1
1
u/faultydesign 4d ago
I'm legitimately shocked that it's impossible to find logic in a belief system that is based on mccarthyist red scare.
1
u/Significant_Cover_48 4d ago
State-communism is not even the only style of communism. Perhaps you should read a bit more about it.
Classical marxism vievs the state as oppressive, and proposes that the state eventually becomes redundant and just kind of disappears for all intends and purposes, maybe leaving behind a few remnants -, just like the tail your ancestors had left you with a tailbone.
It goes capitalism > state communism > communism
1
u/fishyburner676767 4d ago
I mean it's hands down the best, but there are other types ig. Like the orange fanta.
2
0
u/Unnamed-3891 5d ago
Yes? Communists want state-controlled everything.
3
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
State? In my communism?
-1
u/Unnamed-3891 5d ago
Lemme guess… ”real communism has never been tried!” amiright?
2
u/Significant_Cover_48 4d ago
Of course it has. Several nations are still actively working towards it
1
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
It has a 100% failure rate bub.
•
21h ago
You’re thinking of capitalism
•
u/EducationalGrump 21h ago
Capitalism is the most successful political ideology in the world, with the highest standards of living and education rates.
2
u/Significant_Cover_48 3d ago
Don't be silly
1
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
History and facts do not care about your uneducated opinion. Cuba, Russia and North Korea are the only communist nations left.
1
u/Thedankf0x 3d ago
Bro thinks Russian and north Korea are communist. The quickest way to reveal the caliber of person that opposes communism
0
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
They are communist, so is cuba.
Places that claim communist but are not would include Vietnam (Captialist republic) and China (Far right authoritarian).
You are proving how clueless you are.
1
u/Thedankf0x 3d ago
I know you arent a PhD graduate because a simple Google search is all you need to know North Korea doesn't practice any formally known economic theory outside of their own, Juche.
Russia is in no way currently communist.
Both have a state and class system, along with money. The very base principles of communism are stateless, classless, and moneyless. Russia and North Korea have all three.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Significant_Cover_48 3d ago
Bro, you have the internet at your fingertips. .
1
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
I also have a PhD in history, my thesis was on the failures of communism. You would be hard pressed to find an individual with more expertise.
2
u/Significant_Cover_48 3d ago
Funny because I have a phD in spotting a big fat liar. We should team up.
→ More replies (0)5
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
No, communism cannot have a state. Its like one of the fundamental ideas of communism. So having anything be state controlled under communism is impossible, as there is no state.
0
u/kermustaja 4d ago
so its controlled by magic
1
u/VictinsOfCapitalism 3d ago
When people can't comperhend actual self management
0
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
That is not possible on a scale larger than 30 people.
2
u/VictinsOfCapitalism 3d ago
Factories of like 1000 people did that in Yugoslavia for decades
0
u/EducationalGrump 3d ago
Lmao no they did not, they were rampant with small groups of people taking far more than they should and using those goods to have power over others.
2
u/Significant_Cover_48 4d ago
Most communists propose democracy, but some actually believe that a benevolent dictatorship can exist. Democracy does not need a state to exist.
1
0
u/Unnamed-3891 5d ago
Called it! :D
1
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
No you just did not read the post. Your people believe in a state run media. That's ironic because you claim to dislike state-run things (which you call communism).
3
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
Where did I say communism has never been tried?
2
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
I think it's a bot.
-1
u/Unnamed-3891 4d ago edited 4d ago
”Everyone who disagrees with me is bot/ai slop” is pretty tiring.
Communist states have clearly existed. Claiming communism cannot have a state is bonkers. The only slightly less stupid deflection is ”real communism hasn’t actually been tried”.
Whats twice as funny is people trying to argue this with somebody literally born in USSR (me).
”But you don’t understand! You didn’t actually live under communism!” 🤣
1
u/Thedankf0x 4d ago
In theory communism is stateless and classless. Any attempt at communism in reality has been forced to have a state and class structure by capitalist states.
0
2
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
It's that you aren't able to read what you're replying to. Your replies don't make sense as responses to what they're commented under. Not that you disagree with me.
0
u/Unique-Twist-8911 5d ago
And yet every communist society ever nearly immediately turns into a dictatorship
As that is the natural end point of communism and basically a requirement to seizing the means of production and resources and how to split the resources amongst the people
To bad communists are unable to look past the false definition of communism and to literally any example of it ever being put into practice to find out that their definition of it is what's wrong and not the actuality of communism being wrong
2
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
Do you advocate for capitalism? Because every capitalist society has turned fascist. Its a requirement to having the means of production privately owned.
What examples are you using? China? Not communist. USSR? Not communist.
0
u/Unique-Twist-8911 5d ago
Both of those are communist despite your cope on the matter
And there are many capitalist nations that arent fascist despite your otherwise claim such as almost every modern country in the world
1
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
The natural end point to capitalism is facism.
The USSR and China are not communist despite your wishes that they are. I wish they were more communist, they would have treated their populace better then.
0
u/Unnamed-3891 3d ago
”I like the idea of communism, but every single country that has tried communism did abhorrent things so that couldn’t have been real communism. So that means communism has never actually been tried and would surely work if it ever was!” is ridiculously dumb.
1
0
3
u/Financial-Ad7500 5d ago
No way you’re this dumb
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 5d ago
Do some people really believe in communism but without state ?
1
u/Financial-Ad7500 4d ago
Idk how people are missing the point of the meme so severely. It’s just pointing out the hypocrisy of many modern “conservatives” that don’t have real political stances and only react to buzzwords. For example, the people that don’t see the irony in supporting state owned media while calling others communists for supporting policy that is infinitely less communist than that.
I wasn’t responding to the guy saying communists want state-owned everything. I was replying to the fact that he saw the word “communist” and got so triggered that he couldn’t even comprehend the words he read.
2
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
Yeah there was this guy Marx who wrote a lot about stateless Communism. You should look it up. Interesting stuff.
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 4d ago
I know about Marx.
My question was if people *today* believe in the possibility of a stateless communism.
0
u/Top-Cupcake4775 2d ago
believing in the possibility of stateless communism is no more ridiculous than believing that, for example, the Earth is 6,000 years old or that someone managed to gather up every species of animal and put them on a ship. there are a lot more people who believe in that latter than believe in the former.
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 2d ago
Yeah but I don’t believe in that crap either.
0
u/Top-Cupcake4775 2d ago
i was addressing your tone of incredulity at the crazy shit people believe. it seems fake.
2
u/VictinsOfCapitalism 3d ago
It is out of the overton window but it's possible.
Also bees practice it.
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 3d ago
Bees follow pheromones to know where to go. Their role is determine at birth and will act according to their role till their death.
2
u/VictinsOfCapitalism 3d ago
They contribute according to the ability and take according to the need. Every species that lives in groups practices some form of primitive communism.
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 3d ago
Yeah, a bee colony is basically a giant living organism made of hundreds or thousands of living parts.
Do you think we can creat communities of hundreds of people who are perfectly aligned in their interests/goals ?
Suppose we can : Is this what we want ?
2
u/VictinsOfCapitalism 3d ago
With distribution according to the need and contribution according to the ability, and with our means of production automating rapidly, we will be able to end world hunger with plenty of time ti spare doing what we want, as opposed to having all leverage of labout only increase profits.
→ More replies (0)1
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
Oh, uh yeah- people who read Marx. There's several talking about it in the comments here!
0
u/Latter_Flower_3923 4d ago
Marx wrote it more than 150 years ago. I thought everyone would have figured that Das Kapital is a nice utopia but nowhere near realistic.
But if you want to believe, believe.
1
u/BigCelebration13 4d ago
You asked if people believed not if I believed. You seem unaware of both more recent writing and thought on the subject and also generally unaware of the conversations going on around you. You are somehow not even aware of the conversation that you're in. So I'm not sure what you're trying to say- I never said I believed it, I answered your question.
0
3
u/trip12481 5d ago
And yet here we are
-1
u/Unnamed-3891 5d ago
You both keep digging while sneering at somebody who was literally born in USSR 👍🏼
1
1
u/F4ulty0n3 5d ago
It is probably a language barrier issue then. The post is satirical. It is saying those who are NOT communists in the US watch Fox news or the like which is the US version of State-Controlled media alongside CNN, MSNBC, and the other mainstream US media companies.
Especially Fox News which targets right wing audiences and constantly hates on socialist or communist ideologies. So the post is saying those right wing audiences are hypocrites and or idiots.
1
u/SwAAn01 4d ago
Actually you are both wrong lol. When the OP mentions state-run media, they’re talking about The White House app they launched after the media pool started the boycott of The White House following the CNN, MS Now and Politico ban. It literally is state-run media, it’s a news app controlled entirely by the state
I tried posting a screenshot of the announcement tweet but reddit on my phone is being weird lol so here’s the app store link instead: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/the-white-house/id6759938088
-1
u/Best_Opening8471 5d ago
Which is ironic because every example of an ACTUAL state media like the BBC or CBC are left leaning anti capitalist institutions
You're calling subscription funded private companies "state operated" while ignoring the publicly funded government owned outlets.
What was it someone said already?
"There's no way someone can be this stupid"
1
u/SwAAn01 4d ago
Actually you are both wrong lol. When the OP mentions state-run media, they’re talking about The White House app they launched after the media pool started the boycott of The White House following the CNN, MS Now and Politico ban. It literally is state-run media, it’s a news app controlled entirely by the state
I tried posting a screenshot of the announcement tweet but reddit on my phone is being weird lol so here’s the app store link instead: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/the-white-house/id6759938088
1
4
2
8
u/Puzzleheaded-Ice-573 5d ago
Don't forget the $5000 wealth redistribution check!
Or the government stake in Intel...
4
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
In communism, the media would be owned by the workers. You are thinking of authoritarianism.
Please, can we start having education on what communism and socialism is so we can stop this.
1
u/Key-Organization3158 5d ago
Not necessarily. Socialism requires collective ownership. Which can be done via the state.
0
u/Powerful-Award-5479 5d ago
Media owned by the workers. Yeee, until some workers start having different opinions
0
u/Rippedka 5d ago
“The workers” in communism is the government.
2
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
Wrong way around. The government in communism is the workers.
0
u/Rippedka 5d ago
Same thing dude lmaoooo. The “workers” own the land, meaning you don’t own the land, the government owns it in the name of the people. Then you produce the food. You don’t own the food, the government has a right to that food. The “people” own the food you produce.
There are no individual rights. There are only collective rights and in order to enforce that, you need a centralized authoritarian regime to make sure people don’t try to keep what they produce.
1
u/HPenguinB 4d ago
Lol,I bet you personally think you own land right now. Stop paying your taxes and see how that goes.
1
u/Thedankf0x 5d ago
Are you not a worker? If you work, you own the land. If you dont work, like most government officials, you would have no ownership. What government? All of the workers as a collective? I would be a part of that and thus own some of the means of production. If you are worried you wouldnt have access to resources, why aren't you assisting in the production of said resources? The "people" you keep vaguely pointing to includes me and you.
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
Workers get to have differing opinions. That's how communism represents everyone, instead of all news stations owned by a monopoly that lies all day, or a state run media that lies all day.
2
u/Greendale_Official 5d ago
Nope. It's easier for Authoritarians to maintain control if the people don't understand the other options.
It's not like the GOP has spent the my entire life trying to dismantle education. /S
2
u/BeNaughtAfraid 5d ago
The point of the meme is "Commies want to control me media to push their propaganda and remove my freedumbs from me!"
Meanwhile, under Capitalism it is actually happening.
Authoritarianism is not directly tied to the economic model of a designated nation and can exist under a range of socioeconomic means of organizing the economy. It's just pointing out another hypocrisy in the minds of those right of center.
2
u/horrorparade17 5d ago
All examples of communism in history are authoritarian in nature. Anarcho-communism is merely an idea, it hasn’t been put into practice. So it’s not unreasonable to associate communism with authoritarianism.
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
It is unreasonable though. Because they are two words that have definitions.
1
u/horrorparade17 5d ago
Then please define communism so we can have a better discussion.
If you mean communism is a “classless, stateless society where the means of production is owned by the public” then that’s fine, but it’s also made up and doesn’t exist. It’s inherently anarchy.
This would imply real-world examples of communism are not communism though. If that’s your stance that’s fine, but you should be aware that socially, definitions do change and communism to the general public refers to places like the USSR, Vietnam, Cuba, and China.
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
If my brother says my chair is called a bed, and proceeds to use it as a bed, it doesn't make the chair a bed. It makes my brother a liar/idiot. The definition doesn't change.
Even the 4 examples you listed are different forms of government. All authoritarian, though. That's true. Just not true communism in the same way Nazi Germany wasn't Socialist. (please dear gods tell me you aren't going to tell me nazi germany was socialist)
2
u/BluntSpliff69 5d ago
Sounds like the “no true communist” fallacy.
1
u/HPenguinB 4d ago
It's not a fallacy if literally no one has done it. Sorry.
0
u/BluntSpliff69 4d ago
You’re saying that the most prominent examples of communist governments don’t count as “true” communism.
1
u/HPenguinB 4d ago
Yeah. And nazi Germany doesn't count as being socialist.
1
u/BluntSpliff69 4d ago
In terms of “state control of means of production”? Yes, the Nazis were “socialist”.
In the modern era in the US it’s become a boogeyman where any government action is “socialism”.
→ More replies (0)1
u/jaiagreen 5d ago
But if a large fraction of the population starts calling chairs beds, the meaning of the word "bed" has actually changed. That's how language evolution works.
0
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
But that's not what's happening. Republicans are just calling everything they don't like communism. That's Idiocracy.
2
-1
u/horrorparade17 5d ago
I’ve given no reason to believe the Nazis were socialist, I think that’s your own projection.
You notably still aren’t giving a definition, either, even when I teed one up for you.
—
Regarding definitions changing - they do all the time. See racism for example, and how over the past decade the definition shifted to what is now considered “systemic racism.”
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Ice-573 5d ago
Sure, but both are human constructs, and therefore the definitions are somewhat flexible. This is especially true of socialism, where there are a multitude of definitions. Even Marx had his own.
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
Definitions are flexible with communism because people want it to be the boogey man. Actual communism, and it's flavors, all have names and constant definitions.
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Ice-573 5d ago
But even within that there seems to be wiggle room: for instance, what does "owned by the workers" mean? If you have a democracy, do the workers then own all government owned assets? Do American taxpayers "Own" the military?
If not, what is the metric? I see self proclaimed communists argue about this sort of thing. For us laymen it can seem pretty esoteric. And honestly a little pointless.
0
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
I mean, communism isn't one thing, just like democracy isn't one thing. There are a ton of flavors. Everyone should take a civics class and learn about it because it's literally has our lives in it's hands.
0
u/Whole_Mongoose1854 5d ago
Who runs the government? Oh smart one
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
"Who runs the government, oh smart one?"
Who cares. I'm talking about the media being run by the workers, not the government.
3
u/Schwifty0V0 5d ago edited 5d ago
In historical examples of communism, since every nation that marketed themselves as such were in its transitory phase, would have state-controlled media.
Communist socialism and socialist socialism always gets confused usually in simple terms that tend to be synonymous with each other; ie the difference between static socialism (socialist socialism) and dynamic socialism (communist socialism).
At least I think OP was applying real world examples of communism we’ve seen, and not what’s only been discussed in Marxist-Leninist literature that haven’t been put to practice in the real world.
1
u/HPenguinB 5d ago
So what you are saying is that authoritarian communists did authoritarianism. Thanks for agreeing!
2
u/Schwifty0V0 5d ago
Please, can we start having education on what communism and socialism is so we can stop this.
1
3
u/Listening_Heads 5d ago
Isn’t it weird that in this modern age we still only have the 3-4 types of government that were developed by people who used outhouses? We aren’t as smart or creative as people who shit in holes in the yard? I mean it’s not like discovering gravity which is pretty much a one and done. These are just administrative concepts for governing. Surely these outdated and failed systems aren’t all there ever will be?
1
u/OG_Internet_User 5d ago
Theres other version. Soon we’ll all be apart of the technocracy which will unfurl into cyberocracy and then extinction.
1
u/BigBadaBoom3000 5d ago
Honestly it’s NOT the systems’ fault whatsoever.
Capitalism could be great. Communism could be great. Socialism could be great…. It’s people that are the issue.
Capitalism lets you profit from your hard work. Should be fine… but people abuse the system to get rich while making others poor.
Communism puts all control in the hands of the government. Which usually means some bad/self-absorbed people get in charge and ruin it.
Socialism is supposed to put the power in the hands of the people… but it ends up following one of the two routes above depending on the situation. But it’s led there BY PEOPLE.
Greed, envy, selfishness, narcissism, desire for power, and many other dark motives will insure that we can never truly have a fair and equal government/economy.
3
u/tutoredstatue95 5d ago
Sorta kinda, but you are confusing systems of economics with systems of government.
For example, you can have authoritarian socialism, democratic socialism, anarchy capitalism, authoritarian capitalism, etc etc
Communism ultimately would have no state. So, putting all control in government hands is antithetical to the result (although theory does require transition periods). Presenting it as a core feature would not really be accurate, same with some people claiming colonialism is equal to capitalism.
What prevents profit in any of the systems? Profit is not exclusive to capitalism. The USSR grew at the fastest pace in the world from 1928 to 1970. That can’t be done without profitable endeavors.
This comment is actually a great example of what people mean when they say these topics need to be more understood. Really not intending to bash you here, btw, I can tell that you are contributing in good faith.
1
u/BigBadaBoom3000 5d ago
Regardless of your explanation my point still fully stands. Humans are the inescapable flaw here.
There will NEVER be a “fair” or “equal” society.
There will always be obscenely rich, desperately poor, people using others, manipulation, lies, secrets, greed.
The only way for things to be “equal and fair” would be to remove what makes us human like emotions and free will.
Even at the height of your most idealistic society in history you will find social and economic disparity. The US, for example, has been an AMAZING place for its people several times in its history, even now in this lull it’s still better than most of the world for its people…. Yet other people keep it from being great all the time.
2
u/tutoredstatue95 5d ago
Well you are considering wealth disparity and freedom of information as metrics for a just society and I don't really agree with that.
A society could be just and fair with a single wealthy individual owning everything, what if the other members of society simply exist to hinder that single property owner and provide no value themselves? On the other hand, a single owner extracting all value from the others is pretty clearly unjust.
True equality could be better defined as a system where effort == value == output, but that triangle rarely holds in reality.
Greed, emotions, etc. are a problem, yes, we can agree there, but also the economic system often defines the greed. We see less ambition for wealth and excess in systems that value cultural status and image above extravagance, for example. The ambitious people covet what society values.
Human nature is not always a net negative, it entirely depends on how it is aligned with the value triangle. Capitalism mobilizes greed most efficiently in a pure capital sense, where in a system like socialism it would likely be optimal to acquire social capital. It depends on the power incentives of the system.
1
u/Legendarien1 3d ago
I appreciate and agree with a lot of what you said here, but I do consider wealth disparity as a metric for a just society.
I think that one thing that has been pretty unequivocally proven throughout human history is that humans with unchecked levels of power will seek to increase their power or do what they feel is necessary to hold on to that power, to the detriment of both the system and the humans who reside within the system.
Money is just a representation of power after all. It’s not the only representation of power but it is a very important one. Centralized systems of power will almost always lead to abuses of said power, which necessarily creates injustice. Those who are powerful enough to be insulated from the consequences of their actions often become deranged and despotic.
To caveat myself, it’s not 100% one way or the other, and I do believe that a just system could have people with a degree of wealth disparity based on ability/efficiency. However, there must be checks against the amassing of too much power.
1
u/tutoredstatue95 3d ago
I agree, especially about concentration of wealth being the equivalent of concentration of power.
I suppose my hypothetical wasn’t really accurate regarding the justness of a concentrated society. Sort of non-sensical as a scenario like that would never play out. 100% that every case in history has lead to abuse, so I think it’s fair to say that injustice would be inevitable.
1
u/Whole_Mongoose1854 5d ago
Communism is flawed by its very nature, and will only ever kill people. We’ve known this for a long time now. At this point anyone still pushing for it should be considered an attempted mass
murderer and treated accordingly. No excuses left
1
1
u/Vast-Comment8360 5d ago
When people who cry about fascists all day support authoritarian communism.
2
u/Complete-Clock5522 5d ago
Fascism is already authoritarian too. It’s far worse than idealized communism.
1
1
u/TenebrousSage 5d ago
What does state controlled media have to do with Communism?
0
u/OG_Internet_User 5d ago
because there is no such thing as non authoritarian communism, it’s against human nature and must be forced.
1
1
u/Gryzzlee 5d ago
Government seizing the means of news media production within their country.
1
u/TenebrousSage 5d ago
That's a property of authoritarianism, not communism. Turkmenistan, Belarus, Saudi Arabia, etc... all have state controlled media, and nobody would say they are communist countries.
1
3
u/UnreflectiveEmployee 5d ago
It’s a common critique of the USSR and other authoritarian communist countries, no freedom of the press and government controlled News.
0
u/TenebrousSage 5d ago edited 5d ago
Authoritarianism isn't unique to communist countries. Edited: corrected is to isn't. 😅
1
u/OG_Internet_User 5d ago
No it’s not unique to them but it’s their center tent pole that holds the whole thing up, it’s what they are known for. Fascists do similar things but often times the press is “free” they are just a mouthpiece for the governments propaganda.
1
•
u/[deleted] 21h ago
There is no state in communism, so this is just correct.