Dissecting John Stossel's Anti-Communist Lies

[Red Front]

Actually, Capitalism did that ...

China transitioned from an agrarian society always one harvest away from mass starvation, to an industrial nation by providing cheap labor to Capitalist societies. Eventually, those Chinese who were able to benefit from that arrangement were able to participate in the nascent Chinese Capitalist society.

View attachment 723794

China eliminated hunger, famines, by the late 1960s. Many of the figures touted by Western academics on the payroll of capitalist "think tanks" are grossly exagerrated. There were deadlier famines and social upheavels in feudal and colonial China than under socialism. India a capitalist run economy suffered much more than China and is now struggling economically compared to China. China has a centrally planned economy and as I mentioned earlier, markets in and of themselves do not equate capitalism nor are prohibited in socialist, centrally planned economies. Your attempt to make China a so called "free-market" capitalist country without central planning or socialism reveals your misconceptions about socialism.

 

[fncceo]

I'm not against the type of market exchange that you just described provided it doesn't involve the exploitation of human labor.

In a Capitalist society, all labor is voluntary. No one is forced to take a job for which they feel under-valued or exploited. If someone is doing a job for which they feel exploited then they can either A) leave and seek other employment or B) come to realize that they may have an over-valued sense of their own value to the organization that employs them.

Since only a labor market can fairly determine the real value of any labor, no one can claim to be exploited if they freely participate in that market.

 

[Unkotare]

China eliminated hunger, famines, by the late 1960s.....

Hunger has still not been eliminated in China. You don't need a famine like the one caused by the stupid "Great Leap Forward" to have hunger.

 

[fncceo]

China eliminated hunger, famines, by the late 1960s

By embracing trade with Capitalist nations after nearly 50 million of their "workers" died in a famine earlier that decade.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

American-imposed sanctions prevent socialist countries from trading with the world, due to the amount of control the US empire has over the world's economy and governments.

Socialism is going to win......it's inevitable.

Unless the US says no.

That about sum up your newest whine?

 

[Red Front]

And now it can't even beat Ukraine.

It is meeting all of its objectives in Ukraine, which is to secure the Donbas. But that's beside the point since Russia is no longer a socialist state as it was in Soviet times, so why even mention the current conflict in Ukraine? Russia is essentially fighting the US and NATO in Ukraine, due to the amount of support it has and continues to receive. When the ground freezes now in a few weeks, Russia is going to open a can on Ukraine. They're going to do what they should've done in February but didn't due to their policy to engage in a limited, controlled "military operation" to secure eastern Ukraine. All of that is over now and what we will be witnessing in the next few weeks is the full wrath of the Russian war machine.

 

[Unkotare]

North Korea is more communist than China today, and they had a massive famine as recently as 1997. The average height of North Koreans is falling because of so much malnourishment among children TODAY.

Communism is, always has been, and always will be an utter failure. It ALWAYS results in a loss of freedom and massive loss of life.

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

​

Stossel Comes from Long Island, where he's a social butterfly. For all his "capitalism" hot air, when his 2.5 Mil Hamptons mansion was blown away years ago, he had no problem getting Gov't agencies to pay for the loss. Some say, he was "underinsured". He's the ultimate 'Bankster': "Socialism for me, capitalism for the peasants".

Finally a Joe Biden democrat speaks the truth .... it's a miracle I tell you...

 

[ozro]

North Korea is more communist than China today, and they had a massive famine as recently as 1997. The average height of North Koreans is falling because of so much malnourishment among children TODAY.

Communism is, always has been, and always will be an utter failure. It ALWAYS results in a loss of freedom and massive loss of life.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Electricity is a vital part of our national infrastructure that everyone needs to function in a modern society. It's a product that everyone consumes.

How many hours of electricity do they have every day in Cuba?

Is it more than we have? Must be. Communism is that awesome!

 

[SeaMajor7]

It's not how you start the race, it's how you finish it that matters. It took centuries for capitalism to replace chattel slavery and feudalism, and it will take time for socialism and then communism to replace capitalism. It's just a matter of time.

I think the SICKEST part of your demented ideology is that you hive-minded lunatics want to fuck up society beyond your lifespan.

Pivot, shift, nudge, and CREEP society to HELL; not toward prosperity, freedom, or liberty.
In the end, there are two kinds of people: Control FREAKS, and individuals that don't want a boot on our necks.

Oh yeah, and fuck off you demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I've never liked the term capitalism. I like free markets. But if you say free markets and capitalism together, no, we don't have that. Not even close.

There's a tremendous problem with definitions and understanding in the electorate as to what kinds of policies we actually have. Which makes arguing over capitalism and socialism utterly useless. It's a useless exercise which avoids the more relevant terms of controversy.

What we have is a planned economy. We have economic interventionism. We have a belief in deficit financing. We have central economic planning by a central bank. We have inflationism. We have a welfare state. The whole Keynesian system is designed to fail. It rewards the rich and destroys the middle class.

It's foolish to label any of that free-market capitalism.

It is predictable, however, that socialists are gonna come along and contend that it's just soooo bad that what we need is socialism and eventually communism.

The problem is that we don't have free-markets, though. While the current monetary policy certainly should be rejected, since it is designed to ultimately fail and destroy the middle class, the electorate should not reject the cause of liberty and sound economics, because liberty and sound economics are not the problem. The problem, again, is that we do not have enough free-markets.

 

[Red Front]

By embracing trade with Capitalist nations after nearly 50 million of their "workers" died in a famine earlier that decade.

The death toll figures were much less, around three million. Still horrible, but it wasn't in the tens of millions as Western academics claim. Those figures have already been debunked by several scholars, like Mobo Gad in his work "The Battle for China's past" and by Lota and others. There were famines before socialism in both China and Russia which took the lives of tens of millions of people, not to speak of all of the civil wars..etc. So your attempt to discredit socialism by citing death tolls is misleading, if not disingenuous.

China's economic success and growth in the 1960s were due to the mass mobilization of industrial forces and capacity in education, training, mining, the processing of raw materials, and the assistance of the USSR in the area of specialists, and providing machinery. So your bleak picture of communist China and the cultural revolution amounts to nothing more than capitalist rhetoric, if not hypocrisy. Capitalist-funded and enforced colonialism created mountains of dead rotting corpses, so you have no moral high ground upon which to stand and condemn communists. Class warfare is deadly, people die in civil wars, this holds true for both capitalists and socialists. Both systems have their fair share of dead bodies.

 

[Leo123]

No need, America is my home. Perhaps capitalists and their fans can go somewhere else? That would be ideal. Capitalists leave, and socialists stay.

Capitalists run this Forum, maybe you should go find someplace else to dump your shit?

 

[22lcidw]

Hunger has still not been eliminated in China. You don't need a famine like the one caused by the stupid "Great Leap Forward" to have hunger.

China has hundreds of millions more people to bring into their hard-working capitalist industrial early age ways. We are toast. Prog women are mad and empowered will teach us all lessons of their femineity. When the worst happens, they will receive what they deserve, and it won't be nice. And there will be little sympathy.

 

[fncceo]

Capitalists run this Forum, maybe you should go find someplace else to dump your shit?

The Communist message boards are run a little more assertively ...

 

[fncceo]

China has hundreds of millions more people to bring into their hard-working capitalist industrial early age ways. We are toast. Prog women are mad and empowered will teach us all lessons of their femineity. When the worst happens, they will receive what they deserve, and it won't be nice. And there will be little sympathy.

I recently read the "Three Body Problem" trilogy, written by Liu Cixin and translated from Chinese. I wrote a review on another forum.

In it, he describes a society about 200 years in the future when males have been completely feminized and that leads, indirectly, to the total domination of Earth by an alien civilization.

 

[Soupnazi630]

I understand it much better than you ever will. Socialism made China a superpower and in the not-too-distant future, you're going to wish you were back in China with your people. Karl Marx wrote that socialism is the process that leads to communism. A socialist state and society can identify itself as communist because communism is the objective. Communism is defined by Marx, as a stateless society, without socioeconomic classes or the need for money. There has really never been an actual communist state. The very term "communist state" is an oxymoron. What exists are socialist states.

Socialism according to Marx can include markets in the consumer goods sector of the economy. That's exactly what we see in China today. The economy is centrally planned hence it is socialist, despite its use of markets. So don't make the silly error of pretending markets equate capitalism because they don't. Markets existed before capitalism and can in some cases be part of a socialist economy. I prefer socialist economies without markets, but that's just an ideological preference, not a dogmatic principle that anyone has to agree with. China is a superpower thanks to socialism. Think about that for a while.

No you do not,

China was unsuccesful under socialism and only became a superpower after instroducing elements of capitalism.

Marx wrote many things but is a proven fool

Communism as defined by marx is not a classless state or even a state at all it is an ideology. It includes a necessity for despotic tyranny and enslavement of humanity. All communist states are in fact communist states under a dictatorship as he described.

You do not even comprehend the ideology you believe in

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Socialism made China a superpower

Why didn't it make them a superpower from 1949-1979?

 

[Soupnazi630]

As a communist, I'm not against the type of market exchange that you just described provided it doesn't involve the exploitation of human labor. Markets don't equate capitalism, because they existed way before the first capitalist ever purchased the life of a human laborer for twelve or sixteen hours to operate his machines and produce products for a profit. You're confusing bartering and use value exchange with capitalism, which is a completely different relationship.

In the not too distant future technology will render capitalism obsolete and unworkable, due to the fact that without human labor the capitalist market collapses. All value in capitalism relies on human wage labor.

NO WAGE LABOR = NO PAYING CONSUMER = NO CAPITALISTS GENERATING A PROFIT.​

We are going to have to adopt a mode of production that isn't based on the pursuit of profits or capital accumulation. Within the next few decades, robotics, automated systems, artificial intelligence, self-driving autonomous vehicles, and a few other technologies will significantly replace human labor, hence it will become necessary for the public to take control of the technology and produce everything to meet their needs, rather than for a profit. The two options for those who live in the modern, industrialized world are techno-feudalism or high-communism (i.e. high-tech communism). The former will reduce the public to useless, worthless serfs and eventually to the compost heap. The later will empower the consumer by rendering the means of production theirs. It democratizes and socializes production.

​

In the not to distant and very distant future technoloy will make socialism and communism impossible. Human labor will be needed mroe than ever and will never be replaced.

Communism is by definition a regressive system which does not allow for high tech which is why your engtire rosy prediction is disproven and false