TheDankHold

Do I need to pick a side? Can I not think both have flaws that should be addressed? The criticisms aimed at capitalism by Marx are incredibly valid, his solution clearly not so much based on real world attempts.

I think if anyone is viewing this through a tinted lens it’s you. Your position is very black and white with no actual care for honestly comparing the two ideologies. You’ve made statements that show a fundamental lack of understanding of both systems and the faults you lay at these governments aren’t inherent to them being communist as I explained earlier.

Capitalism hasn’t been corrupted because the underlying values and tenants of the ideology are functioning exactly as intended. Communism is a utopian pitch with a glaring flaw in implementation that allows strongmen to form authoritarian control. Capitalism by design rewards those that can operate profitably regardless of ethics, which ensures an inherently dystopian outcome. If it’s better for business that a mass murderer like Pinochet takes power then that’s the optimal decision from a capitalist model. US involvement the Middle East and Central/South America has almost always been to benefit a US based corporation that was exploiting and extracting the natural resources of those places. A system that allows and encourages the concentration of economic power is inherently corrupt and self serving towards the elite at the top.

That last part was me describing an instance where “no true Scotsman” literally isn’t a fallacy. Words have meanings, if I call you a duck you’re still a person. If something doesn’t fit the established definition then you can’t honestly say it does.

Do you think ignoring obvious sarcasm makes you look smarter?

Every system of governance has millions of deaths attributable to them. Capitalists destabilize third world countries so they can take advantage of the corruption. If you look at every authoritarian government propped up by western capitalist governments you’ll see the body count hit the billions. I’d say a system that props up a guy who threw thousands of political dissidents out of helicopters is far more “inherently shitty” than one whose core ideology was undermined by strongmen.

Every starving person that exists in a place where excess food is destroyed is another body waiting to be added to the count.

Attack the actual tenants of an ideology, not the bastardized version spoon fed to you by people with an incentive to present it dishonestly.

Or give me a good pitch as to why North Korea is definitely a democratic republic. When the person claiming to be a Scotsman was born in Thailand and lived their whole life in Iraq it’s not a fallacy to say that they’re wrong.

I didn’t realize communism was when you’re an authoritarian state capitalist system. It’s so interesting that international corporations can exist within a communist system. You’d think there’d be local control of resources and production and minimal social hierarchies, given that those are the core defining traits of the ideology.

So cool to see how you understand the concepts you’re talking about, plenty of people just go by whatever strawman they get raised with.

Exactly, gotta protect US business while they siphon off resources from the third world. Only we’re allowed to exploit the natural resources of another country.

So you’d argue to keep those people in an unfair situation because it’s unfair to try to minimize the unfair conditions you’re benefiting from?

To the people that benefit from an unfair world, balancing the playing field somehow becomes just as unfair in their mind. A mindset that ensures the underlying problems in the world don’t get meaningfully addressed.

No one’s saying you can’t do anything. I’m simply explaining that your “protest” is ignorable at best and actively beneficial to the people you hate at worst.

No one is stopping them. Nexus admins just don’t want them jacking it to that shit on their website

Like I said, too stupid to hold a conversation with. I’ve been an atheist my whole life.

Yeah we know you’re too stupid and arrogant to have a conversation, you don’t need to remind me.

No they’d just be happy that there’s less people they have to convince to vote for them. Less people voting means it’s easier to pass policies that enrich them. You aren’t doing some meaningful protest, you’ve removed yourself from the conversation.

There’s tons of money in seeding voter apathy and people like you are why. They get you to remove your own voice and make you think you’re hurting them and not yourself.

If you think I wasn’t clear that’s on you. I stated my premise and gave examples as to why I think my premise is valid.

If you still don’t understand me I don’t think it’s worth it to keep trying.

Compelling argument. I really liked the part where you explained anything. Exactly what I expected from someone that needs things to be simple to make sense.