Neoliberalism and its disgusting tactics

It's the best alternative and has been proven to work well in places like Catalonia
Communism only works if resources are abundant and if the group is small enough that it does not need to have designated leaders or bureaucratic middlemen. Critical mass is somewhere between 20 people and 100 depending on the local resources and personality of people.

The moment you get a large enough country that you have to ship resources about, have resource shortages or have to have people put in charge of things you get points of failure that result in communism shifting to one form of a totalitarian government or another with those in the charge accumulating power/resources and limiting how much the populace as a whole gets.

Communism isn't a viable option, it would only *maybe* work in a totally futuristic society. But for the world we live in right now, communism should not ever be approached, the world has largely been trying to undo the damages of communism.
 
Last edited:
Communism only works if resources are abundant and if the group is small enough that it does not need to have designated leaders or bureaucratic middlemen. Critical mass is somewhere between 20 people and 100 depending on the local resources and personality of people.

The moment you get a large enough country that you have to ship resources about, have resource shortages or have to have people put in charge of things you get points of failure that result in communism shifting to one form of a totalitarian government or another with those in the charge accumulating power/resources and limiting how much the populace as a whole gets.

Communism isn't a viable option, it would only work in a totally futuristic society.
A communist state would easily be toppled by a capitalist state. Capitalism is the natural state of man.

You cannot remove property rights in Islam anyways.
 

Radical

Been there, done that
Communism only works if resources are abundant and if the group is small enough that it does not need to have designated leaders or bureaucratic middlemen. Critical mass is somewhere between 20 people and 100 depending on the local resources and personality of people.

The moment you get a large enough country that you have to ship resources about, have resource shortages or have to have people put in charge of things you get points of failure that result in communism shifting to one form of a totalitarian government or another with those in the charge accumulating power/resources and limiting how much the populace as a whole gets.

Communism isn't a viable option, it would only *maybe* work in a totally futuristic society. But for the world we live in right now, communism should not ever be approached, the world has largely been trying to undo the damages of communism.
The dominant global mode of production is capitalism which even has its faults. Anything outside of it is incompatible and will therefore tend toward failure. It would take a global chain of revolutions to actually achieve a change in the dominant mode, I'm not arguing that communism is perfect as I believe all man made economic systems are never perfect, but it's a whole lot better than what we have now
A communist state would easily be toppled by a capitalist state. Capitalism is the natural state of man.

You cannot remove property rights in Islam anyways.
So might is right in your opinion? what about Vietnam?

And property is allowed in Islam the same way ice cream is, it's okay to have it but it's also okay not to
 
The dominant global mode of production is capitalism which even has its faults. Anything outside of it is incompatible and will therefore tend toward failure. It would take a global chain of revolutions to actually achieve a change in the dominant mode, I'm not arguing that communism is perfect as I believe all man made economic systems are never perfect, but it's a whole lot better than what we have now

So might is right in your opinion? what about Vietnam?

And property is allowed in Islam the same way ice cream is, it's okay to have it but it's also okay not to
Give me an example in history where nations or empires didn't impose their will onto weaker nations? Might is right in geopolitics and nation states.

And what about Vietnam?
 

Radical

Been there, done that
Might is literally right, what about Vietnam?

Don't tell me you think the won
"Who won the Vietnam war?
Objectively, North Vietnam – the communists – who achieved their goals of reuniting and gaining independence for the whole Vietnam won the war whereas South Vietnam under the U.S. support lost the war."
 
"Who won the Vietnam war?
Objectively, North Vietnam – the communists – who achieved their goals of reuniting and gaining independence for the whole Vietnam won the war whereas South Vietnam under the U.S. support lost the war."
I've edited my comment.
 

Radical

Been there, done that
I've edited my comment.
Anyway here's my problem with the might = right logic

Say a country like the US invaded Somalia and forcefully made people convert to Christianity, does that mean they have the true religion?
 
Top