my fellow commrades this is fellow communism and socialism I have set up like if you want to join or dislike if you think communism and socialism is right or ignore this comment if you don't know what it means
I can say with certainty that 'Bad to the Bone' is not the national anthem of the USA, 'Sat Spangled Banner' is. On a side note, this video was not made from a neutral point of view.
Stupid propaganda. Show pictures of the holodomor and other commie genocides to fairly compensate the pictures of pollution and corruption as a consequence of capitalism. Otherwise I can't take this seriously.
Hammer and sickle + Stalin + gun versus $ = liquidation guaranteed "gun shots". This is Communism! Read Richard Wurmbrand's "Tortured for Christ" to get the real deal about Red control.
Funny. No mention of the over 100 million deaths caused by these Godless, communist scum in the last century. Such great successes as USSR, China, Cuba, Eastern Europe(which has flourished since shedding themselves of the soviet shit sandwich). You little 20-something fucktards need to speak with people who lived under communist rule.Ain'tnobody risking their lives to get to fucking cuba, comrade douchebags.
@Stickmodee Those are all examples of communism by name and not definition. That's like me painting a donkey black and white then parading around town offering zebra rides.
@illahham You're right. Communism by definition sounds like it should work. A utopian existence for mankind. However, in reality, it is slavery. Wake up, child. Godless communism ignores true human nature. Grow up and face the real world. History does not lie. You obviously have never lived in a commie country. Be careful what you wish for. You are going to get it.
@Stickmodee In reality it cannot be enforced by a government, and it is not slavery since you reap what you sow, hence the control and distribution of resources by those who produce it.
@Stickmodee if anything capitalism is literally slavery. Since you are bound by the necessity to survive and the only way to do so is to partake in the generation of capital.
@illahham Yeah. That's called a job. You need marketable skills and products to survive on spaceship Earth. You need to do this"work" thing to feed yourself and your family. I'm guessing your parents are college professors. Or, you're 12.
@illahham If anything, the anti-capitalist is required to engage in unbelievable stupidity in order to make a specious point. Slavery requires the application of coercion - but that does NOT exist in capitalism. The employer-employee relationship is entirely voluntary and mutually beneficial in every case. That reality requires human beings to engage in certain activities to survive is not coercion by anyone. And the notion that the only alternative is starvation is too imbecilic for words.
@Stickmodee true communism doesn't ignore human nature, it demands that people embrace benevolence and sacrifice rather than greed. It requires men to truly be virtuous.
@Stickmodee Communism has not been done right. It is the end result as I've said before. It has to be reached by an entire society or at least the workers on their own terms. Once you try to implement communism through government mandate the purpose is defeated and it is no longer communism but dictatorship.
@illahham You have just proven my point. An entire society will never agree to communism, because of love. Love of self. Love of family and providing them a future. A free economic society provides us all the opportunity to do the best we can for ourselves and our families. This provides goods and services that benefit others and their families. No govt. needed. It's called FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@Stickmodee That is not love, that is hubris. Love is humility. An unchecked free market only provides the means for making you a slave to your employer, hence the centuries of class warfare
@illahham Since the whole idiotic concept of historical structuralism in which the end result is communism has been no less debunked than the rest of Marxism, repeating such ignorance hardly helps your case. Dictatorship is the only possible outcome of ANY attempt to implement communism. Read Hayek's chapter in "The Road to Serfdom" entitled "How the Worst Get on Top" for a very basic assessment.
@Stickmodee There have been small pockets of communism, in the form of communes but never has it been achieved in a large scale society. Communism is not contradictory to human nature. Look up the Iroquois councils. The Iroquois shared their land, and worked their land together. Hunting was done together and shared with everyone. Communism is the most basic form of society.
@illahham There has never been a commune that has been ultimately successful being overwhelmingly small and short-lived (and the notion that there was ever such egalitarianism in pre-history doesn't survive scrutiny). Collectivism has failed in every attempt (the kibbutzim, the Mayflower Compact, Catalonia, Mondragon, American communes, etc.). Your "history" (snicker) of the Iroquois is likewise bovine fecal matter. The Iroquois had rather complex forms of property ownership as well.
@Stickmodee what we have now is the potential for an even higher level of communism due to technology, etc. If society could trace its roots in benevolence, humility and courtesy rather than wallow in greed and class warfare a true communism could be reached.
@illahham Since, of course, in the real world (something communists never seem to want to visit), the technology we have now is ENTIRELY the result of capitalism and there are no "roots" of benevolence, humility and courtesy to which we can "return" as there never existed in all of human history (or pre-history) any such society operating under such a system. Excise the pro-communist drivel and do some actual historical research for crying out loud.
@FletchforFreedom The Iroquois had no private property ownership. Everything was equally shared. Benevolence and humility were hallmarks of their society and it was quite successful. So successful the settlers would have starved to death if it weren't for them. But ignore that and bend the truth to fit your comfort zone.
@illahham The myth you repeat about the Iroquois was destroyed before you were born. The problem is that you rely on pro-socialist talking point websites arther than making even the most cursory attempt to read the actual hostorical literature. The myth of Native American communal ownership is given no credibility any more ... and with excellent reason. And self-interest has existed in every society since the beginning of Man.
@illahham Yes, Henry Morgan's anecdoal evidence is but one part of the whole. The well documented FACT is that the Iroqouis DID have private property, including in land, and only engaged in collective ownership in SOME properties and them ONLY in cases where the available land was so vast in comparison to the population that relative abundance exited. PLEASE do some actual research before you continue to undermine your position further.
@FletchforFreedom You still have nothing to say about the profit motive fucking up people's lives. I wonder what the ramapough mountain indians think about Ford putting profit before people.
@illahham I still have nothing to say about the profit motive fucking up people's lives becuase overwhelmingly it does not. That human beings acting in their own self-interest sometimes do so at the expense of others is certainly true. it is much more rare in the corporate world and much more common under socialist systems. Human nature is not a flaw of capitalism and no system can eliminate human nature. Anyone pretending communism alters this is an obvious fool.
@illahham In fact, the Iroqouis had private property ownership in LAND and only observed communal property ownership of other land, under the concept of usufruct, when and where land was in realtive abundance. In conditions of scarcity, land ownership was the norm and very little was treated communally. Even where it WAS operated communally, primacy of place was still given to special persons who had higher rights of use. ALL of this is easily looked up. I needn't ignore or bend anything.
@illahham Communal ownership has NEVER worked except in conditions of such abundance that the demand for land could easily be met without infringing on the demands of others. It had NOTHING to do with "benevolence" or "humility" and cannot possibly function in a world of real scarcity. So unless your plan is to wipe out 90% of humanity or more, pretending that a communal system could ever possibly be viable is inherently dishonest.
@illahham As ALL resources are finite, they are, by definition, scarce. Capitalism cannot "impose" scarcity as it already exists. The price mechanism simply makes it possible to allocate resources in a manner that best meets consumer needs.
@FletchforFreedom no. that is slavery when there is a price on everything. It is slavery when a corporation is considered a legal person. You do not control if your family eats they do because where will the money come from to feed your family?
@illahham Legal personhood for corporations is an issue that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. It changes nothing, is not an aspect of capitalism and it has no bearing on the issues under discussion. On;y obvious liars resort to the "no choice but to starve" analogy. People get the resources they need to survive the same way they did when humans were new - they WORK for them and, under capitalism, they have to do far LESS work to get them.
@illahham Slavery is INVOLUNTARY servitude. No one is forced to work for another. In fact, under capitalism, literally millions of people have chisen to work successfully for themselves. There is nothing coercive about the fact that people do not have replicators servibg their every need so that people must undertake actual effort to obtain the necessities of life. Complain to Nature about that if you want; it's no corporation's fault.
@FletchforFreedom The technology we have is entirely the result of capitalism? You are bold. You credit the ingenuity of the individual to capitalism and not the virtue of men.
@illahham Modern technology cannot coem into being without the division of labor and a monetary system (complete with prices) that is unequivocally required to bring them into existence. Ingenuity can envision all sorts of things but modern machinery, medicines, etc. all require capitalism to advance beyond the idea stage.
@CommieDemocraticMMD And not if the Mighty Thor and Captain America create a governmnet either. The problem is that the possibility that "true communism" could come in has been utterly and completely disproved, which is why every example has been a totalitarian disaster. And America is BECOMING the worst example of capitalism, but historically the embrace of capitalism is precisely why the US became an economic powerhouse.
@FletchforFreedom what is so different about modern technology and ancient technology other than creativity, curiosity and prior knowledge and building on that knowledge? Did cavemen sell their rock tools and bone shanks? Communism is the absence of that material motive."From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Is it a bad thing to compel people to take the dick out their ass?
@illahham No form of ancient technology could not be developed by an individual or two and placed into use. A jet aircraft requires the work of hundreds of people creating things that have no use except as part of the aircraft and for which there is no market except as part of the aircraft when it is complete. It cannot come into existence without the division of labor and the price mechanism.
@illahham It is NOT an assumption. Demonstrably, absent prices, efficient resource allocation is impossible (the economic calculation problem), remuneration of workers is disconnected from the ability to create products that cannot generate a return until far into the future and basic economic incentives are destroyed such that productive labor is eschewed in favor of the more "fulfilling". There isn't anything debatale about the inability of a money-less system to create modern technology.
@illahham Since communism has been proved objectively impossible (and never existed in primitive society - that myth haveing likewise been completely obliterated) it will remain undebatable. The ability to allocate economic resources cannot be accomplished in the absence of prices. THAT much has been tried; it is an integral part of communism, and it is completely unworkable.
@illahham The stupid notion that "communism is the absence of that material motive" is a key reason why it's objectively impossible. As E. O. Wilson famously put it, "Great idea; worng species". Any system that defies human nature is doomed to failure and the inescapable fact is that self-interest is an overriding part of human nature.
And, no, it's NOT a bad thing. I keep suggesting that communists do precisely that - it interferes with their thinking.
@illahham The problem with your position is that you are foolishly pretending that there is a difference between the monetary sense and any other. Money does NOT cause greed or scarcity or anything else. It is neither more nor less than a means of facilitiating exchange and storing value so that resource allocation is more efficient and savings are possible to the benefit of literally everyone.
@illahham Money does not cause, amplify, alter, interfere with or in any other way alter human motivations. It doesn;t create or facilitate or reward greed and never has. Money was one of the great innovations that made modern society possible by facilitating trade between individuals, permitting saving and allowing capital allocation to things that could create modern technology. To abandon a monetary system is to abandon all of those benefits along with it.
@FletchforFreedom That contrast. The material motive. is what makes it a system of exploitation. You automatically create a class system with a definite and clear oppressor. You are bound to him by your necessity to survive because there is a price on the things you need to survive and you call that freedom?
@illahham No such contrast exists. It is because human beings engage in puersuing their self-interest that (in the dynamic described as the "invisible hand") production takes place for mutual benefit such that goods and services are made available and employment opportunities are created that are mutually beneficial and lead to societal prosperity. The Marxian notion of "expoloitation" is only believed by mental midgets at this point (having been long disproved).
@FletchforFreedom You're saying there is no motive in communism. The motive to provide for yourself and your family is not removed. You are still compelled to work but you won't starve if you can't.
@illahham I'm saying human motives do not cahnge at ALL under ANY economic system. And history has shown unequivocally that capitalism has done more (by several orders of magnitude) to prevent people starving than any other alternative. Voluntary charitable giving fits well within a capitalist framework and has always performed better than any state or collective means of providing charity.
@illahham Yes, actually they are. Capitalism is the exercise of the power of ownership over the means of production privately. It can take place individually or in common cause (while individual ownership is still several) but not under the auspices of the state. It is, in short, the free market ... and always has been.
@illahham I never cease to be amazed at how disconnected from reality some can be that they actually believe that an inescapable real world phenomenon (scarcity) is somehow imposed on them by others or a price system. It's pure imbecility. Prices do not create scarcity. Scarcity pre-exists everything. Prices merely show how items are realtively demnaded by consumers in the presence of scarcity. This is not oppression any more than your need to sleep is. It is simple reality.
@FletchforFreedom Prices make scarcity profitable. And since you say that material motive is just part of human nature. It is inevitable there will be a level of exploitation and greed.
@illahham Prices make NOTHING profitable. The price is the point where someone is willing to part with something and another is willing to part with what they have to obtain it. Nothing more. It is vastly superior to barter and the price makes it possible to determine the most efficient way of allocating resources. Self-interest is an unavoidable aspect of human nature. It is not "greed" and, again, absent force (which is not part of capitalism), exploitation cannot - and does not - exist.
@illahham We both know no such thing. Again, arxian exploitation has been completely debunked. It doesn't exist. Exploitation cannot occur in the free market because if coercion is applied it is not free. The employer and employee agree on a wage that is mutually beneficial (the employer gets production greater than the labor cost and the laborer gets more than he could otherwise obtain). It is the notion that there is any "exploitation" in this that is pure equine fecal matter.
@illahham You contradict yourself completely. First you say that comunism doesn't ignore human nature and then say it demands that people embrace benevolence and sacrifice. These are two mutually exclusive positions. It is not "greed" but self-interest that is a fundamental aspect of human nature as demonstrated by every facet of every moment of all of human history. Any system ignoring THAT is doomed to failure (hence the impossibility of communism).
@illahham That those examples were not communism is only because theoretical communism is so contrary to human nature that it is an objective impossibility. Moreover, since the things on which it is based, the labor theory of value, the Marxian theory of exploitation and the viability of a collectivist economy absent prices have been flatly disproved (that's not speculation or opinion - merely fact), no other outcome was possible.
@FletchforFreedom wrong. Capitalism is a system based on the exploitation of labor. Adam Smith warned it could lead to great inequality. Because it has, and there are more poor than rich the people will turn to socialist policies because the illusion of the American dream, the thought that one can move up in class, is dying with the disappearance of the middle class. Capitalism in a democracy is the precursor to socialism and communism.
@illahham Sigh. Clearly you've never READ Adam Smith who NEVER said any such thing and described the free market as a system of "perfect liberty". The whole concept of Marxian exploitation was completely debunked (along with the rest of Marxism) long before you were born. The canard about the disappearing middle class only serves to make those repeating it prove their ignorance - while income mobility remains string and a third of those in the bottom 20% will eventually reach the top 20%.
@FletchforFreedom If you have read Smith he does say, "capitalism doesn't just generate wealth, it could create huge inequality, making some very rich and others very poor."
@illahham Smith, who never used the word "capitalism" NEVER said any such thing either. He allowed that a free market makes extremes of wealth possible he noted it could lift everyone - which it did.
@illahham Capitalism has resulted in 300 years of steady improvement in compensation, working conditions and living standards, particularly for workers. Marx has been DEBUNKED.
@FletchforFreedom the free market didn't improve living standards or working conditions. The progressive movement and labor unions did, those are elements of socialism.
@illahham Neither the progressive movement or unions had ANYTHING to do with it. Engels wasn't credible in 1844 and his work was completely discredited by historians. Compensation and working conditions improved fastest where union activity was LEAST (primarily in the US) including bringing child labor to an effective end BEFORE state or union intervention. This is easily checked recorded history - not socialist fairy tales.
@illahham Actually, the system was better and cheaper before wage and price freezes during WWII encouraged businesses to offer benefits as an alternative. Yet another governmnet failure.
@FletchforFreedom Do some research about what happened to the Ramapough mountain indians of NJ, and you will see plain and clear that capitalism allows and encourages the exploitation of people.
@illahham Capitalism doesn't make people saints (any more than socialism does). That said, it is no accident that correlation between the adoption of capitalism and a cleaner environmnet is HUGELY positive. And, repeating the long debunked "exploitation" nonsense doesn't magically make it any less idiotic.
@illahham History demonstrates that the environment was getting cleaner LONG before the EPA. Tree stocks had increased since the 20s. Water was cleaner, etc. Nice try.
@illahham What actually occurred is that the prosperity resulting from capitalism made it possible for people who had more urgent demands met to consider the environment. THAT is capitalism.
@FletchforFreedom all after the presence of labor laws. Don't say capitalism is responsible for a cleaner environment. That's just glossy bullshit and you know it.
@illahham No, o factually challenged one. EVERY thing that I have described occurred BEFORE or even in the complete ABSENCE of labor laws having ANY effect whatsoever. Compensation rose, working conditions improved, days shortened all by the private sector in order to attract the best workers. And if you wish to call facts you don't like "glossy bullshit", I've come to expect nothing less from ignorant Marxists.
@FletchforFreedom it is glossy bullshit. I guess you're going to ignore things like bosses putting chains on the doors of their factories to keep production up. I'm sure you know about the triangle shirtwaist fire. Now was it capitalism that improved factory working conditions?
@illahham Now all you've demonstrated is that you're a liar as well. Setting aside the fact that you are cherry picking rare cases (when, in fact, the horrors under every attempt to implement communism have been far worse), but you mishcaracterize things - the doors were locked because of "pilferage" (theft), not to "increase productivity". And it is an indisputable FACT that capitalism improved factory working conditions steadily and substantially over more than a century.
@FletchforFreedom Or how about the working conditions for Apple's workers in China? Or the shoemakers in Bishan? Where they work with toxic benzene based glues without gloves, masks or proper ventilation and thousands have gotten sick. Is capitalism working in their favor?
@illahham In actual FACT, the working conditions in China were FAR worse and have been improving steadily. China's decades of abandoning capitalism have placed them (and their workers) in conditions several decades behind what have been achieved in capitalist countries and things take time to change. It is the FAILURE to adopt capitalism sooner that has caused these problems as anyone with an IQ above that of pulverized coprolite can figure out.
@FletchforFreedom you refuse to acknowledge the fact that the workers' necessity to survive outweighs the benevolence of the employer. Without labor laws to prevent exploitation there is nothing stopping people from willingly accepting slave like conditions in order to survive.
@illahham Me? A Marxist? I said nothing about private ownership being bad or that I want to get rid of it. Just because I think you're out of touch with reality doesn't make me a communist.
@illahham I don't refuse to acknowldege anything. I am simply not so incredibly stupid as to believe that, absent the "benevolence" of the employer, compensation and working conditions do not improve. ALL employers create jobs in THEIR own interest. Compensation and working conditions improve (and history demonstartes this as a fact) as employers compete to attract the best workers. It is why the improvement took place ENTIRELY without union or state intervention.
@illahham In fact, it's no accident that, at one time, the ONLY steel mill in the country with an 8 hr day was a NON-union shop (and this was before labor laws). It also has a hospital for workers and their families (that also served the town) and offered college courses in metallurgy and similar subjects to employees for free. It did this (as did the rest of the private sector which came up with ALL these things first) in order to attract the best workers. Your anecdotes FAIL badly.
@FletchforFreedom You see the exploitation today. Apple gets a 65% profit margin manufacturing in china. It can afford to manufacture here and still have a 50% margin but it doesnt
@illahham At which point more resources would be expended on the product, economic efficiency would shrink and fewer jobs would be created. Try reading an economic book before proving so foolish.
@FletchforFreedom NO. Not for the people of Apple's biggest market,America. They hire less than 50k in the US. Outsourcing manufacturing to china doesn't create more jobs here. Just cheap labor there.
@illahham Except, of course, in teh REAL world, more jobs are INsourced into the US than are outsourced and those jobs are, on average, higher paying. Economic efficiency, such as that resulting from reduced production costs is what creates jobs. So, as usually, the facts are entirely against you.
@FletchforFreedom Industrialization is the cause for that.But what about a post industrialized country? wages in America for the middle class havent moved since the 70s, that is a fact.
@illahham That Smith outlined what is essentially free market capitalism is true. He also denounced the intervention of the state or organizations that took the role of labor unions (guilds), described it as an avenue toward "perfect ;iberty" and clearly established that the state intervention (socialism/mercantilism) was the problem and no protection for workers was needed beyond getting the interventiopn out of the way.
@FletchforFreedom Reality says differently. Necessity to earn a living outweighs benevolence of the employer. As was evident when unions went on strike and factories just hired non union workers.
@illahham Jobs are created when the benefit the worker returns exceeds the cost. The end result is opportunities that wouldn't otherwise exist that make BOTH parties better off.
@illahham In ACTUAL fact, total compensation has increased steadily and substantially both since the beginning of the industrial revolution and since the 1970s. What happened, as anyone with a grasp of economics knows, is that more compensation was demanded in the form of benefits. Health care costs were the primary driver of inflation and they are primarily paid for with benefits. The middle class stagnation myth has been LONG debunked.
@illahham It is addressing the bald-faced lie that workers stagnted or were worse off because they drew compensation in the form of benefits and, in reality, had more disposable income as a result.
@illahham In communism, there are NO rich but the party members(see unions) Capitalism is no more than economic freedom. Where freedom exists without morals, greed can take hold. Where totalitarianism exists without morals, that is communism.
@Stickmodee in true communism there is no rich or poor. Everyone is equal hence the classless Iroquis who were anarcho-communists, the purest form of communism.
@Blazestalker100 Capitalism is no more than economic freedom. What most disagree with is greed. I agree also.Where freedom exists, so must true morals. Communism is not economis(or any) freedom, and tyrannical greed.
Why should people do all the work just so the 1% can live so well, and we go with out and suffer so much? Why are they the only ones allowed to profit? Do not works sacerfice their very lives blood sweat and tears, our very life energy so they can profit so much. They will not even pay us enough to buy a home, or car or support a family feed our kids and save for the future.
@AdamWeith Yeah, it doesn't matter that Stalin is dead, and that millions of people died under his leadership. People like you should go find an Island to stay on, so you can form another collective regime, and lay witness to the starvation caused by totalitarian leadership.
Waste of life troll. You are a flea on the dick of society. Go read a fucking book.
Why If Capitalism then it is USA? Because I know that Capitalism existed before the U.S was created And In modern world Russia is more capitalist than USA
@scootamenadianeloo Well socialism is the worst solution. People havent noticed but there has been a world wide trend to move towards larger government, less freedoms, higher taxes. The USA in particular has suffered terribly from the affects of an ever growing government. As the government has expanded there, class mobility has dropped, immigrants can no longer work their way up, the nation has been bankrupted. Do you want more of that to happen?
The Soviet union was not good by any means but they kept the world stable, now there is nothign to balance America so they can just go around killign everyone.
We need a new Soclialist governemnt. A Governemnt with its power spread over people who deserve it such as doctors making choices about hospitals and professors making choices about education!
Made from a neutral viewpoint but not playing the US national anthem at all and only showing pictures of bikers and weirdos. Then when the Soviet anthem comes it's picture after picture of Stalinst propaganda. This is not neutral at all, this is pro-Communist propaganda.
@AdamWeith Yup, the CIA now pays unknown youtube posters to follow their agenda...to be honest it's not much. If the Commies pay more let me know - I'm look for a new house so could use some extra cash.
It's a shame the Soviet Union collapsed, America wouldn't be running around like they own the world if the Soviets were still here...They were what kept the world in order, Russia needs to rise into a superpower again.
"BOTH" have been CREATED by the same Hidden Psychopathic Pathological LYING Zionist/Jews/European Aristocracy for "Fine-Tuning" Their "New World (ENSLAVING) Order" Who Wrote OUR Hi(S)tory Books and Control the Media as well as Our Governments/Banking and every major Industry in the WORLD? and Why isn't this Common Knowledge? "Harley Davidson?" NOT Who you may think controls it! Do a little research as it ALL connects back to "Parasites!" Want to know more? Go to: wake-upbeforeitstoolate(dot)com
As for someone who is against religious collectivism and war, I can't say I've exactly 'conformed' to all american values. But the natural driving force of selfishness that I have felt flow through my veins since childhood propels me to a different conclusion, one that I've come to after engaging in many debates, reading many books, and tuning out to what parents and teachers want me to hear. It is this. I live for me. My well-being comes before anything else. No separate mind, no existence.
If this is neutral I'm a fat guy in a tutu. Really, pictures of Motorcycle Riders and anti capitalism propaganda IS the idea you have of capitalism? XDDD
HILARIOUS!! I love how the anthem, which few Soviets knew the words to because Stalin wrote it and then fell out of favor shows the "might and power" of a country that no longer exists because its unsustainable economy collapsed!
"No longer exists"? What are you talking about? Are you living in some kind of fantasy world?
The Soviet Union is as strong as ever, and is 10 years from reaching the 100 year mark. The economy prospers, the people are happy and it is steadily expanding and freeing more and more countries from the evils of capitalism.
Are you really this uninformed and secluded from the rest of the world in the US!?
@AdamWeith The soviet union collapsed in 1991 and now its just Russia, the soviet union no longer exists because of communism. Russia isnt stronger then ever, they have only one navy fleet and the united states has eleven. Thanks to the EVILS of capitalism, get your facts right because you rant. In other words GO FUCK YOUR ASS THROUGH YOUR FACE YOU COMMUNIST LOVING PIECE OF SHIT
@AdamWeith You have probably never read a single piece of literature on either capitalism or communism. You speak nonsense, and all of the people who have liked your comment are either trolls or severely misled.
@AdamWeith First of all. Soviet union was capitalist country. Every country is capitalist, No society can function without some form of capital, And they didn't prosper nearly as well since the capital was controlled by bureaucrats and brought in a monopolistic manner with no competitors. If you look at the wealth and standard of living. It was FAR higher in the U.S than it was in russia. Because companies had to compete with eachother.
@AdamWeith I'd say the U.S has done a better job in the objectives that the soviets wanted to achieve in terms of equality. Because ANY society that aims for equality will not have equality. Is it fair that one person is born blind and the other is not?
@AdamWeith Why do you think communism works you ignorant fool.
MrConservative95 18 hours ago
@MrConservative95
Because you are Mr Conservative 95. Pleased to meet you.
I'm Mr Unserious Clown 93. May you live long and prosper, comrade.
AdamWeith 43 minutes ago
my fellow commrades this is fellow communism and socialism I have set up like if you want to join or dislike if you think communism and socialism is right or ignore this comment if you don't know what it means
wowawsome1 22 hours ago
My father is comunist, my grandfather is capitalist
MrXXXfiles 1 day ago
Adam smith and karl marx were both gentle santa clauses
RedOctober1922 1 day ago
both suks
MrXXXfiles 2 days ago
Stalin, the peaceful. I dont understand why some capitalists said he killed millions of people.
STALIN WAS MOTHER TERESA, OK? Stalin said: "Killing people with mustache is wrong". He was a genious LOL
trifulquita15 3 days ago
The likes represent Capitalist
The dislikes represent Communist
lol.
parakeetman22 3 days ago
Its not communism vs capitalism .its more like america vs russia .
masterkaran4u 4 days ago
@skiingman97
lol, good one...
Kukainis 4 days ago
I can say with certainty that 'Bad to the Bone' is not the national anthem of the USA, 'Sat Spangled Banner' is. On a side note, this video was not made from a neutral point of view.
kevWilson1994 5 days ago
VIVA STALIN!!!
AldoAlonso89 5 days ago
from YOU according to YOUR ability, to ME according to MY needs
fountainherz 6 days ago
That is NOT the American anthem because I AM AMERICAN.
UdgieLad 1 week ago
Stupid propaganda. Show pictures of the holodomor and other commie genocides to fairly compensate the pictures of pollution and corruption as a consequence of capitalism. Otherwise I can't take this seriously.
dekippiesip 1 week ago
Hammer and sickle + Stalin + gun versus $ = liquidation guaranteed "gun shots". This is Communism! Read Richard Wurmbrand's "Tortured for Christ" to get the real deal about Red control.
Jerry2Murray 1 week ago
Funny. No mention of the over 100 million deaths caused by these Godless, communist scum in the last century. Such great successes as USSR, China, Cuba, Eastern Europe(which has flourished since shedding themselves of the soviet shit sandwich). You little 20-something fucktards need to speak with people who lived under communist rule.Ain'tnobody risking their lives to get to fucking cuba, comrade douchebags.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@Stickmodee Those are all examples of communism by name and not definition. That's like me painting a donkey black and white then parading around town offering zebra rides.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham You're right. Communism by definition sounds like it should work. A utopian existence for mankind. However, in reality, it is slavery. Wake up, child. Godless communism ignores true human nature. Grow up and face the real world. History does not lie. You obviously have never lived in a commie country. Be careful what you wish for. You are going to get it.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@Stickmodee In reality it cannot be enforced by a government, and it is not slavery since you reap what you sow, hence the control and distribution of resources by those who produce it.
illahham 1 week ago
@Stickmodee if anything capitalism is literally slavery. Since you are bound by the necessity to survive and the only way to do so is to partake in the generation of capital.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Yeah. That's called a job. You need marketable skills and products to survive on spaceship Earth. You need to do this"work" thing to feed yourself and your family. I'm guessing your parents are college professors. Or, you're 12.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@illahham If anything, the anti-capitalist is required to engage in unbelievable stupidity in order to make a specious point. Slavery requires the application of coercion - but that does NOT exist in capitalism. The employer-employee relationship is entirely voluntary and mutually beneficial in every case. That reality requires human beings to engage in certain activities to survive is not coercion by anyone. And the notion that the only alternative is starvation is too imbecilic for words.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@Stickmodee true communism doesn't ignore human nature, it demands that people embrace benevolence and sacrifice rather than greed. It requires men to truly be virtuous.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Oh, so communism just hasn't been done RIGHT yet?
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@illahham When has that occured? Communism FORCES adherence. True benevelence and sacrifice are FREELY given. Can you see the difference?
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@Stickmodee Communism has not been done right. It is the end result as I've said before. It has to be reached by an entire society or at least the workers on their own terms. Once you try to implement communism through government mandate the purpose is defeated and it is no longer communism but dictatorship.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham You have just proven my point. An entire society will never agree to communism, because of love. Love of self. Love of family and providing them a future. A free economic society provides us all the opportunity to do the best we can for ourselves and our families. This provides goods and services that benefit others and their families. No govt. needed. It's called FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@Stickmodee That is not love, that is hubris. Love is humility. An unchecked free market only provides the means for making you a slave to your employer, hence the centuries of class warfare
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Since the whole idiotic concept of historical structuralism in which the end result is communism has been no less debunked than the rest of Marxism, repeating such ignorance hardly helps your case. Dictatorship is the only possible outcome of ANY attempt to implement communism. Read Hayek's chapter in "The Road to Serfdom" entitled "How the Worst Get on Top" for a very basic assessment.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@Stickmodee There have been small pockets of communism, in the form of communes but never has it been achieved in a large scale society. Communism is not contradictory to human nature. Look up the Iroquois councils. The Iroquois shared their land, and worked their land together. Hunting was done together and shared with everyone. Communism is the most basic form of society.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham There has never been a commune that has been ultimately successful being overwhelmingly small and short-lived (and the notion that there was ever such egalitarianism in pre-history doesn't survive scrutiny). Collectivism has failed in every attempt (the kibbutzim, the Mayflower Compact, Catalonia, Mondragon, American communes, etc.). Your "history" (snicker) of the Iroquois is likewise bovine fecal matter. The Iroquois had rather complex forms of property ownership as well.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@Stickmodee what we have now is the potential for an even higher level of communism due to technology, etc. If society could trace its roots in benevolence, humility and courtesy rather than wallow in greed and class warfare a true communism could be reached.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Blah. Blah, Blah. Good luck in your future of communist slavery. I hope you don't live in the US. Goodbye.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@illahham Since, of course, in the real world (something communists never seem to want to visit), the technology we have now is ENTIRELY the result of capitalism and there are no "roots" of benevolence, humility and courtesy to which we can "return" as there never existed in all of human history (or pre-history) any such society operating under such a system. Excise the pro-communist drivel and do some actual historical research for crying out loud.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom The Iroquois had no private property ownership. Everything was equally shared. Benevolence and humility were hallmarks of their society and it was quite successful. So successful the settlers would have starved to death if it weren't for them. But ignore that and bend the truth to fit your comfort zone.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham The myth you repeat about the Iroquois was destroyed before you were born. The problem is that you rely on pro-socialist talking point websites arther than making even the most cursory attempt to read the actual hostorical literature. The myth of Native American communal ownership is given no credibility any more ... and with excellent reason. And self-interest has existed in every society since the beginning of Man.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Destroyed before I was born? So you discredit the primary sources from men who witnessed it like Henry Morgan?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Yes, Henry Morgan's anecdoal evidence is but one part of the whole. The well documented FACT is that the Iroqouis DID have private property, including in land, and only engaged in collective ownership in SOME properties and them ONLY in cases where the available land was so vast in comparison to the population that relative abundance exited. PLEASE do some actual research before you continue to undermine your position further.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom You still have nothing to say about the profit motive fucking up people's lives. I wonder what the ramapough mountain indians think about Ford putting profit before people.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham I still have nothing to say about the profit motive fucking up people's lives becuase overwhelmingly it does not. That human beings acting in their own self-interest sometimes do so at the expense of others is certainly true. it is much more rare in the corporate world and much more common under socialist systems. Human nature is not a flaw of capitalism and no system can eliminate human nature. Anyone pretending communism alters this is an obvious fool.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham In fact, the Iroqouis had private property ownership in LAND and only observed communal property ownership of other land, under the concept of usufruct, when and where land was in realtive abundance. In conditions of scarcity, land ownership was the norm and very little was treated communally. Even where it WAS operated communally, primacy of place was still given to special persons who had higher rights of use. ALL of this is easily looked up. I needn't ignore or bend anything.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham Communal ownership has NEVER worked except in conditions of such abundance that the demand for land could easily be met without infringing on the demands of others. It had NOTHING to do with "benevolence" or "humility" and cannot possibly function in a world of real scarcity. So unless your plan is to wipe out 90% of humanity or more, pretending that a communal system could ever possibly be viable is inherently dishonest.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom what is there a scarcity of?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham As ALL resources are finite, they are, by definition, scarce. Capitalism cannot "impose" scarcity as it already exists. The price mechanism simply makes it possible to allocate resources in a manner that best meets consumer needs.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom no. that is slavery when there is a price on everything. It is slavery when a corporation is considered a legal person. You do not control if your family eats they do because where will the money come from to feed your family?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Legal personhood for corporations is an issue that has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. It changes nothing, is not an aspect of capitalism and it has no bearing on the issues under discussion. On;y obvious liars resort to the "no choice but to starve" analogy. People get the resources they need to survive the same way they did when humans were new - they WORK for them and, under capitalism, they have to do far LESS work to get them.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham Slavery is INVOLUNTARY servitude. No one is forced to work for another. In fact, under capitalism, literally millions of people have chisen to work successfully for themselves. There is nothing coercive about the fact that people do not have replicators servibg their every need so that people must undertake actual effort to obtain the necessities of life. Complain to Nature about that if you want; it's no corporation's fault.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom capitalism has imposed scarcity by putting a price on everything
illahham 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom The technology we have is entirely the result of capitalism? You are bold. You credit the ingenuity of the individual to capitalism and not the virtue of men.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Modern technology cannot coem into being without the division of labor and a monetary system (complete with prices) that is unequivocally required to bring them into existence. Ingenuity can envision all sorts of things but modern machinery, medicines, etc. all require capitalism to advance beyond the idea stage.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Not if True Communism comes in, but of course you stick to the fake examples. America is the WORST example of Communism, nuff said.
CommieDemocraticMMD 1 week ago
@CommieDemocraticMMD And not if the Mighty Thor and Captain America create a governmnet either. The problem is that the possibility that "true communism" could come in has been utterly and completely disproved, which is why every example has been a totalitarian disaster. And America is BECOMING the worst example of capitalism, but historically the embrace of capitalism is precisely why the US became an economic powerhouse.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom I MEANT AMERICA IS THE WORST EXAMPLE OF CAPITALISM Lol.
CommieDemocraticMMD 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom what is so different about modern technology and ancient technology other than creativity, curiosity and prior knowledge and building on that knowledge? Did cavemen sell their rock tools and bone shanks? Communism is the absence of that material motive."From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Is it a bad thing to compel people to take the dick out their ass?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham No form of ancient technology could not be developed by an individual or two and placed into use. A jet aircraft requires the work of hundreds of people creating things that have no use except as part of the aircraft and for which there is no market except as part of the aircraft when it is complete. It cannot come into existence without the division of labor and the price mechanism.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom That is an assumption.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham It is NOT an assumption. Demonstrably, absent prices, efficient resource allocation is impossible (the economic calculation problem), remuneration of workers is disconnected from the ability to create products that cannot generate a return until far into the future and basic economic incentives are destroyed such that productive labor is eschewed in favor of the more "fulfilling". There isn't anything debatale about the inability of a money-less system to create modern technology.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom there is nothing debatable about it because communism has not been tried in modern society.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Since communism has been proved objectively impossible (and never existed in primitive society - that myth haveing likewise been completely obliterated) it will remain undebatable. The ability to allocate economic resources cannot be accomplished in the absence of prices. THAT much has been tried; it is an integral part of communism, and it is completely unworkable.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham The stupid notion that "communism is the absence of that material motive" is a key reason why it's objectively impossible. As E. O. Wilson famously put it, "Great idea; worng species". Any system that defies human nature is doomed to failure and the inescapable fact is that self-interest is an overriding part of human nature.
And, no, it's NOT a bad thing. I keep suggesting that communists do precisely that - it interferes with their thinking.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom It doesn't defy human nature. The motive is not material in a monetary sense and that does not mean there is no self interest.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham The problem with your position is that you are foolishly pretending that there is a difference between the monetary sense and any other. Money does NOT cause greed or scarcity or anything else. It is neither more nor less than a means of facilitiating exchange and storing value so that resource allocation is more efficient and savings are possible to the benefit of literally everyone.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom money and the price system do not cause greed, they amplify it and reward it.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Money does not cause, amplify, alter, interfere with or in any other way alter human motivations. It doesn;t create or facilitate or reward greed and never has. Money was one of the great innovations that made modern society possible by facilitating trade between individuals, permitting saving and allowing capital allocation to things that could create modern technology. To abandon a monetary system is to abandon all of those benefits along with it.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom That contrast. The material motive. is what makes it a system of exploitation. You automatically create a class system with a definite and clear oppressor. You are bound to him by your necessity to survive because there is a price on the things you need to survive and you call that freedom?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham No such contrast exists. It is because human beings engage in puersuing their self-interest that (in the dynamic described as the "invisible hand") production takes place for mutual benefit such that goods and services are made available and employment opportunities are created that are mutually beneficial and lead to societal prosperity. The Marxian notion of "expoloitation" is only believed by mental midgets at this point (having been long disproved).
cont
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom You're saying there is no motive in communism. The motive to provide for yourself and your family is not removed. You are still compelled to work but you won't starve if you can't.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham I'm saying human motives do not cahnge at ALL under ANY economic system. And history has shown unequivocally that capitalism has done more (by several orders of magnitude) to prevent people starving than any other alternative. Voluntary charitable giving fits well within a capitalist framework and has always performed better than any state or collective means of providing charity.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom you are equating the free market to capitalism and the two are not synonymous.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Yes, actually they are. Capitalism is the exercise of the power of ownership over the means of production privately. It can take place individually or in common cause (while individual ownership is still several) but not under the auspices of the state. It is, in short, the free market ... and always has been.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham I never cease to be amazed at how disconnected from reality some can be that they actually believe that an inescapable real world phenomenon (scarcity) is somehow imposed on them by others or a price system. It's pure imbecility. Prices do not create scarcity. Scarcity pre-exists everything. Prices merely show how items are realtively demnaded by consumers in the presence of scarcity. This is not oppression any more than your need to sleep is. It is simple reality.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Prices make scarcity profitable. And since you say that material motive is just part of human nature. It is inevitable there will be a level of exploitation and greed.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Prices make NOTHING profitable. The price is the point where someone is willing to part with something and another is willing to part with what they have to obtain it. Nothing more. It is vastly superior to barter and the price makes it possible to determine the most efficient way of allocating resources. Self-interest is an unavoidable aspect of human nature. It is not "greed" and, again, absent force (which is not part of capitalism), exploitation cannot - and does not - exist.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom saying exploitation under capitalism cannot and does not exist is blatant horseshit and we both know it.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham We both know no such thing. Again, arxian exploitation has been completely debunked. It doesn't exist. Exploitation cannot occur in the free market because if coercion is applied it is not free. The employer and employee agree on a wage that is mutually beneficial (the employer gets production greater than the labor cost and the laborer gets more than he could otherwise obtain). It is the notion that there is any "exploitation" in this that is pure equine fecal matter.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom ok lol you continue to believe that.
illahham 6 days ago
@illahham You misunderstand. I'm an economist, not a Marxist. I need't rely on faith and belief. Facts work just fine for me, thank you very much.
FletchforFreedom 6 days ago
@FletchforFreedom Oh you're an economist excuse me for insulting your intelligence......
-_______-
illahham 6 days ago
@illahham You contradict yourself completely. First you say that comunism doesn't ignore human nature and then say it demands that people embrace benevolence and sacrifice. These are two mutually exclusive positions. It is not "greed" but self-interest that is a fundamental aspect of human nature as demonstrated by every facet of every moment of all of human history. Any system ignoring THAT is doomed to failure (hence the impossibility of communism).
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham That those examples were not communism is only because theoretical communism is so contrary to human nature that it is an objective impossibility. Moreover, since the things on which it is based, the labor theory of value, the Marxian theory of exploitation and the viability of a collectivist economy absent prices have been flatly disproved (that's not speculation or opinion - merely fact), no other outcome was possible.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
do u understand Joseph Stalin killed as many or more people than Hitler and you have him in this video like hes a good guy.
13johm 2 weeks ago
Capitalism was made to save the past, today its a destructive force for the people and the envirement.
Blazestalker100 2 weeks ago 2
@Blazestalker100 Capitalism did save the past. It's abandonment is one of the most destructive trends in all of human history.
FletchforFreedom 2 weeks ago 3
@FletchforFreedom wrong. Capitalism is a system based on the exploitation of labor. Adam Smith warned it could lead to great inequality. Because it has, and there are more poor than rich the people will turn to socialist policies because the illusion of the American dream, the thought that one can move up in class, is dying with the disappearance of the middle class. Capitalism in a democracy is the precursor to socialism and communism.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Sigh. Clearly you've never READ Adam Smith who NEVER said any such thing and described the free market as a system of "perfect liberty". The whole concept of Marxian exploitation was completely debunked (along with the rest of Marxism) long before you were born. The canard about the disappearing middle class only serves to make those repeating it prove their ignorance - while income mobility remains string and a third of those in the bottom 20% will eventually reach the top 20%.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom If you have read Smith he does say, "capitalism doesn't just generate wealth, it could create huge inequality, making some very rich and others very poor."
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Smith, who never used the word "capitalism" NEVER said any such thing either. He allowed that a free market makes extremes of wealth possible he noted it could lift everyone - which it did.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom If you deny the middle class is shrinking in America then you are out of touch with reality.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham That the middle calss is NOT shrinking is an economic fact. Try doing some actual research.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom In a system where profit is the chief motive the only thing that results is exploitation of the worker.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Capitalism has resulted in 300 years of steady improvement in compensation, working conditions and living standards, particularly for workers. Marx has been DEBUNKED.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom the free market didn't improve living standards or working conditions. The progressive movement and labor unions did, those are elements of socialism.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Neither the progressive movement or unions had ANYTHING to do with it. Engels wasn't credible in 1844 and his work was completely discredited by historians. Compensation and working conditions improved fastest where union activity was LEAST (primarily in the US) including bringing child labor to an effective end BEFORE state or union intervention. This is easily checked recorded history - not socialist fairy tales.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom So you're going to deny that the labor laws in this country served a purpose..
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Yes, I'm going to deny that labor laws were necessary. This is consistent, again, with actual history. Try doing some REAL research.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom and surely anyone who would call themselves an advocate for the free market is not for companies providing health care.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Actually, the system was better and cheaper before wage and price freezes during WWII encouraged businesses to offer benefits as an alternative. Yet another governmnet failure.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Do some research about what happened to the Ramapough mountain indians of NJ, and you will see plain and clear that capitalism allows and encourages the exploitation of people.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Capitalism doesn't make people saints (any more than socialism does). That said, it is no accident that correlation between the adoption of capitalism and a cleaner environmnet is HUGELY positive. And, repeating the long debunked "exploitation" nonsense doesn't magically make it any less idiotic.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom a cleaner environment is the result of educated people, activism, and early EPA before Reagan. NOT capitalism.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham History demonstrates that the environment was getting cleaner LONG before the EPA. Tree stocks had increased since the 20s. Water was cleaner, etc. Nice try.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham What actually occurred is that the prosperity resulting from capitalism made it possible for people who had more urgent demands met to consider the environment. THAT is capitalism.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom all after the presence of labor laws. Don't say capitalism is responsible for a cleaner environment. That's just glossy bullshit and you know it.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham No, o factually challenged one. EVERY thing that I have described occurred BEFORE or even in the complete ABSENCE of labor laws having ANY effect whatsoever. Compensation rose, working conditions improved, days shortened all by the private sector in order to attract the best workers. And if you wish to call facts you don't like "glossy bullshit", I've come to expect nothing less from ignorant Marxists.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom it is glossy bullshit. I guess you're going to ignore things like bosses putting chains on the doors of their factories to keep production up. I'm sure you know about the triangle shirtwaist fire. Now was it capitalism that improved factory working conditions?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Now all you've demonstrated is that you're a liar as well. Setting aside the fact that you are cherry picking rare cases (when, in fact, the horrors under every attempt to implement communism have been far worse), but you mishcaracterize things - the doors were locked because of "pilferage" (theft), not to "increase productivity". And it is an indisputable FACT that capitalism improved factory working conditions steadily and substantially over more than a century.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Or how about the working conditions for Apple's workers in China? Or the shoemakers in Bishan? Where they work with toxic benzene based glues without gloves, masks or proper ventilation and thousands have gotten sick. Is capitalism working in their favor?
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham In actual FACT, the working conditions in China were FAR worse and have been improving steadily. China's decades of abandoning capitalism have placed them (and their workers) in conditions several decades behind what have been achieved in capitalist countries and things take time to change. It is the FAILURE to adopt capitalism sooner that has caused these problems as anyone with an IQ above that of pulverized coprolite can figure out.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom you refuse to acknowledge the fact that the workers' necessity to survive outweighs the benevolence of the employer. Without labor laws to prevent exploitation there is nothing stopping people from willingly accepting slave like conditions in order to survive.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Me? A Marxist? I said nothing about private ownership being bad or that I want to get rid of it. Just because I think you're out of touch with reality doesn't make me a communist.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham I don't refuse to acknowldege anything. I am simply not so incredibly stupid as to believe that, absent the "benevolence" of the employer, compensation and working conditions do not improve. ALL employers create jobs in THEIR own interest. Compensation and working conditions improve (and history demonstartes this as a fact) as employers compete to attract the best workers. It is why the improvement took place ENTIRELY without union or state intervention.
cont
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham In fact, it's no accident that, at one time, the ONLY steel mill in the country with an 8 hr day was a NON-union shop (and this was before labor laws). It also has a hospital for workers and their families (that also served the town) and offered college courses in metallurgy and similar subjects to employees for free. It did this (as did the rest of the private sector which came up with ALL these things first) in order to attract the best workers. Your anecdotes FAIL badly.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom You see the exploitation today. Apple gets a 65% profit margin manufacturing in china. It can afford to manufacture here and still have a 50% margin but it doesnt
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham At which point more resources would be expended on the product, economic efficiency would shrink and fewer jobs would be created. Try reading an economic book before proving so foolish.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom NO. Not for the people of Apple's biggest market,America. They hire less than 50k in the US. Outsourcing manufacturing to china doesn't create more jobs here. Just cheap labor there.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Except, of course, in teh REAL world, more jobs are INsourced into the US than are outsourced and those jobs are, on average, higher paying. Economic efficiency, such as that resulting from reduced production costs is what creates jobs. So, as usually, the facts are entirely against you.
But, hey, thanks for playing!
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Industrialization is the cause for that.But what about a post industrialized country? wages in America for the middle class havent moved since the 70s, that is a fact.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Smith may not have said "capitalism" but he outlined what we know to be free market capitalism.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham That Smith outlined what is essentially free market capitalism is true. He also denounced the intervention of the state or organizations that took the role of labor unions (guilds), described it as an avenue toward "perfect ;iberty" and clearly established that the state intervention (socialism/mercantilism) was the problem and no protection for workers was needed beyond getting the interventiopn out of the way.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom Reality says differently. Necessity to earn a living outweighs benevolence of the employer. As was evident when unions went on strike and factories just hired non union workers.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham Reality is what the actual historical record (that I have been trying to educate you with) says. It isn't a question of benevolence.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham Jobs are created when the benefit the worker returns exceeds the cost. The end result is opportunities that wouldn't otherwise exist that make BOTH parties better off.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham That unions disrupt production making it worthwhile to hire non-union workers undermines my position not in the least.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham In ACTUAL fact, total compensation has increased steadily and substantially both since the beginning of the industrial revolution and since the 1970s. What happened, as anyone with a grasp of economics knows, is that more compensation was demanded in the form of benefits. Health care costs were the primary driver of inflation and they are primarily paid for with benefits. The middle class stagnation myth has been LONG debunked.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@FletchforFreedom total compensation. But you deflected from the argument; we're talking about wages.
illahham 1 week ago
@illahham It is addressing the bald-faced lie that workers stagnted or were worse off because they drew compensation in the form of benefits and, in reality, had more disposable income as a result.
FletchforFreedom 1 week ago
@illahham In communism, there are NO rich but the party members(see unions) Capitalism is no more than economic freedom. Where freedom exists without morals, greed can take hold. Where totalitarianism exists without morals, that is communism.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
@Stickmodee in true communism there is no rich or poor. Everyone is equal hence the classless Iroquis who were anarcho-communists, the purest form of communism.
illahham 1 week ago
@Blazestalker100 Capitalism is no more than economic freedom. What most disagree with is greed. I agree also.Where freedom exists, so must true morals. Communism is not economis(or any) freedom, and tyrannical greed.
Stickmodee 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why should people do all the work just so the 1% can live so well, and we go with out and suffer so much? Why are they the only ones allowed to profit? Do not works sacerfice their very lives blood sweat and tears, our very life energy so they can profit so much. They will not even pay us enough to buy a home, or car or support a family feed our kids and save for the future.
MrJapper88 2 weeks ago
I just wasted three minutes of my life.
rossastan 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AdamWeith Yeah, it doesn't matter that Stalin is dead, and that millions of people died under his leadership. People like you should go find an Island to stay on, so you can form another collective regime, and lay witness to the starvation caused by totalitarian leadership.
Waste of life troll. You are a flea on the dick of society. Go read a fucking book.
arenor 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
arenor 2 weeks ago
Why If Capitalism then it is USA? Because I know that Capitalism existed before the U.S was created And In modern world Russia is more capitalist than USA
victorydayof91945 3 weeks ago
While I like communism better than capitalism, I must say it has quite a few flaws. I think socialism is the best solution
scootamenadianeloo 3 weeks ago 2
@scootamenadianeloo Well socialism is the worst solution. People havent noticed but there has been a world wide trend to move towards larger government, less freedoms, higher taxes. The USA in particular has suffered terribly from the affects of an ever growing government. As the government has expanded there, class mobility has dropped, immigrants can no longer work their way up, the nation has been bankrupted. Do you want more of that to happen?
yelloyo 3 weeks ago
@scootamenadianeloo socialism like we ex-yugoslavian had
dauzl 2 weeks ago
The Soviet union was not good by any means but they kept the world stable, now there is nothign to balance America so they can just go around killign everyone.
We need a new Soclialist governemnt. A Governemnt with its power spread over people who deserve it such as doctors making choices about hospitals and professors making choices about education!
ANIOLATORV 3 weeks ago
Made from a neutral viewpoint but not playing the US national anthem at all and only showing pictures of bikers and weirdos. Then when the Soviet anthem comes it's picture after picture of Stalinst propaganda. This is not neutral at all, this is pro-Communist propaganda.
Hereticalable 3 weeks ago
@Hereticalable
Unbelievable. How could you have come to this (incredibly wrong and deluded) conclusion?
Brainwashed by the CIA, perhaps?
AdamWeith 3 weeks ago 2
@AdamWeith Yup, the CIA now pays unknown youtube posters to follow their agenda...to be honest it's not much. If the Commies pay more let me know - I'm look for a new house so could use some extra cash.
Unbelievable indeed...
Hereticalable 3 weeks ago
@Hereticalable I think this video is meant to be a joke.
Micro8Bit 1 week ago
@Hereticalable Omg, I expected a rational attitude towards this two ideologies, this is PURE SHIT !!!
MrStifmeister10 1 week ago
It's a shame the Soviet Union collapsed, America wouldn't be running around like they own the world if the Soviets were still here...They were what kept the world in order, Russia needs to rise into a superpower again.
jumshid 3 weeks ago
Stalin was the example of how communism was bad.
You can take over simply by executing your rivals. Communism was fine till Stalin. Communism i would say is like a monarchy with equal power. Reason
1) There will always be a ruler in communism
2) depending on your ruler it can change just like a religion etc: Catholic to Christianity
3) But if that ruler is bad so will the country (Stalin was bad)
Stalin was bad cause he executed people for power
Dellvin99 3 weeks ago
"BOTH" have been CREATED by the same Hidden Psychopathic Pathological LYING Zionist/Jews/European Aristocracy for "Fine-Tuning" Their "New World (ENSLAVING) Order" Who Wrote OUR Hi(S)tory Books and Control the Media as well as Our Governments/Banking and every major Industry in the WORLD? and Why isn't this Common Knowledge? "Harley Davidson?" NOT Who you may think controls it! Do a little research as it ALL connects back to "Parasites!" Want to know more? Go to: wake-upbeforeitstoolate(dot)com
einrib4truth 3 weeks ago
2:10 charlie sheen to the right
pepinozinanasshole 3 weeks ago
1:43 Translation is wrong! This inscription mean "Let's come to abundance!"
1:43 Они перевели не верно "Запад слаб!"
Alex27xyz 3 weeks ago
As for someone who is against religious collectivism and war, I can't say I've exactly 'conformed' to all american values. But the natural driving force of selfishness that I have felt flow through my veins since childhood propels me to a different conclusion, one that I've come to after engaging in many debates, reading many books, and tuning out to what parents and teachers want me to hear. It is this. I live for me. My well-being comes before anything else. No separate mind, no existence.
quidnick 3 weeks ago
If this is neutral I'm a fat guy in a tutu. Really, pictures of Motorcycle Riders and anti capitalism propaganda IS the idea you have of capitalism? XDDD
AkaiTsukiShimitsu 3 weeks ago
HILARIOUS!! I love how the anthem, which few Soviets knew the words to because Stalin wrote it and then fell out of favor shows the "might and power" of a country that no longer exists because its unsustainable economy collapsed!
FletchforFreedom 4 weeks ago 2
@FletchforFreedom
"No longer exists"? What are you talking about? Are you living in some kind of fantasy world?
The Soviet Union is as strong as ever, and is 10 years from reaching the 100 year mark. The economy prospers, the people are happy and it is steadily expanding and freeing more and more countries from the evils of capitalism.
Are you really this uninformed and secluded from the rest of the world in the US!?
AdamWeith 4 weeks ago 6
@AdamWeith The soviet union collapsed in 1991 and now its just Russia, the soviet union no longer exists because of communism. Russia isnt stronger then ever, they have only one navy fleet and the united states has eleven. Thanks to the EVILS of capitalism, get your facts right because you rant. In other words GO FUCK YOUR ASS THROUGH YOUR FACE YOU COMMUNIST LOVING PIECE OF SHIT
Mrducard93 3 weeks ago
@AdamWeith It doesn't you idiot what year are you living in?
fds9931 3 weeks ago
@AdamWeith Dude, your joking right? Cuz I'm getting a little scared now......
9lml9 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
arenor 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AdamWeith You have probably never read a single piece of literature on either capitalism or communism. You speak nonsense, and all of the people who have liked your comment are either trolls or severely misled.
arenor 2 weeks ago
@AdamWeith
Where do you live whats water suppy and the U.S.S.R has collaped anyways so move and get a real eduation.
Marylandbrony 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AdamWeith
Where do you live whats water suppy and the U.S.S.R has collaped anyways so move and get a real eduation.
Marylandbrony 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AdamWeith
Where do you live whats water suppy and the U.S.S.R has collaped anyways so move and get a real eduation.
Marylandbrony 2 weeks ago
@AdamWeith First of all. Soviet union was capitalist country. Every country is capitalist, No society can function without some form of capital, And they didn't prosper nearly as well since the capital was controlled by bureaucrats and brought in a monopolistic manner with no competitors. If you look at the wealth and standard of living. It was FAR higher in the U.S than it was in russia. Because companies had to compete with eachother.
tehatemachine 2 weeks ago
@AdamWeith I'd say the U.S has done a better job in the objectives that the soviets wanted to achieve in terms of equality. Because ANY society that aims for equality will not have equality. Is it fair that one person is born blind and the other is not?
tehatemachine 2 weeks ago
@AdamWeith Are you being sarcastic or do you truly believe this?
JasonCIAHudson 2 weeks ago