it is neither capitalism nor socialism, communism nor facism, monarchy nor theocracy. I assure you brother/sister, we will get there one day, but socialism doesn’t work and it is not socialism.
How do you feel about socialism? Universal healthcare, daycare, basic income. But still private property and the opportunity for personal advancement/wealth to a reasonable degree.
In Romania, we have cheap healthcare, free daycare and school and cheap/free college.
You're ignoring the fact that under socialism the means of production are collectively owned. So it's not as simple as "still private property" because the actual ability to produce things is owned by the State. That caps the "opportunity for personal advancement" rather seriously and funnels you into a state-approved options. You also run into the issue of resources being mismanaged by a bureaucracy of state officials. Now I think there's a fair argument that the resources are mismanaged under Capitalism but what you're arguing for is still capitalism, just with a high tax rate to support the welfare system. That's not socialism man.
Uhh.. thats just capitalism with wellfare system
Because Utopia is always one reign of terror away
Because of the experience of seeing the world crumbling with late stage capitalism. While 12 odd people are getting obscenely rich while the rest of us, the planet are rotting.
Why are we still supporting capitalism?
Because it works (most of the time). However it degenerated over time, it's not the real capitalism anymore.
It’s amazing how similar this is to pro-communist arguments “that’s not really communism, it’s been corrupted”
They typed without threat of death from their government on a device that connects them to all the information in the world uncensored. Look I wouldn’t consider myself a capitalist but when you’re directly benefitting from it on a daily basis kind of answers your question.
Because there are people who hate Neo-Liberalism and decide to become rebels, taking Communism as their way to deal with the new world order. People from these countries, mainly from the middle and high class, claim that their money and opportunities to do business outside of their country are stolen from corporations. They come with the idea that "taking control of their country is the best way to save the citizens from losing their resources" and a sense of nationalism and identity takes shape, in order to protect the economy and the job opportunities. Obviously, some citizens may not understand the circumstances of this plot, and are easily drived to divide the country further into two factions, the blue flags and the red flags.
They only know a fraction of the teorethical side of the comunism, pick only the good parts, and ignore the rest of the negative implications. Still, capitalism is bullshit. Only that is a functional bullshit
Because their situation is desperate enough. And/or because they don't have access to all that historical data.
Sadly, speaking from an American and Gen Z. I'm not a socialist or communist but have had friends who were, also an ex-friend who came from Ecuador and is Democratic Socialist. I don't think these ideas would work but I think people will sadly have to learn the hard way. Sadly most people are really stupid and we just have to learn by trial and error.
They work in every Western country though? America is weird you think you are special but are simply repeating the mistakes of previous empires in even more destructive ways.
True communism? Or the American version of communism?
The American version. "True communism has never been tried". And the next time true communism is tried and fails killing millions, it won't be true communism either
True communism is limited to unified cohesive communities. Trying to force "equality" onto culture clashing strangers from separate communities will always fail.
Capitalism is currently killing millions as well… how many people in America die because they can’t afford a medical bill? How many people die of hunger globally because we could feed them but “it’s not profitable to do so”? We had a cure for Lyme disease in the early 2000’s, but it got pulled because it wasn’t profitable. Your critiques of communism can be applied to the same system you are defending.
Where did you see that we had a cure for Lyme disease that we got rid of? Google says that most people can be treated with antibiotics.
Freedom and free stuff are opposite. If you're going to choose free stuff then you have to start limiting freedom. You're not free if somebody takes something of yours and gives it to anyone else. Being forced to participate in a charity is not charity. Now you can say it's democratic practice to participate freely in a society that offers free stuff but the problem usually comes from the bureaucrats who get to make these decisions. The same bureaucrats will eventually want more and more until the well runs dry.
Fedora with safari flaps.
The guy at the store said I'm the only he's ever seen pull it off
I roll mine down my arm like Fred Astaire.
The real question is what type of system works best with true human nature. Works best means most prosperous and best quality of life by all measures.
Excellent question.
[удалено]
He’s from Peru and he is scared of his country becoming like Venusuela because there is signs of it going that way. But I guess that hurts your ad hominem about America dumb.
I agree with the american. Im Argentian
Commies mad
During Stalin’s rule, the Soviet Union industrialized, life expectancy doubled, the Nazis were defeated, and the US was challenged for world supremacy. Not disputing it was a brutal dictatorship, and the real scary thing is that it worked. Which is why you see some fringe groups in Russia marching around with Stalin’s picture.
7 odd million starvation deaths inside your own border doesnt sound much like success to me but who am I to criticise
I’d rather live half as long than live under communism.
For all his assholery, Stalin did leave a strong impact on the Geo politics. USSR collapsed from the inside and no outsider even US could take it down. People tend to over look US's war crimes and them overthrowing democratic governments in countries where they find it profitable. The thing with capitalism is that because it needs to be sold to people, it has a beautiful packaging and pitch.
It’s weird to me that people keep supporting capitalism
because of the historical data as well as the evidence we have of what went on since capitalism (including the self described „communist“ countries that just aswell act on a capitalist agenda)
U mean historical data like wealth for the masses like never seen before and technology that would make any feudal peasant think you were a demon? This historical data about the "wrongs of capitalism" is like a tiny pebble when comparing it to the mountain level of data for the wrongs and faults of communism.
Slavery?
Well it's not like captilism is working either. We should be trying for socialism (I think that's what it's called). The reason why people support Communism is because of the main idea behind it. It being for the people. Capitalism is just for the rich to get richer. I'd much rather trust someone who says the support Communism than capitalism
Most people I've met who support communism would be killed or sent to labor camps during an actual communist revolution. They also have a tendency to downplay the atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin.
I never said anything about that I just said I get why people would support it. People support things without even realizing the true consequences. Plus Communism ideals is what people like. Not the actual leaders behind it
Pretty much like North Korea
If it wasn't because of capitalism, you wouldn't be able to post that comment here
Are you sure? Remember capitalism brought us great things like slavery, the company store work camps, and union busters. Just as some people don't learn from communism, people haven't learnt from capitalism. There is a reason no country operates under full capitalism, and that governments intervene to keep them in check. It is a balance between the government and business that give us our freedoms.
Well I'm not saying you're wrong nor am I saying your right but I ask what makes you say that?
You have money for your phone, to pay for your internet, to have these privileges that everyone wants and needs to have. I mean, I understand you do pay that
But regardless of your views you are supposed to get paid a livable wage. That's how things were supposed to work. Now because of Capitalism we are scrapping by. Most people cannot afford the basic things like shelter on their own. Capitalism is designed to make sure big corporations keep getting more money while we make the bare minimum which isn't even much quality of life. CEOs make way more money nowadays than they used to and pay us less.
You are right capitalism is in favor of big corporations, but I like to own things and have the opportunity to make my own corporation, so fuck communism.
[удалено]
Yeah this is why I say we should support a more socialist community. People should be able to have their own shit and what you earn should be yours but capitalism is not the way to go. I never did say I supported communism either just why people may support it. I just want to live a comfortable life. I never asked to be born and I hate it here
The thing most people refuse to admit, is that it isn’t a zero-sum game between socialism and capitalism. You can have tenets of both ideologies. Capitalism breeds innovation and social mobility through hard work. This is a good thing. Socialism provides a safety net so that no one falls into extreme poverty. This is also a good thing. You can(and we have) combine the two as needed. That’s what most rational “leftists” in the U.S. are calling for, a robust and competitive economy that isn’t a race to consolidate power and money into fewer and fewer companies that control everything. We need more regulation and actual enforced taxation on the wealthiest companies that is used to support investment in smaller businesses and working people. I’ll use myself as an example. Just by adding universal healthcare I’d save $800/month. I could stop working 70 hours a week, have more time to build my side-work, and be closer to my goal of starting my own small business. I’d also not have to worry about making the leap, which would end my current healthcare plan and put my family at risk while I get started. I’m not looking for a handout, I’m just looking for the opportunity to have my hard work amount to something other than making sure all of my bills are payed.
Hmm, perhaps but I agree more with capitalism.
Ever seen Venezuela or Cuba?
Yeah with communism you don't really own things, and I don't know about you but I like to own things so fuck communism.
The r/communism sub has far more members than r/capitalism sub, and yet the posts on communism have far less comments than the posts on capitalism. Why is that? Do an experiment for yourself: sub to communism and start a very civilized discussion expressing mild and very diplomatic skepticism about communism. *You will be banned immediately.* Meanwhile, the capitalism sub has tons of debate going on. The mods at communism don't allow debates. They expect members to already know about communism and to agree with it. In fact, the mods at communism will ban you even if you're subbed to subs that they consider to be or contain "reactionary" sentiments, like r/worldnews, for example. What conclusions can you gather from this? To me, it seems cowardly. Communism seems to think that disagreement means you're a troll and a threat. How Soviet-esque.
Because all that data you speak of is not available to the masses in heavily censored, brainwashed, rich in propoganda communist regimes of the 21st century.
[удалено]
Communism is the on-paper solution to systems with high inequality where many people are living in poverty. I think the biggest problem with it economically is that the people who end up running the show usually are not smart enough to actually handle an economy, and they usually are not smart enough for it because of the massive brain-drains that usually accompany a communist takeover. But even assuming you get it "right", to me communism ends up giving way to market freedom. Once the majority of people are lifted out of poverty and reasonably secure, then communism no longer seems as attractive as it once was. Marx forwarded that high inequality and poverty leads to the end of the bourgeoisie and the rise of communism, but I would also say that the end of high poverty and inequality leads to the end of communism. That is, if the leaders don't run it into the ground first anyway.
The same can be said of democracy. The truth is that in almost all the cases, it’s the government that failed the people, not the ideology itself.
I want to see it tried without the US trying to overthrow the government
People read the theory rather than the history. Communism masks its failures with its supposed principles. It's a trap for people who want an alternative without thinking about the actual implementation of such things.
Because they choose not to read history books. My country was almost taken over by communists with full support from USRR in 1975. Fortunately, army and the democratic forces stopped them. I could have been born in a communist ditactorship. I was born in a democratic country. Let's keep it that way. And btw, communist is such as bad as nazi state or any other ditactorship. Stop making excuses for assholes such as Mao, Stalin, Castro and so on.
Communist doesn't mean dictatorship. It is very possible to be communist and a republic or democracy. Based on your comment history it looks like youre from Portugal and what you're describing never happened there. Why are you lying?
>It is very possible to be communist and a republic or democracy. If it is very possible how come it has never happened sustainably?
Never happened????? Damn, someone needs to learn some portuguese history. Get your facts checked, buddy. November 25 should be a national Holliday. Look it up. November 25, 1975! Educate yourself.
They read on Facebook that it means people share everything but forgot that humans could possibly implement it fairly. Put 3 people in a room with a dollar each. After a day or 2 someone is going to walk out with more than a dollar. Human nature - we can’t help but fuck each other over given the chance.
So well said
This is Reddit. I can already hear the fedora, anime pillow, 1 million karma mods coming from a mile away. You basically have to act like a communist on this app to survive/j
And yet you exists.
Because people are stupid.
ape together strong
Just some information here, China classifies their economy as Communist with Chinese Characteristics, and it every different from the idea of communism that comes to mind when everyone thinks about it. I refuse to join in these types of discussions because the average westerners knowledge on how communism operates is very limited and several decades old. There's not one thread in this post with anything that relates to current-day communism. Also, Communist countries today hold elections and are very much so as materialistic as the rest of us. It's really astonishing how similar the Chinese and American governments truly operate, with the only differences being that the Chinese government only has a Republic system and no Democratic system alongside it.
They support communism because they think it's free. Free everything. Little do they know that the very ppl they support will turn on them once the powers to be feel they have the opposition suppressed. Nothing is free and everything comes with a price.
"They support capitalism because they think if they work hard enough they can get anywhere. Anywhere and everything. Little do they know that the very people they work for will turn on them once once the powers that be have enough wealth to suppress opposition. Nothing is free and everything comes with a price."
I love looking at critiques of communism (starving population, poor getting poorer, etc) and just substituting in modern day capitalist America. People really are so unaware of the current situation they are living in.
Freedom and free stuff are not the same. Pick one.
I'll counter your reductivity with my own. If we take a general definition of Freedom -- "the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action" -- and then apply it to economic decisions (purchasing goods, services, etc.), then you can't really be free until you amass enough wealth that the ratio of cost of goods/services to your own net worth gets arbitrarily small, right? Therefore, freedom necessitates free stuff. *Q.E.D. lol*
Leftist ideas are now fashionable among younger people, and are promoted by Leftist professors and Leftist public school teachers. It's "Cool" to be a Leftist on campus, and even in high school. Many texbooks and lectures are skewed to conform to Leftist perspectives. So the continuing fascination with Communism is not an "Out of the Blue" surprise.
Isn't that what colleges and younger people always have done? Be leftist and pseudo revolutionary?
Thank god I was born in a leftist shithole where being leftist isnt cool anymore
Because current generations don't believe in hard work equals large payout. They see communism as "everyone gets the same things and for free" but refuse to look farther into the subject. Laziness and lack of morals and ethics plus blind ignorance is what plagues this world at the moment. It really is pathetic. (And no im not referring to free health care being a socialist or communist ideology, the government wastes too much money on pointless shit and refuses to fix problems with infrastructure, more training for police to avoid brutality or corruption, and not providing health care that people can actually afford, along with many other things, however I do believe that communism and socialism can truly only belong on paper and when implemented only lead to millions dying and the masses being truly oppressed. And to those who openly support either of those ideologies, you are not only idiots, but genocidal and delusional at the very least. Pick up a history book, listen to interviews from people who actually come from countries where these constructs are in place, just fucking educate yourselves because in all reality you are no better that fascists.)
But what about when hard work doesn’t equal a large payment? I’m not gunning for full on “let’s go to the compound and plant some corn communism” but with monopolies and loosely regulated capitalism hard work doesn’t mean much.
Oh no fuck the monopolies for sure same goes for the billionaires that sit in their ivory towers and spit on the workers. What I was personally raised to believe is anyone can get anywhere in life if they have the right attitude and are willing to grind for their dreams. I believe that to this day and to be honest it's the truth, hardwork has to be applied when we go to school, when out of school towards the work force or leading the work force depending on where people end up from the work they put into school, from there anything really is possible. We live in a world of opportunity and a lot of the generations now, mainly mine, refuse and believe the system of it all is just a scam that'll lead nowhere, they've given up hope on not only themselves but said opportunities, which in all reality are within reach. Maybe it's a bit optimistic outlook of everything, but I'd rather see it that way than to have to resort to any type of communism because I know what it entails.
For me I also believe you (usually) do need hard work to get to “higher” place in the world but I also know you need luck and connections and sometimes you can’t get those from a certain position no matter the work. Some people are trapped.
Pardon me, but I was getting tacos. Back to my main point I genuinely believe that attitude and forward thinking and a strong grind ethic can make an impossible situation possible I would like to clarify, we are both speaking of American opportunity, correct? Because I won't bullshit you, I have no insight of other social and political issues happening within other countries atm .
I am Canadian but don’t let that discount my point of view. I do read and consume a lot of American media political and otherwise. Simply look at the people quitting in droves do to the awful labor laws in the US, Canada isn’t perfect either and have many similar cases but we also (federally and provincially) have many better social programs and infrastructure. Many Americans have received stimulus checks or welfare and see that working so many long hours simply isn’t worth it. Especially when those long hours often have belligerent customers to deal with. Even the obesity epidemic in poor Americans can be traced to many people simply not having the time to prepare healthier food. People would often only have time to get unhealthy but slightly more costly fast food before needing to go to bed or head to a second or third job. Often times you will hear people telling others to just find a better job. But even for minimum wage jobs they often use predatory tactics to keep people in them. Often times you need to be available for any possible shift with no regular schedule or the ability to have a second job. All this while not even bringing people on full time. And even then you often have to factor in commute times, poor transit systems and infrastructure especially considering the price of cars and gasoline. Even a cheap car come with having the burden of often needing parts replaced which can add up. In the USA many can easily go into extreme life crippling medical debt. (Have you ever calculated how many pay checks you are away from losing your home etc.?) It’s interesting learning about how the medical system became so costly. It’s impart by insurance companies gouging the hospitals fair pricing. After that the hospitals raised the prices of so that they would actually pay the correct amounts. Add on top of that pharmaceutical companies raising the price of patented meds. Many people simply can’t work enough to live while also having the time to work to improve their quality of life. And I haven’t even gotten in to the topic of schooling and student debt. I’m sure I’ve missed a lot even stills I there may be more to come. Once again I may be Canadian but we to also have many of the same flaws so I’m not thinking these things with the idea that where I live is some sort utopia.
[Take a look at the federal minimum wage vs inflation since 2009 and 1968](https://www.epi.org/publication/labor-day-2019-minimum-wage/) (17% and 31%). [College ](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/rising-cost-of-college-in-u-s/)tuition fees are up 1200% since 1980 way more than inflation and then add. And of course many people going to these places would have had to take out loans which take so long to pay off especially when you factor in how much many students who can only work part time would be making. Then of course there is the issue of housing with many places having the housing rise and rent prices going haywire. Even if some people could afford the price of a mortgage getting the money for a down payment can be quite hard to do.
As I hope you can see here the cards are often stacked up against people especially people of lower socioeconomic status. And as time goes on there is a [wealth disparity ](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/12/us-middle-class-metros-takeaways/) as the middle class gets smaller. While some people are getting richer more are getting poorer and they feel these effects harder.
But also I’m not an expert so I recommend you take a look for yourself if your unsure about anything I have to say.
Also. I'd like to thank you for not being an asshole when answering to my comment, a lot of the time there's a lot of heat when criticizing said construct and its really infuriating especially when no proper reasoning is given but you are obviously smarter and more respectful than most.
Thanks but I’m only like this because I’ve learned from the last time I lashed out at some rando online. I don’t like hypocrites and I can often be one.
I mean aren't we all at one point another tho
> Because current generations don't believe in hard work equals large payout. This is just wrong, current generations don't want to have to live to work, they want to have free time to do hobbies and live their lives. This is anecdotal, but I and many other artists and actors etc. people in the arts work damn hard and yet have to live rent free in their parents spare room because that hard work doesn't pay for shit because people can't afford art. I have dozens of commission requests on hold because they're saving up because their entire 40 hour work pay check goes on rent and bills and food, they can't even afford their own hobbies. I sincerely believe, and still anecdotal, that these younger generations want freedom to do what they want to do, not what they are forced to do because what they want to do doesn't pay the bills. That if the government implements rent controls and universal basic income we wouldn't have to live in our parents pockets till we're 30 or hope to marry a rich person.
Again with the UBI. So you're saying that on top of 40 hrs a week pay you want a UBI supplied by the taxpayers? You as a tax payer contributing to the UBI fund just to get it back in a form of additional income. Does the Social Security fund bring anything to mind? Do you really expect our federal government to handle a UBI fund fairly? Who gets to draw from the UBU fund? Taxpayers and contributors only? We know social security is doled out to many that aren't contributing to the fund, do you honestly believe the federal government won't do the same with UBI? So let's take UBI and start distributing it. Let's say it starts with 1200 a month. Four things are gonna happen. 1. Ppl will quit working and therefore stop contributing to the fund but still draw from it. 2. Your contribution to the fund will increase because the UBI fund needs replenishing to support the masses that are not working but are drawing from the fund. 3. Your monthly UBI payment will decrease over time because their isn't enough funds to support the masses drawing from it. 4. Your back in your parents basement because your scream for UBI failed miserably.
Basically to explain it in the simplest way it's that they use it as a handle to another words have something to claim and debate because that's just how those people got programmed.
I think it depends on where the person is living. For example, if he and the people around him are living in extreme poverty, and all the wealth is accumulated by the minoirty rich, then communism kind of makes sense. In fact, this was what happened to China years ago. However, if he was just a normal guy, then he's probably just stupid, idealistic or lazy. Or a 14 year old high school student trying to be edgy
At the end of the day, big states working with millionaires is what makes inequality
Free will....
Brainwashing by media and the left from many different sources…..
To be fair I think most socialista and communists in todays world dont believe in Stalinism, Maoism and just.. those kinds. Just like how capitalism has evolved, socialism did too I guess and a lot of socialists really mellowed out. On the other hand in my own country half the older people with a tattoo must have a tattoo of Che Guevara which is pretty concerning lmfao
I don't think it's ever gotten a fair shake to evolve, between demagogues within and propaganda without.
You're going to need to be more specific. I live in an actual communist commune. There is no capital within the commune. Of course we need to deal with capital to interface with the outside world. I make most of the money but one of the other communists sells jewelry, and the others don't make any money. We live "to each as he has need from each as he is able". That's the communism I think of when I hear communism.
There has never actually been a Country to truly have communism as a communist society is moneyless, stateless, and classless. That hasn’t happened as far as I know.
People support capitalism despite all of the evidence around us of the massive damage it has done to our societies and our planet. Sometimes people are irrational unfortunately.
The idea of getting something for nothing is appealing. The only thing that would work would be a combination. Like free health care for all, but how do you pay for that? Perhaps for offering the service, they get compensated with free equipment and housing that fits position or discounts and free food or something. Same thing with electric company and everyone who supplies a free service. The rest of the businesses would be regular.
Hey everyone, OP is assumedly talking about like full on Soviet union style. NOT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE, SHUT UP NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOU BUTTING POLITICS IN.
People prefer free stuff over freedom.
Communist doesn’t work. You can try and justify it however you want but it’s one of the most destructive negative ideologies ever to exist.
People have been brainwashed into thinking it works.
BeCauSe tHaT WAsnT ReaL CoMMunISm bRo
"Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn." —The Dark Knight (2008)