What is the goal of capitalism?

[Robert W]

OK, so his grandpa isn't a big-money capitalist millionaire, he's more of a mom-pop store owner. Nothing wrong with that, good for you. Your grandson was born and raised in a middle-class family. Got it. Why even mention your grandson to me? What's your point? How does that apply to what I'm saying about capitalism vs communism?



Nothing in the past resembles the automation available today due to our computational power and artificial intelligence. Machines in the past, unlike today, needed to be operated by human beings. That's much less so today, due to our powerful computers and advanced AI.



You're in Lalaland if you believe the automation we had available 56 years ago is equivalent to what we have today. Your smartphone today, in 2023, has more computational power than all of NASA in 1967.

You never were in the machine shop business as I was. So naturally you know next to nothing about automation. What makes machines better now using computers in them? Well set up time is a lot faster using computers. But the machines making things still are mechanical. Humans still are paid to watch over the computer ran machines.

I did not claim that past automation is as good as automation that also has computers running them.

Surely under communism you know they are backwards compared to capitalist countries!!!!!

 

[Red Front]

At least NOW you admit you promote being communist.

Again, no thanks. And can that crap how great life is for Russians. A lot of stores there shut down.

I've never admitted otherwise. When did I ever deny being a communist? You're probably in your 70s or 80s (like most people on this forum), living through the Cold War, which I only had a taste of as a child, and teenager in the 1970s and 80s. I was heavily indoctrinated against communism, due to the community I was born and raised in, in Miami, Florida. All of these blockbuster Hollywood movies conveyed the false narrative of the USSR being an evil empire out to get us:

​

It was hogwash. The USSR had no intentions of invading Western Europe, much less the United States. I also served in the US Army and although I was never stationed in Germany as you were, I spent a year in Korea and before that, a few months in Kuwait, attached to a combat engineer battalion, as a supply specialist.

I met plenty of men of your generation who were still in the army and had served in Germany in the early days of the Cold War, and many of them knew that the USSR had no intention of invading Western Europe. They also were of the opinion, based upon what they had researched, that if the USSR had invaded Western Europe, NATO wouldn't have been able to stop them. The reason the USSR didn't invade, was that it never had any strategic incentive to do so. It was never part of their agenda.

The Cold War was more of an "arms chase" than an arms race, with the US always racing ahead of the USSR, creating more powerful, devastating weapons, while the Russians were calling for treaties, to stop the proliferation of these weapons. Communists don't want to be stuck fighting wars, we want to spend all of our resources on developing infrastructure and improving people's lives, not killing them.

Most of what we've learned about the USSR in the West is a bald-faced lie. Were the Soviets "saints"? No. There were injustices, and innocent people died. But the United States and the West in general, likewise has its fair share of crimes against humanity. We have no moral high ground upon which to stand and point fingers at anyone. If you're going to debate with communists, stick to the economics of the issue, because appealing to death-toll arguments and scary campfire stories, only proves your inability to defend capitalism, on its own merits. Ad hominem logical fallacies are the refuge of weak arguments. If you need to demonize your opponent to defend your position, you've lost the debate.

 

[Robert W]

I've never admitted otherwise. When did I ever deny being a communist? You're probably in your 70s or 80s (like most people on this forum), living through the Cold War, which I only had a taste of as a child, and teenager in the 1970s and 80s. I was heavily indoctrinated against communism, due to the community I was born and raised in, in Miami, Florida. All of these blockbuster Hollywood movies conveyed the false narrative of the USSR being an evil empire out to get us:

​

It was hogwash. The USSR had no intentions of invading Western Europe, much less the United States. I also served in the US Army and although I was never stationed in Germany as you were, I spent a year in Korea and before that, a few months in Kuwait, attached to a combat engineer battalion, as a supply specialist.

I met plenty of men of your generation who were still in the army and had served in Germany in the early days of the Cold War, and many of them knew that the USSR had no intention of invading Western Europe. They also were of the opinion, based upon what they had researched, that if the USSR had invaded Western Europe, NATO wouldn't have been able to stop them. The reason the USSR didn't invade, was that it never had any strategic incentive to do so. It was never part of their agenda.

The Cold War was more of an "arms chase" than an arms race, with the US always racing ahead of the USSR, creating more powerful, devastating weapons, while the Russians were calling for treaties, to stop the proliferation of these weapons. Communists don't want to be stuck fighting wars, we want to spend all of our resources on developing infrastructure and improving people's lives, not killing them.

Most of what we've learned about the USSR in the West is a bald-faced lie. Were the Soviets "saints"? No. There were injustices, and innocent people died. But the United States and the West in general, likewise has its fair share of crimes against humanity. We have no moral high ground upon which to stand and point fingers at anyone. If you're going to debate with communists, stick to the economics of the issue, because appealing to death-toll arguments and scary campfire stories, only proves your inability to defend capitalism, on its own merits. Ad hominem logical fallacies are the refuge of weak arguments. If you need to demonize your opponent to defend your position, you've lost the debate.

You demonize capitalism. As you say, losing the debate.
My age is not relevant yet no secret. I in days will be 85. Unlike you I have experienced communism in person.

I track both China and Russia as to communism. While our media lauds good things in China, it ignores what still is pure stinking lousy there.

In America you will not be executed for using pot. China kills the residents who do that.
Russia has had some excellent stores for sure yet due to their invasion of Ukraine, and you present Russia as this kind nation, has killed thousands of Ukraine citizens. Also try to protest in Russia.
When the Soviets were in full force, their stores were not well supplied. Corruption was all over the place. I saw in East Germany how the people lived as prisoners.

No thanks.

America has a variety of kooks with wild ideas. While true the Democrats are the worst, they are not the only bad ones.

As an economic system, Russia tried to make it work using 5 year plans. But they failed. And so bad the system went out of business. And you want to revive it for some strange notion.

Why do you object to freedom?

 

[Robert W]

One more time. You glorify communism when in actual life, it is a failed system.

 

[Robert W]

I've never admitted otherwise. When did I ever deny being a communist? You're probably in your 70s or 80s (like most people on this forum), living through the Cold War, which I only had a taste of as a child, and teenager in the 1970s and 80s. I was heavily indoctrinated against communism, due to the community I was born and raised in, in Miami, Florida. All of these blockbuster Hollywood movies conveyed the false narrative of the USSR being an evil empire out to get us:

​

It was hogwash. The USSR had no intentions of invading Western Europe, much less the United States. I also served in the US Army and although I was never stationed in Germany as you were, I spent a year in Korea and before that, a few months in Kuwait, attached to a combat engineer battalion, as a supply specialist.

I met plenty of men of your generation who were still in the army and had served in Germany in the early days of the Cold War, and many of them knew that the USSR had no intention of invading Western Europe. They also were of the opinion, based upon what they had researched, that if the USSR had invaded Western Europe, NATO wouldn't have been able to stop them. The reason the USSR didn't invade, was that it never had any strategic incentive to do so. It was never part of their agenda.

The Cold War was more of an "arms chase" than an arms race, with the US always racing ahead of the USSR, creating more powerful, devastating weapons, while the Russians were calling for treaties, to stop the proliferation of these weapons. Communists don't want to be stuck fighting wars, we want to spend all of our resources on developing infrastructure and improving people's lives, not killing them.

Most of what we've learned about the USSR in the West is a bald-faced lie. Were the Soviets "saints"? No. There were injustices, and innocent people died. But the United States and the West in general, likewise has its fair share of crimes against humanity. We have no moral high ground upon which to stand and point fingers at anyone. If you're going to debate with communists, stick to the economics of the issue, because appealing to death-toll arguments and scary campfire stories, only proves your inability to defend capitalism, on its own merits. Ad hominem logical fallacies are the refuge of weak arguments. If you need to demonize your opponent to defend your position, you've lost the debate.

I was in the Army from 1962-64. And in Germany in those same years.

Do you believe the Soviets lived in paradise?
I urge you study more. Sure communism does not have to be like it was in Russia or China, but even now our Democrats are leading us that way. How do you like being told you will lose the right to own a gas driven car? Biden signed an order. Maybe you like to wait a long time for a charge. i prefer the quick fuel system we now have.

While the Soviets fought the most against the Nazis, they had to due to being invaded. Bet you do not know how many Americans wanted to be Nazis, do you? See under Hitler prior to his wars, he got Germany up and out of the great depression using socialism. democrats lie about it being socialism and allege it was not. But clearly Hitler installed a massive socialist system as you want.

 

[Red Front]

You never were in the machine shop business as I was. So naturally you know next to nothing about automation. What makes machines better now using computers in them? Well set up time is a lot faster using computers. But the machines making things still are mechanical. Humans still are paid to watch over the computer ran machines.

I did not claim that past automation is as good as automation that also has computers running them.

Surely under communism you know they are backwards compared to capitalist countries!!!!!

No, you're wrong. The Soviets were quite advanced in industrial technology. So much so that they turned a backwater, under industrialized agrarian society full of Russian hillbillies, into a nuclear superpower, rivaling the United States, the most powerful empire in human history. The US had a 120-year headstart in industrializing itself, and yet the USSR was able to survive the onslaught of being invaded by the United States, the UK, France, and 12 other countries between 1918 and 1926. Over 200 thousand foreign troops, with over a quarter million anti-socialist Russians of the "white army", fought the red army, and lost. The USSR was at war, from 1917 to 1991, with only maybe a decade of relative peace in the 1930s.

The USSR was invaded by 4 million Germans in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa. The full brunt of the Third Reich's war machine was focused on the Soviets, not the Western front. Seven out of every ten Nazis were fighting in Russia. The Soviets lost 27 million of its citizens in WW2, about 14% of its population. The United States lost 460 thousand people, 0.03% of its population. The US is surrounded by two vast oceans, making it practically impossible to invade, especially in the modern age, due to naval technology and the size of its territory and population. The odds of any country successfully invading the United States are about nil. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Japan.

The Soviets lost a significant % of its national infrastructure in WW2, being that most of its population was in Western Russia, not in Siberia. They didn't have the American-backed "Marshal Plan" as Western Europe and Japan had after the war. The Soviets had to rebuild their new country, by picking themselves up by their bootstraps, and indeed thanks to Socialism, they rebuilt the USSR into a nuclear superpower, with the second largest economy in the world, not to speak of its military capabilities.

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism. It's extremely effective at doing that. The Soviets were the first to have nuclear plants, connected to a power grid. They were launching satellites and people into space, before the United States, less than 15 years after the cataclysmic devastation they suffered in WW2, losing tens of millions of their citizens and much of their infrastructure.

You shoot yourself in the foot when you start mentioning the USSR when debating communists like me. You shouldn't mention it and just stick to arguments based on present-day socioeconomics, lest you get clobbered. I can debate five capitalist apologists at once, due to how stupid their arguments are. I'm not smarter than them, that's not why I win practically every debate on these issues. I rip their arguments to pieces because I have the truth, not because I'm more intelligent or better than them. I just open the cage and let the lions out. They do the job for me. Defending communism is easy, against capitalist-imperialists.

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the automation available in the 1960s, was as capable as what we have today in 2023, with our present technology, hey believe whatever nonsense toots your horn.

Automation is taking over like never before, eliminating jobs, at an unprecedented scale, and the wealthy ruling elites know that They understand what is happening, they're not idiots, hence their pleas to their cronies in government to hand everyone a monthly UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. That government check (socialism), is what these billionaires are hoping will save capitalism.

​

Within the next few decades, society will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production, no longer based upon profits or markets, due to unemployment. Advanced 21st-century automation technology, ensures the victory of socialism over capitalism. It reveals socialism as the natural, inevitable successor of capitalism, just as Marx and Lenin taught us in their writings.

 

[Robert W]

No, you're wrong. The Soviets were quite advanced in industrial technology. So much so that they turned a backwater, under industrialized agrarian society full of Russian hillbillies, into a nuclear superpower, rivaling the United States, the most powerful empire in human history. The US had a 120-year headstart in industrializing itself, and yet the USSR was able to survive the onslaught of being invaded by the United States, the UK, France, and 12 other countries between 1918 and 1926. Over 200 thousand foreign troops, with over a quarter million anti-socialist Russians of the "white army", fought the red army, and lost. The USSR was at war, from 1917 to 1991, with only maybe a decade of relative peace in the 1930s.

The USSR was invaded by 4 million Germans in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa. The full brunt of the Third Reich's war machine was focused on the Soviets, not the Western front. Seven out of every ten Nazis were fighting in Russia. The Soviets lost 27 million of its citizens in WW2, about 14% of its population. The United States lost 460 thousand people, 0.03% of its population. The US is surrounded by two vast oceans, making it practically impossible to invade, especially in the modern age, due to naval technology and the size of its territory and population. The odds of any country successfully invading the United States are about nil. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Japan.

The Soviets lost a significant % of its national infrastructure in WW2, being that most of its population was in Western Russia, not in Siberia. They didn't have the American-backed "Marshal Plan" as Western Europe and Japan had after the war. The Soviets had to rebuild their new country, by picking themselves up by their bootstraps, and indeed thanks to Socialism, they rebuilt the USSR into a nuclear superpower, with the second largest economy in the world, not to speak of its military capabilities.

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism. It's extremely effective at doing that. The Soviets were the first to have nuclear plants, connected to a power grid. They were launching satellites and people into space, before the United States, less than 15 years after the cataclysmic devastation they suffered in WW2, losing tens of millions of their citizens and much of their infrastructure.

You shoot yourself in the foot when you start mentioning the USSR when debating communists like me. You shouldn't mention it and just stick to arguments based on present-day socioeconomics, lest you get clobbered. I can debate five capitalist apologists at once, due to how stupid their arguments are. I'm not smarter than them, that's not why I win practically every debate on these issues. I rip their arguments to pieces because I have the truth, not because I'm more intelligent or better than them. I just open the cage and let the lions out. They do the job for me. Defending communism is easy, against capitalist-imperialists.

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the automation available in the 1960s, was as capable as what we have today in 2023, with our present technology, hey believe whatever nonsense toots your horn.

Automation is taking over like never before, eliminating jobs, at an unprecedented scale, and the wealthy ruling elites know that They understand what is happening, they're not idiots, hence their pleas to their cronies in government to hand everyone a monthly UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. That government check (socialism), is what these billionaires are hoping will save capitalism.

​

Within the next few decades, society will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production, no longer based upon profits or markets, due to unemployment. Advanced 21st-century automation technology, ensures the victory of socialism over capitalism. It reveals socialism as the natural, inevitable successor of capitalism, just as Marx and Lenin taught us in their writings.

View attachment 814787
View attachment 814788​

Jeesus crist. I do not require massive videos nor ignorant remarks.

Study the avionics of the Soviet Airplanes. They look like those we had in the 1950s.
Since the Soviets saw us as a major threat, they did arm to the gills. And of course had larger nuclear weapons than we had. My unit in Germany had nuclear weapons in our small units. We had tactical nukes that you never heard of.

We had citizens visit Russia in the 1930s and some of them clearly wanted us to convert to Communism, as you presently want.
Again, no thanks.
My political science teacher in college explained why and how he got out of Russia. He had left his home with a servant to hunt. When they got home, his whole family was wiped out so he fled to China. After time he made it to the USA and told students the trutyh about Russia.

Why do you suppose the Soviets had massive numbers of battle tanks? We had never invaded Russia.

 

[Robert W]

No, you're wrong. The Soviets were quite advanced in industrial technology. So much so that they turned a backwater, under industrialized agrarian society full of Russian hillbillies, into a nuclear superpower, rivaling the United States, the most powerful empire in human history. The US had a 120-year headstart in industrializing itself, and yet the USSR was able to survive the onslaught of being invaded by the United States, the UK, France, and 12 other countries between 1918 and 1926. Over 200 thousand foreign troops, with over a quarter million anti-socialist Russians of the "white army", fought the red army, and lost. The USSR was at war, from 1917 to 1991, with only maybe a decade of relative peace in the 1930s.

The USSR was invaded by 4 million Germans in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa. The full brunt of the Third Reich's war machine was focused on the Soviets, not the Western front. Seven out of every ten Nazis were fighting in Russia. The Soviets lost 27 million of its citizens in WW2, about 14% of its population. The United States lost 460 thousand people, 0.03% of its population. The US is surrounded by two vast oceans, making it practically impossible to invade, especially in the modern age, due to naval technology and the size of its territory and population. The odds of any country successfully invading the United States are about nil. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Japan.

The Soviets lost a significant % of its national infrastructure in WW2, being that most of its population was in Western Russia, not in Siberia. They didn't have the American-backed "Marshal Plan" as Western Europe and Japan had after the war. The Soviets had to rebuild their new country, by picking themselves up by their bootstraps, and indeed thanks to Socialism, they rebuilt the USSR into a nuclear superpower, with the second largest economy in the world, not to speak of its military capabilities.

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism. It's extremely effective at doing that. The Soviets were the first to have nuclear plants, connected to a power grid. They were launching satellites and people into space, before the United States, less than 15 years after the cataclysmic devastation they suffered in WW2, losing tens of millions of their citizens and much of their infrastructure.

You shoot yourself in the foot when you start mentioning the USSR when debating communists like me. You shouldn't mention it and just stick to arguments based on present-day socioeconomics, lest you get clobbered. I can debate five capitalist apologists at once, due to how stupid their arguments are. I'm not smarter than them, that's not why I win practically every debate on these issues. I rip their arguments to pieces because I have the truth, not because I'm more intelligent or better than them. I just open the cage and let the lions out. They do the job for me. Defending communism is easy, against capitalist-imperialists.

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the automation available in the 1960s, was as capable as what we have today in 2023, with our present technology, hey believe whatever nonsense toots your horn.

Automation is taking over like never before, eliminating jobs, at an unprecedented scale, and the wealthy ruling elites know that They understand what is happening, they're not idiots, hence their pleas to their cronies in government to hand everyone a monthly UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. That government check (socialism), is what these billionaires are hoping will save capitalism.

​

Within the next few decades, society will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production, no longer based upon profits or markets, due to unemployment. Advanced 21st-century automation technology, ensures the victory of socialism over capitalism. It reveals socialism as the natural, inevitable successor of capitalism, just as Marx and Lenin taught us in their writings.

View attachment 814787
View attachment 814788​

I have a very kind hearted suggestion for you.

Since you glorify communism, locate one of the countries you brag about and simply relocate to that place. That way you get what you want at no added charge.

 

[Robert W]

No, you're wrong. The Soviets were quite advanced in industrial technology. So much so that they turned a backwater, under industrialized agrarian society full of Russian hillbillies, into a nuclear superpower, rivaling the United States, the most powerful empire in human history. The US had a 120-year headstart in industrializing itself, and yet the USSR was able to survive the onslaught of being invaded by the United States, the UK, France, and 12 other countries between 1918 and 1926. Over 200 thousand foreign troops, with over a quarter million anti-socialist Russians of the "white army", fought the red army, and lost. The USSR was at war, from 1917 to 1991, with only maybe a decade of relative peace in the 1930s.

The USSR was invaded by 4 million Germans in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa. The full brunt of the Third Reich's war machine was focused on the Soviets, not the Western front. Seven out of every ten Nazis were fighting in Russia. The Soviets lost 27 million of its citizens in WW2, about 14% of its population. The United States lost 460 thousand people, 0.03% of its population. The US is surrounded by two vast oceans, making it practically impossible to invade, especially in the modern age, due to naval technology and the size of its territory and population. The odds of any country successfully invading the United States are about nil. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Japan.

The Soviets lost a significant % of its national infrastructure in WW2, being that most of its population was in Western Russia, not in Siberia. They didn't have the American-backed "Marshal Plan" as Western Europe and Japan had after the war. The Soviets had to rebuild their new country, by picking themselves up by their bootstraps, and indeed thanks to Socialism, they rebuilt the USSR into a nuclear superpower, with the second largest economy in the world, not to speak of its military capabilities.

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism. It's extremely effective at doing that. The Soviets were the first to have nuclear plants, connected to a power grid. They were launching satellites and people into space, before the United States, less than 15 years after the cataclysmic devastation they suffered in WW2, losing tens of millions of their citizens and much of their infrastructure.

You shoot yourself in the foot when you start mentioning the USSR when debating communists like me. You shouldn't mention it and just stick to arguments based on present-day socioeconomics, lest you get clobbered. I can debate five capitalist apologists at once, due to how stupid their arguments are. I'm not smarter than them, that's not why I win practically every debate on these issues. I rip their arguments to pieces because I have the truth, not because I'm more intelligent or better than them. I just open the cage and let the lions out. They do the job for me. Defending communism is easy, against capitalist-imperialists.

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the automation available in the 1960s, was as capable as what we have today in 2023, with our present technology, hey believe whatever nonsense toots your horn.

Automation is taking over like never before, eliminating jobs, at an unprecedented scale, and the wealthy ruling elites know that They understand what is happening, they're not idiots, hence their pleas to their cronies in government to hand everyone a monthly UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. That government check (socialism), is what these billionaires are hoping will save capitalism.

​

Within the next few decades, society will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production, no longer based upon profits or markets, due to unemployment. Advanced 21st-century automation technology, ensures the victory of socialism over capitalism. It reveals socialism as the natural, inevitable successor of capitalism, just as Marx and Lenin taught us in their writings.

View attachment 814787
View attachment 814788​

I have stated why automation improved after the addition of computers to them. Do not know why you missed that.
As to you defeating me, I live nicely in a wonderful USA and you complain about it when all you need do is pack bags and move to those glorious places you so adore.

 

[Robert W]

Red Front, I do not recall demeaning you ever. I do recall defeating that Communism is a wonderful benevolent system. I did not bring up nuclear power. I am older than you are so am very familiar with nuclear in both countries.

You rambled on about the WW2 war. That was a very long time ago. And you did not mention that the Soviet union broke apart. Nor did you explain why they broke apart.

 

[Red Front]

I was in the Army from 1962-64. And in Germany in those same years.

Do you believe the Soviets lived in paradise?
I urge you study more. Sure communism does not have to be like it was in Russia or China, but even now our Democrats are leading us that way. How do you like being told you will lose the right to own a gas driven car? Biden signed an order. Maybe you like to wait a long time for a charge. i prefer the quick fuel system we now have.

While the Soviets fought the most against the Nazis, they had to due to being invaded. Bet you do not know how many Americans wanted to be Nazis, do you? See under Hitler prior to his wars, he got Germany up and out of the great depression using socialism. democrats lie about it being socialism and allege it was not. But clearly Hitler installed a massive socialist system as you want.

I was in the Army from 1962-64. And in Germany in those same years. Do you believe the Soviets lived in paradise?
I urge you study more.

When did I ever suggest the Soviet Union was paradise? The US isn't paradise. Paradise, at least now, doesn't exist in the world, anywhere. You however pretend that living in the USSR was a complete HELL, and that's simply not true. There are tens of millions of Russians that regret what happened to the USSR. Many of them would like to see it resurrected. Your rhetoric against communism and the USSR is in many ways, bullshit. Cold War hogwash.

Sure communism does not have to be like it was in Russia or China, but even now our Democrats are leading us that way.
How do you like being told you will lose the right to own a gas driven car?

What does that have to do with communism? Do you actually believe Biden is a communist? You're so confused. Communists aren't American liberals, we're the true left. We want nuclear energy to provide us with electricity, not solar panels and windmills. Solar panels won't be able to provide us with the power that we need until we make them at least ten times more efficient than they are now. We need to manufacture them in zero gravity in space, for them to be that efficient. We still don't have factories in space, and we will probably not have them for another forty or fifty years. We need to go nuclear, and only then can we replace gas-fueled engines with electric.

We can't replace gas engines with electric until we have the infrastructure to charge all of those electric cars. Our electric grid would collapse if we had millions of e-cars being charged at once.

Communists are practical, unlike American liberals. Communists can define what a woman is and we don't inject children with puberty blockers. Communists aren't into all of this shit:

That's American liberal values, fueled by capitalism. The capitalists are capitalizing on all of this perversion.






​

Communism has nothing to do with this shit. This is your baby, created by capitalism, not communism. The ruling elite loves the idea of creating submissive, emasculated workers. Merchants sell most of their products to women. Women do most of the shopping and when they buy something, they usually buy several colors, a variety of the product, not just one or two pieces. Men are more utilitarian in their shopping habits, being satisfied with one or two pairs of boots. Women will fill their closets with shoes and purses, buying dresses, makeup, hair products..etc. Retailers make their billions from women.

The ruling capitalist class loves the idea of turning men into a bunch of effeminate metro-sexual shoppers.

The medical industry is getting our children hooked on a lifetime of expensive hormone treatments and dangerous surgeries. That's not communism, that's capitalism, fueled by the private pursuit of profits. All of this LGBTQA+ crap is an extremely lucrative business.

Biden signed an order. Maybe you like to wait a long time for a charge. i prefer the quick fuel system we now have.

I agree with you. We can't switch to electric cars until we have the infrastructure to charge all of those electric engines. Gas-powered engines are needed now, and it will remain that way for the foreseeable future. Communists aren't for replacing fossil fuels with solar panels and windmills.

While the Soviets fought the most against the Nazis, they had to due to being invaded. Bet you do not know how many Americans wanted to be Nazis, do you? See under Hitler prior to his wars, he got Germany up and out of the great depression using socialism. democrats lie about it being socialism and allege it was not. But clearly Hitler installed a massive socialist system as you want.

Fascism, especially German Fascism ("National Socialism") vs fascism in Italy and Spain, was a marriage between the government and the capitalist ruling elites (the private sector). The major centers of economic power in Germany were still in the hands of capitalists, but unlike in a non-fascist capitalist economy, the government is heavily involved in the business, and it protects the capitalists against the working class. They crush all worker actions against their employers, placing unions under their control. Fascism is a way of preserving capitalism when it is threatened by Marxists like me. It's a capitalist, counter-revolutionary "solution" to actual socialism, which places the means of production under the control of the working class.

That's why Hitler went to war against communists and murdered Marxists. The communists were right there with the Jews, in the concentration camps. So it's assesnine, for you to confuse German fascism (so-called "National Socialism") with Marxist communism. We're mortal enemies of German Nazi fascism. If it wasn't for the Soviet Union, Americans would now be salluting a Nazi flag and speaking German.

Were the Nazis Socialists? Historians DEBUNK and EXPLAIN​

 

[Red Front]

I have stated why automation improved after the addition of computers to them. Do not know why you missed that.
As to you defeating me, I live nicely in a wonderful USA and you complain about it when all you need do is pack bags and move to those glorious places you so adore.

You're living well, but others aren't. Why should anyone leave their country? Americans should stay and improve America, not leave. You're not making any sense.

 

[Robert W]

When did I ever suggest the Soviet Union was paradise? The US isn't paradise. Paradise, at least now, doesn't exist in the world, anywhere. You however pretend that living in the USSR was a complete HELL, and that's simply not true. There are tens of millions of Russians that regret what happened to the USSR. Many of them would like to see it resurrected. Your rhetoric against communism and the USSR is in many ways, bullshit. Cold War hogwash.



What does that have to do with communism? Do you actually believe Biden is a communist? You're so confused. Communists aren't American liberals, we're the true left. We want nuclear energy to provide us with electricity, not solar panels and windmills. Solar panels won't be able to provide us with the power that we need until we make them at least ten times more efficient than they are now. We need to manufacture them in zero gravity in space, for them to be that efficient. We still don't have factories in space, and we will probably not have them for another forty or fifty years. We need to go nuclear, and only then can we replace gas-fueled engines with electric.

We can't replace gas engines with electric until we have the infrastructure to charge all of those electric cars. Our electric grid would collapse if we had millions of e-cars being charged at once.

Communists are practical, unlike American liberals. Communists can define what a woman is and we don't inject children with puberty blockers. Communists aren't into all of this shit:

View attachment 814795

View attachment 814797

View attachment 814799

View attachment 814800

View attachment 814801

View attachment 814802

That's American liberal values, fueled by capitalism. The capitalists are capitalizing on all of this perversion.






​

Communism has nothing to do with this shit. This is your baby, created by capitalism, not communism. The ruling elite loves the idea of creating submissive, emasculated workers. Merchants sell most of their products to women. Women do most of the shopping and when they buy something, they usually buy several colors, a variety of the product, not just one or two pieces. Men are more utilitarian in their shopping habits, being satisfied with one or two pairs of boots. Women will fill their closets with shoes and purses, buying dresses, makeup, hair products..etc. Retailers make their billions from women.

The ruling capitalist class loves the idea of turning men into a bunch of effeminate metro-sexual shoppers.

The medical industry is getting our children hooked on a lifetime of expensive hormone treatments and dangerous surgeries. That's not communism, that's capitalism, fueled by the private pursuit of profits. All of this LGBTQA+ crap is an extremely lucrative business.

Biden signed an order. Maybe you like to wait a long time for a charge. i prefer the quick fuel system we now have.

I agree with you. We can't switch to electric cars until we have the infrastructure to charge all of those electric engines. Gas-powered engines are needed now, and it will remain that way for the foreseeable future. Communists aren't for replacing fossil fuels with solar panels and windmills.



Fascism, especially German Fascism ("National Socialism") vs fascism in Italy and Spain, was a marriage between the government and the capitalist ruling elites (the private sector). The major centers of economic power in Germany were still in the hands of capitalists, but unlike in a non-fascist capitalist economy, the government is heavily involved in the business, and it protects the capitalists against the working class. They crush all worker actions against their employers, placing unions under their control. Fascism is a way of preserving capitalism when it is threatened by Marxists like me. It's a capitalist, counter-revolutionary "solution" to actual socialism, which places the means of production under the control of the working class.

That's why Hitler went to war against communists and murdered Marxists. The communists were right there with the Jews, in the concentration camps. So it's assesnine, for you to confuse German fascism (so-called "National Socialism") with Marxist communism. We're mortal enemies of German Nazi fascism. If it wasn't for the Soviet Union, Americans would now be salluting a Nazi flag and speaking German.

Were the Nazis Socialists? Historians DEBUNK and EXPLAIN​

Look, you gain nothing at all plastering this forum with so many videos.
Why do you believe the Germans under Nazism were not socialists? Why say Fascism when all that is is a different Socialism?
Hitler went to war with Russia to grab more land. For Germans. Not due to ideology. Flatly he craved other countries land.
Those who love socialism hate the truth that in the real world, Hitler was a socialist dictator. It was called Socialism by Germany because that is what it was.

After the stunning successes by the early era Hitler, many Americans wanted what the Germans had. A humming prosperous economy. Once Hitler invaded, then Americans slowly changed their minds so FDR could then wage war.

Socialism can of course create prosperity as hitler did. But who wants a massive Military as he had?

Do you recall the massive military that the Soviets had? I do recall this clearly.

Have you ever talked to a former Soviet Army officer? I spent a lot of time discussing this with one of them. He was a Major in the Soviet Army.

Where do you get all the things you claim?

 

[Red Front]

Red Front, I do not recall demeaning you ever. I do recall defeating that Communism is a wonderful benevolent system. I did not bring up nuclear power. I am older than you are so am very familiar with nuclear in both countries.

You rambled on about the WW2 war. That was a very long time ago. And you did not mention that the Soviet union broke apart. Nor did you explain why they broke apart.

You capitalist apologists are the ones who started talking about the USSR, not me. Don't blame me for writing about the Soviet Union, you're the ones who continually bring it up in our debates. Yes indeed the Soviet Union broke apart, but that doesn't imply that socialism or communism is wrong, ineffective, and will never replace capitalism. Can't you think rationally and realize that? Apparently, you can't. You're the one "rambling" about irrelevant bullshit. Do I have to explain again, why your line of argumentation, is wrong and irrational? Do I have to repeat myself?

 

[Robert W]

You're living well, but others aren't. Why should anyone leave their country? Americans should stay and improve America, not leave. You're not making any sense.

Communism does not improve this country. I do not mind you staying. But you are trying to ruin this country!

 

[Robert W]

You capitalist apologists are the ones who started talking about the USSR, not me. Don't blame me for writing about the Soviet Union, you're the ones who continually bring it up in our debates. Yes indeed the Soviet Union broke apart, but that doesn't imply that socialism or communism is wrong, ineffective, and will never replace capitalism. Can't you think rationally and realize that? Apparently, you can't. You're the one "rambling" about irrelevant bullshit. Do I have to explain again, why your line of argumentation, is wrong and irrational? Do I have to repeat myself?

If you truly understood Capitalism, you would not talk that way.

Not one time have I apologized. I enjoy capitalism very much.
I only mentioned the Soviets because I personally was inside of the Soviet empire. I saw personally how fucked it is.

The Germans did prove that socialism works excellent so long as they make war machines. But they did excellent things to their highways and built magnificent buildings. This of course provided jobs.

Take a good look at my avatar. That woman was engaged to marry me. She and her family lived under both the Nazis and communists. She would tell you immediately how wrong you are. That photo of us is in Berlin Germany.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All of these blockbuster Hollywood movies conveyed the false narrative of the USSR being an evil empire out to get us:

The USSR wasn't evil, that's why all their formerly enslaved states in Eastern Europe wanted to join NATO. Because the USSR was so awesome!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, you're wrong. The Soviets were quite advanced in industrial technology. So much so that they turned a backwater, under industrialized agrarian society full of Russian hillbillies, into a nuclear superpower, rivaling the United States, the most powerful empire in human history. The US had a 120-year headstart in industrializing itself, and yet the USSR was able to survive the onslaught of being invaded by the United States, the UK, France, and 12 other countries between 1918 and 1926. Over 200 thousand foreign troops, with over a quarter million anti-socialist Russians of the "white army", fought the red army, and lost. The USSR was at war, from 1917 to 1991, with only maybe a decade of relative peace in the 1930s.

The USSR was invaded by 4 million Germans in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa. The full brunt of the Third Reich's war machine was focused on the Soviets, not the Western front. Seven out of every ten Nazis were fighting in Russia. The Soviets lost 27 million of its citizens in WW2, about 14% of its population. The United States lost 460 thousand people, 0.03% of its population. The US is surrounded by two vast oceans, making it practically impossible to invade, especially in the modern age, due to naval technology and the size of its territory and population. The odds of any country successfully invading the United States are about nil. The US came out of WW2 unscathed, compared to Europe and Japan.

The Soviets lost a significant % of its national infrastructure in WW2, being that most of its population was in Western Russia, not in Siberia. They didn't have the American-backed "Marshal Plan" as Western Europe and Japan had after the war. The Soviets had to rebuild their new country, by picking themselves up by their bootstraps, and indeed thanks to Socialism, they rebuilt the USSR into a nuclear superpower, with the second largest economy in the world, not to speak of its military capabilities.

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism. It's extremely effective at doing that. The Soviets were the first to have nuclear plants, connected to a power grid. They were launching satellites and people into space, before the United States, less than 15 years after the cataclysmic devastation they suffered in WW2, losing tens of millions of their citizens and much of their infrastructure.

You shoot yourself in the foot when you start mentioning the USSR when debating communists like me. You shouldn't mention it and just stick to arguments based on present-day socioeconomics, lest you get clobbered. I can debate five capitalist apologists at once, due to how stupid their arguments are. I'm not smarter than them, that's not why I win practically every debate on these issues. I rip their arguments to pieces because I have the truth, not because I'm more intelligent or better than them. I just open the cage and let the lions out. They do the job for me. Defending communism is easy, against capitalist-imperialists.

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the automation available in the 1960s, was as capable as what we have today in 2023, with our present technology, hey believe whatever nonsense toots your horn.

Automation is taking over like never before, eliminating jobs, at an unprecedented scale, and the wealthy ruling elites know that They understand what is happening, they're not idiots, hence their pleas to their cronies in government to hand everyone a monthly UBI i.e. Universal Basic Income. That government check (socialism), is what these billionaires are hoping will save capitalism.

​

Within the next few decades, society will be forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit system of production, no longer based upon profits or markets, due to unemployment. Advanced 21st-century automation technology, ensures the victory of socialism over capitalism. It reveals socialism as the natural, inevitable successor of capitalism, just as Marx and Lenin taught us in their writings.

View attachment 814787
View attachment 814788​

That bears witness to how effective socialism is in industrializing a nation. Many Western, non-Marxist economists admit to the fact that socialism industrializes and builds national infrastructure quicker than capitalism.

Meh.

Kill enough slaves, you can get the rest of the slaves to pretend to build crappy stuff for a while.
It was still a backward shithole, even if enough idiots in the west believed their lies about GDP.

 

[Red Front]

Look, you gain nothing at all plastering this forum with so many videos.
Why do you believe the Germans under Nazism were not socialists? Why say Fascism when all that is is a different Socialism?
Hitler went to war with Russia to grab more land. For Germans. Not due to ideology. Flatly he craved other countries land.
Those who love socialism hate the truth that in the real world, Hitler was a socialist dictator. It was called Socialism by Germany because that is what it was.

After the stunning successes by the early era Hitler, many Americans wanted what the Germans had. A humming prosperous economy. Once Hitler invaded, then Americans slowly changed their minds so FDR could then wage war.

Socialism can of course create prosperity as hitler did. But who wants a massive Military as he had?

Do you recall the massive military that the Soviets had? I do recall this clearly.

Have you ever talked to a former Soviet Army officer? I spent a lot of time discussing this with one of them. He was a Major in the Soviet Army.

Where do you get all the things you claim?

Look, you gain nothing at all plastering this forum with so many videos.

I don't care if you ignore every single video I post. Others won't. Are you so deluded to think that I respond to your disingenuous claptrap, in order to convince you of anything? I know you're fucking braindead, and don't give a rat's ass about the truth. I don't write these posts for you, but rather for those who are genuinely interested in the truth. I get private messages all of the time, thanking me for debunking your crap. I do this for them, not you. You and your ilk are pathetic.

Why do you believe the Germans under Nazism were not socialists?
Why say Fascism when all that is is a different Socialism?
Hitler went to war with Russia to grab more land. For Germans. Not due to ideology. Flatly he craved other countries land.
Those who love socialism hate the truth that in the real world, Hitler was a socialist dictator. It was called Socialism by Germany because that is what it was.

Is North Korea a democratic country? The official name of North Korea is the DPRK, the Democratic People's Republic Of Korea. Following your stupid line of reasoning, North Korea is a democratic state, because it identifies itself as democratic.

The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP), was called "socialist" in the same way North Korea identifies itself as "democratic". The Nazis weren't actually socialists, for the following reasons:

1. 
   Property Relations and Capitalism: One of the fundamental tenets of Marxist socialism is the abolition of private property in the means of production, transitioning towards a system where the means of production are owned and controlled by the working class. However, under Nazism, not only did private property persist, but many capitalists and industrialists thrived. The Nazi regime established partnerships with large industrial corporations, and in many cases, these corporations benefited from forced labor and other exploitative practices.
   Reference: Götz Aly's "Hitler's Beneficiaries" delves into how ordinary Germans, including big businesses, benefited from Nazi policies, particularly through the plunder of conquered territories and the exploitation of forced labor.
2. Labor Unions and Workers’ Rights: Marxist socialism emphasizes the empowerment of workers and their right to organize. Under Nazi rule, independent labor unions were abolished shortly after Hitler came to power in 1933. Instead, they were replaced by the Nazi-controlled German Labor Front (DAF), which suppressed genuine workers' rights and removed their ability to strike or negotiate wages.
   Reference: William L. Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" provides a comprehensive history of Nazi Germany and documents the regime's suppression of labor rights.
3. Racism vs. Class Struggle: Marxism posits class struggle as the primary driving force of history and societal change. In contrast, Nazism was fundamentally built on racial ideology. The Nazis were obsessed with ideas of racial purity, leading to the extermination of Jews, Romani people, and other groups they deemed racially inferior. This focus on race sidestepped the central issue of class struggle that is paramount to Marxist socialism.
4. Protection of the Capitalist Class: Instead of challenging the capitalist bourgeoisie, the Nazi regime often protected and collaborated with them. Many business leaders and industrialists found the Nazi regime beneficial for their interests, as it provided stability, eliminated the threat of communism (a primary concern for many in the capitalist class), and suppressed labor rights.
   Reference: Adam Tooze's "The Wages of Destruction" looks at the economic history of the Third Reich, detailing how many segments of the capitalist class prospered under Nazi rule.
5. Persecution of Marxist Socialists and Communists: From the very beginning of their rise to power, the Nazis viewed communists and socialists as one of their primary enemies. Thousands of communists, socialists, and other leftists were arrested, sent to concentration camps, or killed. This direct suppression and extermination of leftists is antithetical to the idea of the Nazis being genuinely socialist.
   Reference: Ernst Thälmann, the leader of the Communist Party of Germany, was arrested in 1933 and held in solitary confinement until his execution in 1944. His story serves as a stark example of the Nazi regime's treatment of communist leaders.

While the Nazi Party used the term "socialist" in its name, its policies and actions were far from the principles and goals of Marxist socialism. From the perspective of Marxist theory, Nazism can be seen as an attempt to co-opt and redirect the grievances and energy of the working class to serve a capitalist and racially driven agenda, rather than a genuine effort to uplift the proletariat and reshape society along socialist lines.

After the stunning successes by the early era Hitler, many Americans wanted what the Germans had. A humming prosperous economy. Once Hitler invaded, then Americans slowly changed their minds so FDR could then wage war.
Socialism can of course create prosperity as hitler did. But who wants a massive Military as he had?
Do you recall the massive military that the Soviets had? I do recall this clearly. Have you ever talked to a former Soviet Army officer? I spent a lot of time discussing this with one of them. He was a Major in the Soviet Army. Where do you get all the things you claim?

At best, Nazi Germany was a mixed economy, where the state and the private sector closely collaborated in the manufacturing of goods, be it weapons in support of the war effort or consumer goods for the German public. The Nazis protected capitalists from the true socialists, who wanted to abolish private property and place all productive enterprises under the control of the proletariat i.e. the working class.

In Socialism, there's a distinction between private and personal property. So don't make the silly mistake of arguing that communists want your toothbrush or to take your personal stamp collection or take your home and car away. Not true.

 

[Red Front]

Communism does not improve this country. I do not mind you staying. But you are trying to ruin this country!

Communism will be necessary when intelligent robots, get rid of most jobs. Without enough wage labor, communism is necessary and inevitable. I could care less what you mind me doing or not doing, no one needs your approval to stay here in America. It's people like you who are ruining this country and the whole world.