Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

bravetailor t1_jdjt9zz wrote

It's also about having a shitty family that unfortunately many can probably relate to.

13

Naggins t1_jdn2u32 wrote

Yeah, that's one of the hierarchies of abuse that they're talking about

3

Tonsabuns t1_jdjn9us wrote

A.K.A Capitalism

6

CableCoShow t1_jdjo2t1 wrote

Yeah, no hierarchies of abuse in communist Russia or China.

1

Zacajoowea t1_jdkvct1 wrote

You’re correct. There are “no hierarchies of abuse in communist Russia or China” since both China and Russia are capitalist economies.

10

CableCoShow t1_jdl58yo wrote

USSR, China in previous decades. They transitioned when communism failed, but they existed as communist societies and abused people far beyond what has ever occurred under capitalism.

1

Zacajoowea t1_jdmui2l wrote

They never existed as communist societies. You really should read a book about what communism is, you absolutely have no idea.

3

CableCoShow t1_jdmvzo5 wrote

Ah yes, the old argument that since the entire country wasn't run like a hippie commune, it wasn't real communism. You're a well-read genius.

The issue is always human nature. It doesn't matter if it's capitalism or communism, greedy, sociopathic people will exploit and abuse others if they can. Various forms of democracy help temper that. The combination of capitalism and democracy has lifted billions of people out of poverty and given them the most freedom in the history of humanity. There's more room to improve, but constantly blaming capitalism is ignorant and dangerous.

−2

Zacajoowea t1_jdng7hu wrote

Yes, since they weren’t run as communist nations, they are not communist nations, its pretty simple really. Also, the largest reduction in poverty in the last 100 years has occurred in China. And more people are pushed into poverty in the US right now than lifted out of it. So… again, I’d suggest you read a book.

1

CableCoShow t1_jdni8x2 wrote

Yeah, when they shifted to a mostly capitalist economy.

You're insane if you think pure communism would work beyond the size of a hippie commune. USSR already proved that communism isn't compatible with human psychology. If you don't get rewarded relative to your efforts and talents, people just stop working. The reason a hippie commune works is because it's a limited space and they can kick out the people who stop working. You can't do that if the whole country is under that system, which is why the USSR collapsed.

Capitalism unlocks human potential based on human psychology and democracy tempers the abuses of the other side of human psychology (greed, power hunger, etc.).

Move to a hippie commune if you want communism. I doubt you ever would because you probably already hate the lifestyle.

0

Zacajoowea t1_jdnkjr1 wrote

I didn’t say I want communism, neither did the original post you responded to. You brought it up to defend capitalism for some reason, I’m just pointing out that you have no clue what you’re talking about and are just regurgitating talking points you’ve heard before.

0

CableCoShow t1_jdnlfrw wrote

No, it's called critical thinking. Every attempt at communism has resulted in deaths and restrictions beyond anything experienced under capitalism. There is nothing wrong with capitalism. There is a problem with some aspects of human nature and the checks and balances in the US are not functioning properly at the moment. Acting like there won't be abuses in other forms of economics is stupid.

−1

Zacajoowea t1_jdnowt7 wrote

Okay, I get it, you love the only system you understand.

0

CableCoShow t1_jdnrw8h wrote

Okay, I get it, you have no critical thinking skills.

0

Zacajoowea t1_jdnv9nh wrote

Cool. Critical thinking to you means coming to the same conclusions you have. Sounds very convenient.

1

seanparis t1_jdnxbz2 wrote

Well to be fair the USSR was communist and did exhibit many features of communism. They just weren't very successful. For example it was communist under Lenin when he implemented war communism from 1918-1921 and his NEP while containing some slight market compromises was socialist. Furthermore, collectivisation under Stalin was a policy stubbornly rooted in communist ideology despite leading to the deaths of millions of Ukrainians.

1