use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~1 user here now
Taking Wealth From Those Who Work Hard
submitted 3 years ago by EndlessSunflowers from i.imgur.com
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 3 years ago (12 children)
Communism is; Not Socialism.
[–]Bigs 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (11 children)
No, it's just the end result of socialism
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago* (10 children)
It can't be because farmer co-opts are socialism and nothing about that is state enforced "ROYAL" communism? Socialism = the means of production is owned by the workers. It is only when a plutocracy, aristocracy, oligarchy, dictator, etc., enforces such isms through violence that it becomes communism or Marxist/leninism.
Before communism there was socialism and many of these socialistic sects included personal property.
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (9 children)
Communists themselves say socialism is the stepping stone.
Humans are naturally social, and live in communities. Don't confuse that for socialism and communism. Those 2 are ideologies, brain-viri that warp the thinking and perception of their victims.
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (8 children)
Marxist Lenninist bolsheviks do, yes, of course. Was National Socialism, based on some principals of socialism, much different than Mussoliniynism, communism? No. Many socialist thinkers were NOT communists.
Communism was a Jewish amalek ism to destroy edom and Esau. Many socialists before Marx, never preached communism and people like Proudhon among many others despised Marx and his Talmudic heritage. Of course, we now know that Talmudic Jews desired to destroy Amaleks.
Anything else, where the state corporation enforces measures, is communism.
Also, no ISM is inherently bad. Most are corporations either way.
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (7 children)
So what would you call the socialist countries around the world where the workers don't own the 'means of production' (and what does that even mean)?
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (2 children)
Ism's are corporations. Anyone telling you those countries are socialist are lying to you. Again, the definition of socialism is the means of production is owned by the workers. That doesn't enforce via state, the eradication of property like Bolshevik communists did to Amalek countries.
What countries today are 100% socialist? I don't know of any.
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
So you're of the "Oh that's not really communism" stripe eh?
OK, what word should we use for overly-left-wing places like Canada? Fuck would you call that?
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
Yeah, because Socialism is not communism and many socialists hated Marxist/Leninism which was simply Jewish revenge. Marx was related to the Rothschilds after all and grew up in a Talmudic family. There's even such a thing as Christian Socialism but REMEMBER, all isms are CORPORATIONS. So stay off my lawn and we're fine, right?
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (3 children)
From Quora:
Capitalists will say that socialism is the state owning the means of production, and that the stuff about workers is just fluffy rhetoric. Capitalism is corporatism, always. How 'free'-enterprise works is besdie the point. Al states that run on capitalism incorporate themselves.
Socialists will say that socialism is the workers owning the means of production, and that the stuff about the state is just one imperfect, some say detrimental way to implement it.
Different socialists have different opinions about this. Some socialists despise Marx and Marxism.
Marxist communists think that state ownership is a necessary step to build socialism (really communism). The state will be ruled by a socialist party, which will be a massive grassroots worker movement in which everyone gets to participate. (Turns out that was a lie and Bolsheviks took over and killed the peasants and workers.) When the workers finally have firm control over society the state will be unnecessary and “whither away.”
Anarcho-communists think that state ownership is a big mistake and that workers should instead own the means of production directly communally.
Syndicalists think that trade unions should own the means of production.
Mutualists / cooperatists think that worker cooperatives should own the means of production.
Social democrats think that socialists can simply regulate the capitalist economy to serve the needs of workers. (Other socialists believe modern social democrats are really just liberals.)
So there’s not really one answer.
I BELIEVE YOU SHOULD STAY OFF MY LAWN, so I can till my soil and stop manipulating my labor!!
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (2 children)
Well that's one thing you can say for the commie cunts; they love messing around with the language in order to control, confuse, cover and censor.
That's why I say it all comes down to a simple enough concept - are you for freedom or against it? Because no form of socialism/liberalism/otherism can survive let alone 'work' without forcing it upon people who (really fucking seriously) don't want it.
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
no form of socialism/liberalism/otherism can survive let alone 'work' without forcing it upon people who (really fucking seriously) don't want
Wrong, they are all merely isms. Socialism can work if the workers own the means of production and all agree to it VOLUNTARILY and locally under a decentralized system.
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
Can you point to an example of where it is working, cos I've never seen one?
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (12 children)
[–]Bigs 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (11 children)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (10 children)
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (9 children)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (7 children)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]Bigs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)