Why Communism Always Ends In Inequality

To have equality you must use state power to force equality which makes the state unequal to the people which makes inequality. Without a state no one has the will to remain equal. The human need to compete abolishes the state, classless society. Voluntary adherence to an undesirable situation is impossible.

Attached: cat-confused.jpg (500x491, 60.02K)

Other urls found in this thread:


True Communism isn't about equality. It's about eliminating the capitalist worker exploitation.

Well OK. Your goal is about to be rendered useless by automation.


If you're going to make a thread like this, at least learn what communism is first so you don't look retarded.

So, hypothetically, everything gets automated, which results in an increase of surplus/unneeded population. What happens with them? I have doubts if they will just lay down and rot.
inb4 welfare, welfare is only possible thanks to the taxation, but automation increases the number of people dependent on the handouts, while putting a further economic pressure on those still working. This, combined with the rate of profit being reduced due to the above-mentioned automation can ultimately result only in companies shitting themselves to death.

Attached: 1369723275783.jpg (492x500, 188.92K)

this is why you have to turn to discord for validation op you massive disappointment

OP did you ever read any actual communist texts

Attached: reactionaryass.jpg (480x360, 16.52K)

Attached: 1447021564933.jpg (740x740, 438.8K)

found the tankie

Are you literally thirteen?

How exactly the fuck does that make sense in your tiny reptilian brains?

Yeah it's kind of easy when you go take a nap. Getting old

Is not the goal of communism a classless society?

That's a fucking straw man. I never said that. Automation has it own problems to deal with but the struggle of the worker will no longer be an issue because all the worker will be robots.

You're not taking into account genetic engineering. We would produce a whole new class of high mental functioning adults. There would be less need for welfare if the average Autism Level was just about 130. We would all become the Bourgeois in that case and the robots the proletariat.

And what will all the now-unemployed people do? Just lie down and die?
You really are as stupid as a teenager, aren't you?

Attached: 95b0359b3369b488710b9bbe5b9d0a415cb0256fb7d65c053137a6a444fdd93b.jpg (600x600, 21.21K)

This right here was what I was originally responding to

You're putting words in my mouth you fucking filthy commie. Absolutely dishonest.

I meant this post.

Workers are people who work you fucking tool we weren't at all talking about people who do not work and therefore aren't workers.

Ah, so you actually are a teenager. Figures.
Stop embarrassing yourself. Please. I'm serious right now. I understand that you have opinions that you want to share, but in five years, or hell, weeks, from now on you will look back at yourself as you are in this moment, and you will cringe so hard, your face will break in two. Until it goes too far, just stop. Take a walk outside, think about who and where you want to be when you become old enough to legally buy alcohol, call your friends and chat them up. Just distract yourself from political stuff until you become old enough to actually comprehend it. Trust me, you won't regret following this advice.

There's nothing immature about scientific fact. It's easier than ever to edit genetics. In a generation with enough resources we could very well make everyone high IQ. 70% of Autism Level is genetic according to the average of the scientific studies I've read. We could vastly increase intelligence with only a small amount of knowledge on what exactly the genes associated with intelligence do. China is working on it.

Using an example you clearly understand yes. The robots are like exploited workers except the robots don't give a shit.

You're trying to shame me with this "lol you're a teenager if you try to predict the future" shit. Shut the fuck up you retarded commie, you have no right to judge me. Your legacy is failure and everything Communism and socialism touches turns to shit. You're extremely retaded and probably a teenager as well as leftism correlates with youth.

If we are going to use containment for anything, this idiocy needs to be at the top of the list.

You know, when I was a teenager, I went to post my insightful thoughts on politics on an imageboard, just like you did. I got told that I was too young to properly understand this stuff and that I should instead do my best to only just study politics in good faith and mature as a person in general before I could safely return to the subject, just like you did. The difference between you and me? I took that advice to heart.

Character attacks without addressing the substance of my argument at all. Fascinatingly retarded people on this board.

Address this or shut the fuck up.

How so? A company, be it fully automated or not, remains in private hands, so the products created in there will remain unavailable for most people without conducting an exchange on the market. If all jobs are indeed automated, those who don't have their own businesses companies would be shafted because they wouldn't be able to sell their labour power for wages. We don't have to mention the fact that everyone being a one man company is a pure fantasy that would immediately break down since the competition would quickly render the vast majority propertyless again. What's your solution? No, genetic engineering isn't an answer, because ">tfw to inteligent" GMO superhumans still need to do something to survive

It's pretty fucking important because the system breaks down if people are unable to reproduce their existence, no matter if they are feudal peasants, wage workers or permanently unemployed because muh robots.

Attached: 1345916484886.png (457x381, 265.07K)

People aren't on welfare because they're stupid, you fucking retard. They're on welfare because they have no fucking money.
No one is trying to shame you because every one of your retarded posts does that for us.

You're thinking of Capitalism my dude.

Automation doesn’t make labor unessicary, it just increases the amount of goods produced.

If all work is automated (which will probably never happen) worker exploitation can no longer exist.

Well yes that's an issue. I agree that's the only case where I would consider Communism. There may be other solutions though I haven't thought of. I think on it.

Addressing your second point. Yes they are also important. The fact remains though that they are not workers. I was simply pointing this out and half of you jumped down my throat about it.

Wrong again. They're on welfare because they have no job. It greatly increases your personal capital to be able to pick up new skills quickly which is governed by intelligence.

top brainlet gg


Yeah Venezuela is looking mighty nice this time of year. You should consider a visit.

It may make work itself obsolete. That's far in the future though. We'll slowly transition to that. At fist the large companies will automate because it's expensive but as it becomes cheaper the small companies will do it as well.

You're a dipshit and the world would be better off without you.

Nice strawman.

tl;dr Venezuelan government has about as much involvement in the economy as the Scandinavian countries; unless you claim that Denmark is a socialist st— wait, you probably do. Never mind, then.

Simply pointing a fact out is now stupid. I guess it would be in the soviet russia. To the gulags with you.

You didn't "point out a fact."

You failed to do this because you are stupid. I don't blame you for not realizing this, since you lack the requisite intelligence to understand that.

Scandinavian countries are not socialism they're mixed economies. Socialism doesn't respect the right to private property and nationalizes companies in Venezuela's case.

It is, shame I fell asleep during Spanish Class.

Full automation would be impossible without AI. And in such a scenario the AIs would just be the workers.

Then better figure it out first, this problem has been tackled since like third post ITT, and it's really fucking important, there isn't much point in internet slapfights until you fill that gap.
Unless you enjoy shit-flinging with that one overly emotional autismo.

People jumped on you because they've already had the problem of reproducing one's existence in mind(we had enough of such discussions by now) and yours posts made you like took a while to get on same wavelenght.

The "no the Communist countries weren't living hell on earth you fucking idiot" starter pack.



Attached: africa sphinx pharaoh statue.jpg (600x600, 315.32K)


Attached: 1280px-John_Frederick_Lewis_-_A_Bedouin_Encampment;_or,_Bedouin_Arabs_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (1280x862, 254.14K)


Attached: 8a9b35c2e0d99f2f46662594b6cfd0d3c65811d3b78ff0c180d4ae87d65e91d6.jpg (2500x1500, 493.8K)




Attached: Gizeh-Sphinx-de-profil.jpg (3264x2448, 3.51M)


Attached: Oedipus_And_The_Sphinx_A_Greek_Legend.jpg (576x837, 92.2K)


Attached: Sultan_Ahmed_Mosque.jpg (1536x1376, 310.01K)


After the first few days of euphoria, the workers returned to work and found themselves without responsible management. This resulted in the creation of workers' committees in factories, workshops and warehouses, which tried to resume production with all the problems that a transformation of this kind entailed. Owing to inadequate training and the sabotage of some of the technicians who remained many others had fled with the owners the workers' committees and other bodies that were improvised had to rely on the guidance of the unions…. Lacking training in economic matters, the union leaders, with more good will than success, began to issue directives that spread confusion in the factory committees and enormous chaos in production. This was aggravated by the fact that each union… gave different and often contradictory instruction.[14]

Attached: self portrait with stalin - frida kahlo.jpg (1197x1817, 774.75K)

If you didn't want to join the collective you were given some land but only as much as you could work yourself. You were not allowed to employ workers. Not only production was affected, distribution was on the basis of what people needed. In many areas money was abolished. People come to the collective store (often churches which had been turned into warehouses) and got what was available. If there were shortages rationing would be introduced to ensure that everyone got their fair share. But it was usually the case that increased production under the new system eliminated shortages.

In agricultural terms the revolution occurred at a good time. Harvests that were gathered in and being sold off to make big profits for a few landowners were instead distributed to those in need. Doctors, bakers, barbers, etc. were given what they needed in return for their services. Where money was not abolished a 'family wage' was introduced so that payment was on the basis of need and not the number of hours worked.

Production greatly increased. Technicians and agronomists helped the peasants to make better use of the land. Modern scientific methods were introduced and in some areas yields increased by as much as 50%. There was enough to feed the collectivists and the militias in their areas. Often there was enough for exchange with other collectives in the cities for machinery. In addition food was handed over to the supply committees who looked after distribution in the urban areas.[23]

Attached: Waterhouse_Hylas_and_the_Nymphs_Manchester_Art_Gallery_1896.15.jpg (2124x1317, 411.24K)


had the 2nd fastest growing economy of the 20th century the USSR is 2nd after Japan Source: artir.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/captura-de-pantalla-de-2016-05-26-10-15-23.png

had zero unemployment have continuous economic growth for 70 straight years. see: Robert C. Allen's, From Farm To Factory Source: citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi= (review of book here homepages.warwick.ac.uk/~syrbe/pubs/FarmtoFactory.pdf ). The "continuous" part should make sense – the USSR was a planned, non-market economy, so market crashes á la capitalism were pretty much impossible.

had zero homelessness. Houses were often shared by two families throughout the 20s and 30s – so unlike capitalism, there were no empty houses, but the houses were very full. In the 40s there was the war, and in the 50s there were a number of orphans from the war. The mass housing projects began in the 60s, they were completed in the 70s, and by the 70s, there were homeless people, but they often had genuine issues with mental health.

end famine have higher calorie consumption than USA Source: artir.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/compar1.png?w=640

. You can read more about the post-1941 famine history in Nove's An Economic History of the USSR 1917-1991. There were food insecurity issues, especially when Khrushchev et al. majorly fucked up with trade and resource dependence on the west, but no famines after the collectivisation of agriculture in the early 1930s (except for in the Siege of Leningrad).

end sex inequality Source: en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Soviet_Union_(1977,_Unamended) Equal wages for men and women were mandated by law, but sex inequality, although not as pronounced as under capitalism, was perpetuated in social roles. Very important lesson to learn.

end racial inequality Source: theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2016/jan/24/racial-harmony-in-a-marxist-utopia-how-the-soviet-union-capitalised-on-us-discrimination-in-pictures

make all education free Source: revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/PubEdUSSR.htm revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/anglosov.htm unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0000/000013/001300eo.pdf

99% literacy Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likbez

have most doctors per capita in the world Source: marxists.org/archive/newsholme/1933/red-medicine/index.htm The Soviet Union had the highest physician-patient ratio in the world, my notes say 42 per 10,000 population, vs 24 in Denmark and Sweden, 19 in US. In this document: sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0735675784900482 You can open it without paying with sci-hub.cc

eliminate poverty Source: gowans.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/we-lived-better-then/

Attached: wall in iceland.jpg (384x512, 26.36K)

double life expectancy Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Soviet_Union

After the October revolution, the life expectancy for all age groups went up. A newborn child in 1926-27 had a life expectancy of 44.4 years, up from 32.3 years thirty years before. In 1958-59 the life expectancy for newborns went up to 68.6 years. This improvement was seen in itself by some as immediate proof that the socialist system was superior to the capitalist system be 25 years away from reaching parity with Western world This is kind of a counterfactual – the transformation of the USSR to capitalism began a long time before 1991, so trying to figure out what Soviet growth would look like if it hadn't become capitalist requires that we root out the fundamental cause of the change to capitalism. And we can't even use US economic stats either – the mass-privatization of the Soviet economy and the sudden influx of cheap labour for Western capitalists obviously had an effect on the US economy. But then again, even a 1% difference will stack up over 25 years.

Now let's take a look at what happens after the USSR collapse:

GDP instantly halves Source: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Soviet_Union_GDP_per_capita.gif

42% decrease

40% of population drops into poverty Source: wsws.org/en/articles/2003/07/unpo-j28.html Article cites a 2003 UN report.

7.7 million excess deaths in the first year Source: academia.edu/1072631/Review_Red_Plenty_by_Francis_Spufford Really difficult to find this exact figure, original link I had was dead. Also: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC259165/

one in ten children now live on the streets Source: theglobeandmail.com/news/world/an-epidemic-of-street-kids-overwhelms-russian-cities/article4141933/

infant mortality increase Source: knoema.com/atlas/Russian-Federation/Nenets-Autonomous-District/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Infant-mortality-rate-deaths-before-age-1-per-1000-live-births Was 29.3 in 2003 which is around (current) Syria and Micronesia, 7.9 in 2013. Given the trend downwards, it was likely to have been much higher in the 90s. There's a weird amount of variation between years – I have no clue why. Infant mortality in USSR was 1.92, literally the lowest in the world. What the actual fuck. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Soviet_Union#Life_expectancy_and_infant_mortality

life expectancy decreases by 10 years Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#Life_expectancy
Approximately true for men, women were less affected apparently. i.stack.imgur.com/8Fj8E.png 1996 election rigged Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_presidential_election,_1996

Attached: Claude_Lorrain_embarcation of the queen of sheba.jpg (5559x4226, 6.61M)

am not one

and stateless too last I checked, hence voiding your entire spasm of stupidity.

Soviet Women Remember Socialism

Bulgaria 1965

Moscow 1965

Damn OP, you really pissed off that one guy, good job.

Anyway have a nice day. I'm going now.

What's the matter, faggot, can't handle all the facts?

Oh porky can't handle knowing what real socialism is?

go here

Can you give me 1 (o n e) quotation of Marx supporting equal incomes?

Thanks for the giggle. Stopped reading after that.