free market fascism

grüezi us der schwyz ! :))

Your channel icon is white. for white power

LaughingMan. More like LaughingFAG!!!

(post 3) With all that said the so called "communist" regimes that exist simply put the 'communist' party in the place of the capitalists as would probably also happen if a Marxist revolution tool place in advanced capitalist nations which is why Anarchists oppose the state (the state is any entity that allows a minority to control the majority via coercion/force). A military to defend against capitalist aggression in an actual anarchist society is definitely an issue- it would have to be as democratic as possible with safeguards to keep it from being a tool for a minority to control the majority within the anarchist society. Anyhow as far as defending 'economic invasion' read chapter 4 of the book "Conquest of Bread". I'm not sure why I've been so civil with you taking the comments you left on my page into account.

(post2) I say that because socialism isnt about creating industrial society it is suppose to be about taking over an industrial society which is already in existence. Besides industry being capitalism's' job to create there are also social per-conditions for socialism. Marx saw capitalism as a progressive force both materially and socially. the bourgeois revolutions, besides rapid industrialization, also pushed enlightenment values which were a major step up in human social consciousness. Russia and china had both undeveloped industry and undeveloped social/world views. They were also not democratic thus setting the stage for totalitarianism. In short Russia and china tried to do capitalism's job- they tried to skip a MAJOR phase in historical social and material development. Liberal bourgeois capitalism is a necessary step for any nation to go through before an actual socialist revolution can take place.

(Post 1) In more detail, it was the Russian Marxists who mangled Marx/Engels philosophy/theory to the point where Russian Marxists thought communism could overtake capitalism if various smaller revolutions happened in so surrounding the advanced capitalist nations militarily -or the smaller "socialist" nations would build armies to defend themselves while waiting for revolutions in advanced capitalist nations. This isnt even mentioning Mao's silly 'third world' peasant theories basically saying the third world can invade the first world and force communism on the globe. Anything from North Korea to Russia and China wasnt socialist let alone communist.

That's because Lenin was an idiot who tried to facilitate a "socialist" revolution in a backwards nation. Stalin was a fool as was Mao (I'm not a Marxist by the way) as is any idiot who thinks communism has actually existed. Socialist revolutions are suppose to happen in the most advanced capitalist nations, even so, socialism cannot exist in one country alone, it must be global (just like capitalism). The Zeitgeist people are also silly, they don't understand capitalism and what it will take to end it. Their technocratic utopian fantasies are laughable. They're mostly ignorant kids and conspiracy theorists.

crud, u lil shithead

There is NO Communist/Socialist regimes without huge armies or high militance.

Even left-wingers from "VenusProject" and "Zeitgeist" support having large army, why?
"Because enemies will invade our Utopia, without Army - Zeitgeist can't even start"

A competitive economy/market system must lead inevitably to the elimination of some producers by others, there must be winners and losers and the winners will always grow increasingly large. That process is wealth accumulation. Wealth accumulation gives rise to class society which gives rise to the state apparatus. I just destroyed your entire ideology. Have a nice day :)