Thread: Real Men love Capitalism

As some of you may know they are afew intellectual cripples in this forum spiting bold ideas about the superiority of communism. As its my need to burn intellectual energy i shall address this problem and mouth fuck the idiocies of this deluded souls. This is intended for my entertainment, and a handful of other posters, you know who you are.

Alas, bester claims on the superiority of Communism over Capitalism. What is the basis of this superiority? It is unclear. He has claimed its moral since everyone is socially equal and the poor are fed. He has claimed its economic efficiency. He has claimed that having a dictatorship manages resources properly that creates a better society.

The fact is bester has failed to even be able to define Capitalism or Communism. As he said once before defending his argument that Europe was socialist and not capitalistic: "You don't need a socialist economic model to be socialist or a capitalist to be capitalist, its social justice that makes Europe socialist"

So what makes Capitalism and Communism, according to Bester, was an an abstract moral standard based on the vague term "Social Justice" and NOT the economic structure of the particular society. HA!

Now, this is not to say that there is no ideology concerning the struggle of capitalism and communism (Ideologically for the communist it becomes a secular religion since the communists arguments have been proven wrong way before the 1960's and they hold their beliefs against contrary evidence not much different then a Religious Fanatic). But the Ideological struggle does not consist in simply having opposing view of the world, but on how the world order, and society, must be structured. Thus there is an objective measure on what makes a capitalist and communist community.

As for communism there is many different structures carried forth by political leaders and intellectual metaphysicians (For what else should we call the communist intellectual). But they agree in many points: They wan't an avoidance of competition since that will destroy "social equality" thus the overachiever is the enemy of the community and mediocrity the new morality. Private property is to be abolished, or turned into a privilege, not right. You're no longer an individual, but must be part of a collectivist consciousnesses of the community.

I like to keep things simple. Life is easier that way. This whole commy vs capitalist is way toooo deep. Both sound great in theory and both are'nt fair in reality. Theres people at the top in both who have it all and people at the bottom who have sweet fuck all. The people in the middle just get on with it and try to enjoy life. I know this is very simplistic but when you complicate things the problems start! Lifes too short.

Jesus, Urineman, if you're gonna be hysterical about it, I'd rather not do it. Calm yourself.

Difference between capitalism on USSR example.

Difference between 1913 Russian Empire and 1941 USSR:
- the number of hospital beds increased by 4.4 times
- hospitals and clinics in cities increased by 11 times
- countryside medical centers increased by 3.5 times
- number of doctors increased by 6.7 times

USSR. Difference between 1922 and 1938.
- primary school pupils raised from 5.9 mil to 10.6 mil
- partial secondary school pupils raised from 0.7 mil to 11 mil
- secondary school pupils raised from 0.5 mil to 9 mil
- total pupils went raised 7 mil to 31 mil
- school teachers raised from 0.2 mil to 1 mil
- number of universities raised from 148 to 714
- number of university students raised from 168500 to 458000

Building a better life for society isn't interesting for capitalism. Do you realize the magnitude of social elevation socialism offers?

Urineman talks about competition, how it's universally good. What kind of competition does capitalism offer to sweat reeking spic factory workers or pizza carriers? Only the one in which they struggle to survive?

There is competition in socialism, farmers earned less than university professors, writers, actors or valued specialists. Yet farmers weren't poor, they often bought tanks during WW2 and donated them to the army. Is there a single farmer in Mexico who can earn enough money to afford a motherfucking tank?

The average USSR salary in 1985 was 201 rubles. The flat was free for every family.
Here's a menu from a restaurant, dated 20 October 1981.
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5309/...fa5d57a_XL.jpg

You don't have to speak russian to see the prices. Everything was cheaper or around 1 ruble. A cinema ticket was 0.25 rubles. A bus ticket was 0.1 ruble. I remind, the average USSR salary was 201 rubles. That's considering the fact that most people worked as factory workers, farmers, construction workers, etc (manual labor). So an engineer, a professor or a factory manager earned even more.

Students scholarship was 50 rubles, they got a free room and everything else was free. Just as long as they studied, they were taken care of. And the universities were free. How much is a year in university in USA?
The medicine was free and USSR health care system was recognized as the best in the world in 1968 if memory serves by the World Health Organization. How much is an appendicitis operation nowadays in the US? "In the late 1950s, the USSR had a higher life expectancy than the United States" - from the wiki.

Originally Posted by Bester

There is competition in socialism, farmers earned less than university professors, writers, actors or valued specialists. Yet farmers weren't poor, they often bought tanks during WW2 and donated them to the army. Is there a single farmer in Mexico who can earn enough money to afford a motherfucking tank?

Com·pe·ti·tion (kmp-tshn)
n.
1. The act of competing, as for profit or a prize; rivalry.
2. A test of skill or ability; a contest: a skating competition.
3. Rivalry between two or more businesses striving for the same customer or market.
4. A competitor: The competition has cornered the market.
5. Ecology The simultaneous demand by two or more organisms for limited environmental resources, such as nutrients, living space, or light.



*************************************

Moving on.

So in the simplest terms, what is communism and capitalism? The question finds itself in who owns the means of production. In Capitalism its the citizens. In communism, the government has made it illegal for a baker to produce some bread and exchange it for a pair of shows. The government owns all the means of production and keeps his monopoly at gun point. What is the consequences of this?

All men are put in a state of dependence. The Government now takes care of their basic needs and any sing of independence will be crushed. To control peoples behavior one must control their mind and this all information must be regulated to ensure obedience to the Nanny Government. Not much difference then parents with their children (There is an irony to this which we will touch latter on).

It goes to extreme as to ban individuality. any new ideas are dangerous, and in the case of Soviet Russia, to the Gulags you would go. Creating the most dehumanizing state of affairs, all in the name to of rising the human standard. But this collectivization of consciousnesses comes from ideology as much as practicality and we will touch on that latter.

What the communist aim to do is to control every single aspect of human environment and development to create a "better society" and improve the human condition. They will claim that Capitalism, aiming for the liberty of the individual to create his own destiny, and societies development based on the kleptocratic process of the market demanding certain goods and services and not the dictatorial whims of the half baked dreams of an intellectual elite is evil.

But what exactly is a "better society" that in turn is a completely subjective position. The argument is, that they, the Communist intellectual, has figured out what is best for human society and they back this social engineering at the gun point of the new totalitarian government.

I will deal with what their ideas for their new socialist man is.



P.S. Fascism, as originally meant in the 20th century, was simply that the government regulated every aspect of the means of production, while in paper, the ownership was kept in the private sector. Now you know why economists call the left wing fascist.

Well, you tried. Maybe next time you should chose someone from kindergarten.

Okay, maybe you can still help yourself get better if you reply to these questions.

Originally Posted by IronMan666

All men are put in a state of dependence.

sweat reeking spic farmers are independent from anything. How's it working out for them?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

any sing of independence will be crushed.

Examples?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

To control peoples behavior one must control their mind and this all information must be regulated to ensure obedience to the Nanny Government.

You think now nobody controls the media and it's not used to brainwash simple american minds? Should I give examples? Iraq? Afghanistan?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

It goes to extreme as to ban individuality.

Examples?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

any new ideas are dangerous, and in the case of Soviet Russia, to the Gulags you would go.

When were gulags abolished? Any idea?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

What the communist aim to do is to control every single aspect of human environment

Like what?

Originally Posted by IronMan666

They will claim that Capitalism, aiming for the liberty of the individual to create his own destiny, and societies development based on the kleptocratic process of the market demanding certain goods and services and not the dictatorial whims of the half baked dreams of an intellectual elite is evil.

Please calm yourself and rephrase it in English this time.

Originally Posted by IronMan666

The argument is, that they, the Communist intellectual, has figured out what is best for human society

Yeah? What is it?

YAWN.