Reminder: socialism has never succeeded in any country in the history of mankind. Not one single time

Reminder: socialism has never succeeded in any country in the history of mankind. Not one single time.

For the intellectually crippled: schools, air and water aren't socialist. Neither is Sweden.

Attached: IMG_20190420_231610.jpg (1273x873, 186K)

Define the word "socialism".

Tell us what politicians are pushing your definition of socialism.

Socialism has never been tried on a large scale in any country in the history of mankind. The closest thing to socialism that has ever been implemented were in religious monasteries and hippie communes.

I like dictionaries. Useful inventions, honestly. Solid, reliable, consistent devices. Learn to fucking use one faggot.

Attached: IMG_20190411_221135.jpg (1080x1231, 274K)

Attached: FDR.png (637x616, 1.13M)

unless its welfare for the trump states

Attached: Trump voters.jpg (500x520, 53K)

>seething

Attached: 1553919014375.jpg (692x960, 45K)

facts will not deter OP from poster his version of Andy Sixx threads

Attached: republican suckers.png (640x618, 309K)

Russia and Venezuela. Don't try to say it was democratic socialism. It's still socialism even if the majority asked for it.

So communism is the same as socialism to you? Then explain why Russia wouldn't support AOC?

Oh wait... your emotions. Got it.

Kek

Attached: 1564452749744.gif (148x147, 1.06M)

Aoc isn't a socialist by the technical definition tho. She believes in capitalism

Yeah she just calls herself one but that's just for fun, right?

Attached: 1564463659610.jpg (750x732, 480K)

The point of socialism is to create communism. Socialism always leads to communism.

Socialism requires a stateless society. It has NEVER been done on any large scale.

communism is not the same as socialism
its why they created a whole separate word for it
thats how language works ya fuckin dingus

No, democratic socialism and socialism are different economic systems. Under social democracy owners control businesses and profit off them. Under true socialism, the workers control the business and profit. You're ignorance of the differences between these systems doesn't mean they're the same

It's political messaging

Slippery slope fallacy

Marxisttheory, thesocialist mode of production, also referred to aslower-stage of communism[1]or simplysocialismasKarl MarxandFriedrich Engelsused the termssocialismandcommunisminterchangeably

>try on small scale
>fails
>try again
>fails
>try again
>fails
>"it will work large scale"
>the actual liberal mind, folks

Attached: 1564450963908.png (439x399, 167K)

Why do all freshmen in college keep parroting this? It has been tried more than once. The reason it's not constantly a systematic failure is because it actually doesn't work on paper most countries are smart enough to understand that and go the mixed economy route.

Attached: 197960.jpg (716x618, 97K)

"Your facts do not match my emotions, therefore you're wrong. "
- Every Liberal in this thread

Attached: 1554189653909.jpg (620x387, 39K)

Idk I'm seeing unrefuted factual posts from leftists describing the differences between these economic systems that you can't even engage with

So?

US has been quasi socialist for nearly a century, it does work if you don’t give all the power to the rich. Which is exactly what is happening so we are all fucked.

Statism. Not Socialism.

>Interchangeably
Yes. One does not lead to the other, because they are one and the same, and has ever been tried.

They call themselves socialists all the time and their definition of socialism hasn't changed. What is your definition of socialism?

That wasn't real socialism. It'll work this time, I swear.

Attached: 1499619924619.gif (800x667, 1.23M)

>your definition of socialism
I know what your definition is

Attached: 4541621.jpg (656x492, 43K)

Almost no socialist country has failed due to socialism. They fail because America is afraid of communism and socialism, so they come in and intervene.

>Climb is not the same as ascend. It's why they created a whole separate word for it; that's how language works ya fuckin dingus.
>Right is not the same as dexter. It's why they created a whole separate word for it; that's how language works ya fuckin dingus.
>Fast is not the same as quick. It's why they created a whole separate word for it; that's how language works ya fuckin dingus.

Retard.

Marx and Engels referred to the concept as both in their lifetimes.

Even if it isn't socialism, calling it capitalism isn't wholly correct either. It's in no way a free market, and not all the wealth has been seized or made irrelevant. It's essentially a compromise between the two to make sure it doesn't collapse under the problems of either.

yeah
how come socialist country single handedly won the most horrible war in the history of mankind?
(france pussied out, britain sucked cocks, us basically did nothing and entered the war in the European continent only after the Stalingrad battle, otherwise the Soviet Union would have reached the shores of the Atlantic Ocean)

Attached: 145839281216895217.jpg (512x604, 92K)

>never worked

Attached: LmhX18ipDQM.jpg (960x823, 145K)

why the fuck u write like tat fukin retardd

>to make sure it doesn't collapse under the problems of either
What are the problems of capitalism again?

Attached: 1481743589020.jpg (850x1200, 159K)

>Socialist country
You mean statist.

There has never been a socialist or communist country. Call it what it is for clarity, or everyone will associate unrelated things together because you can call ANYTHING other than Laissez-faire capitalism (which also failed) communism/socialism.

Attached: 1481744585244.jpg (707x1000, 330K)

Exploitation. It cannot go unchecked or it abuses people. Thus regulation.

socialism isn't the problem. People are the problem

>Even if it isn't socialism, calling it capitalism isn't wholly correct either
You're right, it's all the benefits of capitalism with the added benefits of giving people's hard earned money to those who are fucking lazy and worthless. There's a reason Darwin introduced the concept of survival of the fittest. You can't love his idea of evolution without accepting his other idea's as well. The downfall of humans won't be rich people, it will be accepting all humans as equal members of society.

thats why the US Government has been outed so many times to be financing a socialist government overthrow then, huh?

Nazi Germany almost took over the world.

>it abuses people
see

>here has never been a socialist or communist country.
that depends on the defenition.
If you use the strict ortodox term of socialism than yes.
But you may make a selfsame statement that liberal democracies have never been successfully implemented. Becuase reality is complex and always confutes theoretical predictions some way or another.

>also
communist country is an oxymoron if you use the original marxist understanding of the term. Communism is a hypothetical formation of society in the formation theory that is characterized by classlessness and statelessness. There can be no communist country, since communism may only happened when classes and countries are abolished.

Attached: statelenin.jpg (850x400, 51K)

Attached: 1489769659161.jpg (859x597, 220K)

Pretty much.

On human life is inherently the same value as any other, and there is a "base value" (for lack of a better term) to every human.

What is drastically different are talents, skills, and lawfulness. These traits can have very extremely different values from one another and the value can change for most depending on the needs of a society. An individual can have any of these thus making them more or less valuable to society, but they are not aspects inherent to or exclusive to any people.
i.e. Let's say someone becomes a skilled doctor (medical). Their skill has a high value since it can save other lives. On the flip side, if said doctor is terrible (malpractice) or uses his knowledge for dark purposes (crime) then they become a burden rather than benefit to society and lose value.

Attached: ThatsThinkin.gif (480x270, 1.51M)

>Depends on the definition
And what would you define as Socialism/Communism because you have to REALLY stretch their meanings to get any 'communist' country to fit. At no point in modern history has the means of production been the property, nor under the control, of the community as a whole. You have to basically make the terms meaningless to call any place communist

>also
Wrong. You are correct that a communist society must be classless and stateless, but nation and state are not inextricably linked. A stateless nation could exist, provided those within it agreed that they were associated by nationhood. A Socialist/Communist nation is by no means an oxymoron.

>It's okay to abuse people if I decide they are lesser than me and use violence and oppression to subjugate them.
Exactly the problem.

americans have agendas pushed so hard down their throats that they think socialism is russian comunism.

France was socialist in the 70's. We were much more powerful than now.

We already have socialism - highways, bridges, tunnels, police, fire, military, public schools, etc. But we also have capitalism which owns our government, so the tax dollars earmarked for social programs is often diverted by corrupt officials.

Nazis weren't socialists.

Attached: 372D8B5C-E78D-4AA9-B4F7-DD6AE7F0C668.jpg (727x419, 65K)

You’re a good slave and your corporate overlords will be proud, if they happen to notice you.
Way to help them crush fair ideals and keep them in power.
You are a true patriot for the oligarchy, plutocracy, and kleptocracy.
Trump for king!

Attached: c78f125.png (793x641, 52K)

go back to /pol

Attached: 15643734387895.png (719x539, 466K)

You retards are still falling for Russian propaganda. Unreal.

The one form of government where the elected officials actually represented the people has been taught to us by our rulers that it's the worst form of government.

Things you wouldn't hear in a National Socialist society,

Jew: "Hi, I'm the new owner of Ford and we are going to a new plant in Mexico!"

Jew: "We're going to import a million sand niggers into the middle of Wisconsin!"

Jew: "We're going to give 38 billion to Israel and ask nothing in return!"

Jew: "If they are born here, they are automatic citizens!"

Attached: 1564182825527.png (530x687, 173K)

Then they think Russians support Trump??

Attached: 1553919035911.jpg (247x256, 42K)

Trump is a lie, while he's distracted everyone with border talk, Niggers and sand niggers have been pouring into our towns, where exactly did they come from?

We need a new government, our elected representatives DO NOT represent us.

Attached: 0b13gh.jpg (632x604, 137K)

Or embrace ACTUAL Communism, the thing that has never been tried and thus hasn't been proven to be a hateful shitshow like literally everything else.

Not that it'll work. Humans are inherently shit. The only solution is a benign dictatorship under a ruler who is immortal and fair and, as usual, that too is impossible, OR a mixed system with enough checks and balances in place to stop everyone shitting on each other, which naturally the Shitters of the day don't want and the Shittees want a reversal.

Shit shit shit.

National Socialism is the idea that your nation and your people come before all others. It's a very simple concept.

A leader under National Socialism would have to explain why they want to give 38 billion to Israel and how that will benefit all citizens of our country. Without an answer, it wouldn't happen. No world policing, no world financial aid, everything would have to benefit the people of your own country. Starving Africans, not your problem. Sand niggers want to fight hook nosed niggers, not your problem. Russia wants to fuck up the Ukraine, not your problem. Our entire military would be based at our borders under National Socialism, as that would be their only job.

Attached: 220681.jpg (1082x768, 498K)

ITT: Incels arguing about not wanting an education and healthcare.

>schools, air and water aren't socialist

Schools, paid for collectively for the common good, absolutely are. So are roads, the fire department, the police, and the military.

I don't know where you got "air" and "water."

>For the intellectually crippled: schools, air and water aren't socialist.
These things are not capitalist either, for that matter.

No one is actually suggesting actual socialism. Pure straw man copypasta.

>Neither is Sweden
And yet if anyone suggests we should have any degree of the shit they have in Sweden, you all start crying
>Socialisms!
Hence the meme.

Attached: _socialism_61668567_910487849336002_885374840549146624_n.png (341x960, 432K)