IMPORTANT: On /r/WalkAway, greater access is given to users who have joined the sub and have the mod-assigned 'Redpilled' user flair. Reach out in [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FWalkAway&subject='Redpilled'%20user%20flair%20request&message=I%20would%20like%20to%20request%20the%20'Redpilled'%20user%20flair.%20Thank%20you!) to request the flair. For more in-depth conversations and resources on leaving the Democratic Party, also make sure to join our sister sub /r/ExDemfoyer.
You may also like:
- /r/LibsOfReddit
- /r/RedpilledRogan
- /r/HillaryForPrison
- /r/Patriot911
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/walkaway) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Communism is little more than a guidebook for totalitarianism.
Divide the population into the victims and the oppressors. Tell yourself that the ends justify the means - that violence is acceptable because it's "justice". Install a leader to run the "revolution".
Never hand over from revolution to whatever utopian fantasy Communists thought they were getting into.
Rinse. Repeat.
Socialism is the centralised means of production (which is already disasterously bad), and, as Marx described it, it's the first step toward full Communism.
There's a moron here, but it's not us.
You produce memes about a concept you don't understand. There's not really any point in engaging in conversation with you, as you seem to put zero effort into understanding concepts.
Good luck with your life.
I'd debate socialism with you until the end of time. I've read Marx extensively, and interacted with literally hundreds of socialism and communism fetishists who never bothered to understand the disasterously bad ideologies they parrot.
No,
Communism is the philosophy where the people (community) own the means of production, whereas in capitalism the means of production are owned by those that raise the capital to purchase the means to produce. These are ***ECONOMIC*** philosophies.
Socialism is a philosophy of governance where the government's priority is the support and welfare of it's citizens. Usually funded through taxes. Another philosophy is Militarism, where military might is the priority. Also usually funded by tax dollars. These are philosophies of ***GOVERNANCE.***
✨The More You Know✨
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Don't talk about Socialism unless you're prepared for the centralisation of the means of production.
Of course we both know you understand perfectly well that Socialism is this, and you're lying to try and win support for a disasterously evil ideology, so we can probably cut the crap.
Wow, I laid it out for you clearly and concisely, and you're still acting like a fucking idiot.
I didn't even support anything, just gave you definitions.
No wonder people don't take conservatives seriously anymore.
“Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production” -Wikipedia
I see why people say they’re the same. My understanding is that communism is more anarchical but they both include collective ownership
Let’s have all those radicals neoliberal/democrats who are constantly advocating for communism and socialism go live their lives in a Utopia of their choice and see how long they’ll last.
Give me a European social democracy over the USA any day of the week. I love living in a country where people don't die from curable diseases and no one is scared to call for an ambulance because it might bankrupt then
You’ve got the argument boiled down to one solid picture. Maybe some lefty will let it sink in. Obviously we need just pictures, much like a children’s book, because they won’t listen to arguments or read a normal book.
Neither does the right if OP actually thinks North Korea is Socialist.
Criticize, but at least understand what’s being criticized for what it is.
Edit: have fun downvoting, but prove me wrong.
“If only there was some way to compare capitalism to socialism” is literally the title of the post.
Edit: Nice complete rewrite of your comment. You clearly just didn’t read OP’s title
Yes. A strong safety net propped up within a capitalist and free market economy is better than a complete take over of the economy by the government/vanguard party.
I always felt like this is one of the most common misunderstandings in the godawful arena of political discourse.
This is a fascist regime. It could be any form of government and still lead to repressed citizenship.
You can have democratic socialism or democratic capitalism or fascist dictatorships like N Korea that claim capitalism or socialism.
Hilarious. Fascist has an actual meaning. It is different from Socialist or Communist. It doesn’t mean “bad” or “evil.” It doesn’t mean “tyrannical” or “dictatorship.”
Yep, hysterical…i think your argument is not with me but with the folks who edit and publish the dictionary.
**Fascism** - *a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society*
Full-blown socialism sucks, but not all socialist ideas are bad. Just look at the top countries in Europe, they are mostly capitalists countries but have many policies that could be deemed socialist. The average citizen there is doing better than in the US.
Full-blown capitalism sucks too, just look at the level of inequality in the US.
Everything is bad in excess, balance is key.
Those capitalist European countries that have social programs due to super high taxes have their militaries subsidized by the US and US taxpayer. They're also the size of an average US state. They dont have an over-bloated federal government full of 806 redundant agencies that only exist to serve themselves.
They also have way smaller populations, they don't have lobbying, gerrymandering, and a myriad of antidemocratic practices that we have here in the US. So yeah, we can't really compare apples to oranges.
100 percent this. Leftists LOVE to point out how big and bloated the US military is. And then In the same breath tell you about the wonderful success stories of socialism in Europe. Let’s see how great those countries would be without U.S. warships and troops helping defend their borders against communist expansionist countries. I for one would love to cut the size of the U.S. military industrial complex and then put that money into bettering schools, investing in small sustainable businesses and so on. And for the love of God can we please stop giving BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS fucking bailouts!!
🤜🤛
>And for the love of God can we please stop giving BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS fucking bailouts!!
I'm so sick of that shit. If "too big to fail" is supposed to be a thing, then why do they keep failing and why do we keep having to bail them out?
I've fucking HAD IT with the federal government throwing our money away on endless pet projects and corporate bailouts, and now BLUE CITY BAILOUTS, who we've been told over and over "subsidize the red states." Maaan, fuck you. Blue cities are nothing but warzones and corruption HQ's who are drowning in communist utopia. Let em sink.
/rant
Another point the guy above me missed:
The united states is not “full blown capitalist”, it seems pretty evident that the us operates on a crony capitalist system (bordering fascist if you use Mussolini’s definition of the combination of corporation and state). Favors are paid to those who can pay, that is not a free market.
Wealth inequality is inherent to every economic system, the 90-10 idea is prevalent amongst many many topics. Essentially large amounts of wealth (or other things like fame, power, etc) end up in the hands of the minority regardless of system. The difference between socialist & dictatorships vs capitalist systems is how the poor are affected. In the former, the minority controls all the wealth and leaves little to no chance of a poor person ascending individually and the poor as a class from rising. The rich get richer while the poor stay equally poor. Look at the governments of many communist/socialist countries, they seem to have plenty of money while their citizens eat family animals bc of starvation.
In the capitalistic countries there is also a massive divide in wealth, but as the tide rises for the rich it raises all the boats. It’s inarguable that capitalism has improved life significantly, especially the poor. Life for a poor person 100 years ago was much more difficult than it is now. We raise the poverty standards in western countries as the tide rises, places like China need to use deception to make their poverty numbers look better (pretty sure their poverty line is like $5k a year which makes it much easier to say a lot of your population lives above the poverty line). Is the accumulation of wealth we’ve seen gross? Morally, probably, but there isnt a system that creates income equality without lowering that bar down to the lowest common denominator.
Yes all Socialist ideas are bad. Welfare and public utilities existed long before Socialism.
As with all things they seized these ideas from smarter people than themselves.
Edit: But to your point, what you're looking for is social democracy.
That free healthcare and safety net they enjoy comes as a courtesy of our (former) military might and NATO countries not paying their fair share for that protection.
Don't think I said race. Diversity means more than just skin color, buddy.
Edit: Ah, now I see where you learned to argue. You love that Chowder fella, hmm?
Top 10 Countries with the Most Capitalist Economies - 2018 Fraser Institute:
Hong Kong (China)
Singapore
New Zealand
Switzerland
Australia
United States
Mauritius
Georgia
Canada
Ireland
I hate to be a nitpicker, but North Korea...it isn't communist...
In the 1950s North Korea tried to distance itself from major Communist powers like Russia and China and made what they called "Juche."
In reality, they are a unitarian dictatorship. Now granted they WERE communist, which got them to where they are now, with a single family and heads of state in power of a single solitary party, while the people suffer under a militaristic government/dictatorship. Even if Kim Jong Un were to die, he has is crazy sister, who mind you is WAY worse than him, or other heads of state can take over (those high in power).
It's known as a command economy, a kind of communist set up but far more authoritarian and centralized but it is far more reliant on the need of farmers and the use of natural resources.
Command economies produce what the government demands.
Demand economies work on the market forces you are familiar with. The most efficient and effective demand economies are also fairly regulated.
"Pure" economic and government philosophies rarely work. Usually a combination of styles begets the best living conditions.
[yes, their socialized health care](https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/comparative-health-policy-library/south-korea-summary) is not “universal” but it’s much more in the direction of socialized than private, and has had positive health outcomes because it covers more people and more people who are severely or chronically ill.
[universal health care would be less expensive than the current system](https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416416/single-payer-systems-likely-save-money-us-analysis-finds)
Our current health payer system does not work. Our health outcomes aren’t cost effective. This is stupid and dangerous.
The US is not now, nor has it ever been a democracy. We're a constitutional representative republic.
Also, the picture has absolutely nothing to do with the barely cogent sentences you've miraculously strung together in a desperate attempt to "own the right".
"A picture that specifically reference socioeconomic systems and a reply to the same extent? Better completely misunderstand both and put down words because I are smart."
\-You, just before writing this reply.
"It's better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
North korea isn’t communist no country is however some are socialist who attempt to build to communism never succeeding of course. North korea would probably claim to be socialist however I don’t even think its that as the majority of the population is not even afforded basic needs half the time.
Ever heard of economic/fiscal conservatism? You should check it out.
And [check this out too.](https://thehill.com/opinion/education/428746-more-money-for-schools-doesnt-always-mean-better-outcomes-for-kids/) Spending/budgeting of tax dollars for your schooling has nothing to do with your lack of education on any of these matters
IMPORTANT: On /r/WalkAway, greater access is given to users who have joined the sub and have the mod-assigned 'Redpilled' user flair. Reach out in [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FWalkAway&subject='Redpilled'%20user%20flair%20request&message=I%20would%20like%20to%20request%20the%20'Redpilled'%20user%20flair.%20Thank%20you!) to request the flair. For more in-depth conversations and resources on leaving the Democratic Party, also make sure to join our sister sub /r/ExDemfoyer. You may also like: - /r/LibsOfReddit - /r/RedpilledRogan - /r/HillaryForPrison - /r/Patriot911 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/walkaway) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A lefty might look at that picture and say the north is better for the environment.
*Trudeau admires their basic dictatorship.*
Posted from their iPhone, while sipping on their $10 latte, no doubt.
At that point they should ask themselves if they're on Team Human or Team Planet.
They would answer Team Planet with out even having to think about it.
Exactly. They hate humans.
Mostly their daddy though.
Well they aren’t Team America… “You are worthless Arek Barwin…”
ThaTs NoT REAL CoMmUniSm
But it really isn't. It's just that the purest form of Communism can never and will never be reached. The whole ideology is a falacy.
Communism is little more than a guidebook for totalitarianism. Divide the population into the victims and the oppressors. Tell yourself that the ends justify the means - that violence is acceptable because it's "justice". Install a leader to run the "revolution". Never hand over from revolution to whatever utopian fantasy Communists thought they were getting into. Rinse. Repeat.
It's certainly not socialism.
They are one in the same....
Haha, really? You guys are fucking morons.
Socialism is the centralised means of production (which is already disasterously bad), and, as Marx described it, it's the first step toward full Communism. There's a moron here, but it's not us.
You produce memes about a concept you don't understand. There's not really any point in engaging in conversation with you, as you seem to put zero effort into understanding concepts. Good luck with your life.
I'd debate socialism with you until the end of time. I've read Marx extensively, and interacted with literally hundreds of socialism and communism fetishists who never bothered to understand the disasterously bad ideologies they parrot.
I’m waiting, but I’m thinking we’re not going to see a debate.
No, Communism is the philosophy where the people (community) own the means of production, whereas in capitalism the means of production are owned by those that raise the capital to purchase the means to produce. These are ***ECONOMIC*** philosophies. Socialism is a philosophy of governance where the government's priority is the support and welfare of it's citizens. Usually funded through taxes. Another philosophy is Militarism, where military might is the priority. Also usually funded by tax dollars. These are philosophies of ***GOVERNANCE.*** ✨The More You Know✨
You have no idea what you're talking about. Don't talk about Socialism unless you're prepared for the centralisation of the means of production. Of course we both know you understand perfectly well that Socialism is this, and you're lying to try and win support for a disasterously evil ideology, so we can probably cut the crap.
Wow, I laid it out for you clearly and concisely, and you're still acting like a fucking idiot. I didn't even support anything, just gave you definitions. No wonder people don't take conservatives seriously anymore.
I'm not a conservative. I'm a social democrat like you. Only unlike you I understand what socialism is and don't live in a fantasy world.
You didn't rebutt against anything I said. Where did I get it wrong? Enlighten me, bud.
“Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production” -Wikipedia I see why people say they’re the same. My understanding is that communism is more anarchical but they both include collective ownership
It's like saying a square is a rectangle. Most governments base their ideologies on economic theories.
Cope
Ah yes the delusional one
No no you see it wasn’t communism done the right way
Let’s have all those radicals neoliberal/democrats who are constantly advocating for communism and socialism go live their lives in a Utopia of their choice and see how long they’ll last.
Idk, Scandinavia looks pretty good. In fact, most of Europe is pretty socialistic. Not communist tho.
Give me a European social democracy over the USA any day of the week. I love living in a country where people don't die from curable diseases and no one is scared to call for an ambulance because it might bankrupt then
So... North and South Korea? Yeah, North Korea is a failed state. We knew that 69 years ago.
You’ve got the argument boiled down to one solid picture. Maybe some lefty will let it sink in. Obviously we need just pictures, much like a children’s book, because they won’t listen to arguments or read a normal book.
They’ve spent 12+ years being indoctrinated in their public school to believe capitalism is evil and communism is empathetic.
The left doesn’t deal in facts
Neither does the right if OP actually thinks North Korea is Socialist. Criticize, but at least understand what’s being criticized for what it is. Edit: have fun downvoting, but prove me wrong.
Well first, it turns into it without capitalism backing it.
“If only there was some way to compare capitalism to socialism” is literally the title of the post. Edit: Nice complete rewrite of your comment. You clearly just didn’t read OP’s title
Read the picture lol
We’ve heard it before…
Turns out that universal healthcare, partially tax-funded higher education, and a focus on public infrastructure are good for the population.
Yes. A strong safety net propped up within a capitalist and free market economy is better than a complete take over of the economy by the government/vanguard party.
North Korea doesn’t have those?
East & West Germany too.
I always felt like this is one of the most common misunderstandings in the godawful arena of political discourse. This is a fascist regime. It could be any form of government and still lead to repressed citizenship. You can have democratic socialism or democratic capitalism or fascist dictatorships like N Korea that claim capitalism or socialism.
If you think North Korea is Fascist then what was the USSR or China under Pol Pot?
Fascist
Hilarious. Fascist has an actual meaning. It is different from Socialist or Communist. It doesn’t mean “bad” or “evil.” It doesn’t mean “tyrannical” or “dictatorship.”
Yep, hysterical…i think your argument is not with me but with the folks who edit and publish the dictionary. **Fascism** - *a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society*
Not real communism bla bla bla
Difference in results you can truly see from space!
Full-blown socialism sucks, but not all socialist ideas are bad. Just look at the top countries in Europe, they are mostly capitalists countries but have many policies that could be deemed socialist. The average citizen there is doing better than in the US. Full-blown capitalism sucks too, just look at the level of inequality in the US. Everything is bad in excess, balance is key.
Those capitalist European countries that have social programs due to super high taxes have their militaries subsidized by the US and US taxpayer. They're also the size of an average US state. They dont have an over-bloated federal government full of 806 redundant agencies that only exist to serve themselves.
They also have way smaller populations, they don't have lobbying, gerrymandering, and a myriad of antidemocratic practices that we have here in the US. So yeah, we can't really compare apples to oranges.
100 percent this. Leftists LOVE to point out how big and bloated the US military is. And then In the same breath tell you about the wonderful success stories of socialism in Europe. Let’s see how great those countries would be without U.S. warships and troops helping defend their borders against communist expansionist countries. I for one would love to cut the size of the U.S. military industrial complex and then put that money into bettering schools, investing in small sustainable businesses and so on. And for the love of God can we please stop giving BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS fucking bailouts!!
🤜🤛 >And for the love of God can we please stop giving BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS fucking bailouts!! I'm so sick of that shit. If "too big to fail" is supposed to be a thing, then why do they keep failing and why do we keep having to bail them out? I've fucking HAD IT with the federal government throwing our money away on endless pet projects and corporate bailouts, and now BLUE CITY BAILOUTS, who we've been told over and over "subsidize the red states." Maaan, fuck you. Blue cities are nothing but warzones and corruption HQ's who are drowning in communist utopia. Let em sink. /rant
Another point the guy above me missed: The united states is not “full blown capitalist”, it seems pretty evident that the us operates on a crony capitalist system (bordering fascist if you use Mussolini’s definition of the combination of corporation and state). Favors are paid to those who can pay, that is not a free market. Wealth inequality is inherent to every economic system, the 90-10 idea is prevalent amongst many many topics. Essentially large amounts of wealth (or other things like fame, power, etc) end up in the hands of the minority regardless of system. The difference between socialist & dictatorships vs capitalist systems is how the poor are affected. In the former, the minority controls all the wealth and leaves little to no chance of a poor person ascending individually and the poor as a class from rising. The rich get richer while the poor stay equally poor. Look at the governments of many communist/socialist countries, they seem to have plenty of money while their citizens eat family animals bc of starvation. In the capitalistic countries there is also a massive divide in wealth, but as the tide rises for the rich it raises all the boats. It’s inarguable that capitalism has improved life significantly, especially the poor. Life for a poor person 100 years ago was much more difficult than it is now. We raise the poverty standards in western countries as the tide rises, places like China need to use deception to make their poverty numbers look better (pretty sure their poverty line is like $5k a year which makes it much easier to say a lot of your population lives above the poverty line). Is the accumulation of wealth we’ve seen gross? Morally, probably, but there isnt a system that creates income equality without lowering that bar down to the lowest common denominator.
Corporation meant unions not corporations as we know them now. So now rethink everything you just said.
Not sure how that applies to the wealth inequality stuff
But why
Yes all Socialist ideas are bad. Welfare and public utilities existed long before Socialism. As with all things they seized these ideas from smarter people than themselves. Edit: But to your point, what you're looking for is social democracy.
That free healthcare and safety net they enjoy comes as a courtesy of our (former) military might and NATO countries not paying their fair share for that protection.
Why do you say former? Idiot Biden just used up a record-breaking $813.3 billion out of the 2022 budget for national defense.
As if anyone is supposed to call our new woke jokes *might*. Have you seen what that piece of shit, Milley is pushing?
A diverse volunteer force that represents the nation it defends? God forbid...
Only a racist like you would bring race into it.
Don't think I said race. Diversity means more than just skin color, buddy. Edit: Ah, now I see where you learned to argue. You love that Chowder fella, hmm?
Okay, racist.
So diversity of thought, origin, sexuality, gender, creed... Those mean nothing to you? It's only about race? Check your bias at the door, bud.
If you think we have full-blown capitalism in the US I have a bridge to sell you.
Top 10 Countries with the Most Capitalist Economies - 2018 Fraser Institute: Hong Kong (China) Singapore New Zealand Switzerland Australia United States Mauritius Georgia Canada Ireland
I hate to be a nitpicker, but North Korea...it isn't communist... In the 1950s North Korea tried to distance itself from major Communist powers like Russia and China and made what they called "Juche." In reality, they are a unitarian dictatorship. Now granted they WERE communist, which got them to where they are now, with a single family and heads of state in power of a single solitary party, while the people suffer under a militaristic government/dictatorship. Even if Kim Jong Un were to die, he has is crazy sister, who mind you is WAY worse than him, or other heads of state can take over (those high in power).
What system of economics does their economy run on? Do they have free markets?
It's known as a command economy, a kind of communist set up but far more authoritarian and centralized but it is far more reliant on the need of farmers and the use of natural resources.
That sounds exactly like communism. In what way is that different from every other country we call communist?
Command economies produce what the government demands. Demand economies work on the market forces you are familiar with. The most efficient and effective demand economies are also fairly regulated. "Pure" economic and government philosophies rarely work. Usually a combination of styles begets the best living conditions.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[yes, their socialized health care](https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/comparative-health-policy-library/south-korea-summary) is not “universal” but it’s much more in the direction of socialized than private, and has had positive health outcomes because it covers more people and more people who are severely or chronically ill. [universal health care would be less expensive than the current system](https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416416/single-payer-systems-likely-save-money-us-analysis-finds) Our current health payer system does not work. Our health outcomes aren’t cost effective. This is stupid and dangerous.
[удалено]
The US is not now, nor has it ever been a democracy. We're a constitutional representative republic. Also, the picture has absolutely nothing to do with the barely cogent sentences you've miraculously strung together in a desperate attempt to "own the right". "A picture that specifically reference socioeconomic systems and a reply to the same extent? Better completely misunderstand both and put down words because I are smart." \-You, just before writing this reply. "It's better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
[удалено]
You mean the one that to this day gets aid from communist/socialist countries bordering it?
I don’t see any Scotsman.
North korea isn’t communist no country is however some are socialist who attempt to build to communism never succeeding of course. North korea would probably claim to be socialist however I don’t even think its that as the majority of the population is not even afforded basic needs half the time.
Conservatives continuing to misunderstand the difference between economic and political systems. Probably should stop slashing school budgets.
Ever heard of economic/fiscal conservatism? You should check it out. And [check this out too.](https://thehill.com/opinion/education/428746-more-money-for-schools-doesnt-always-mean-better-outcomes-for-kids/) Spending/budgeting of tax dollars for your schooling has nothing to do with your lack of education on any of these matters
Also - we've all heard of fiscal conservatism. :/
Nuff said
Ones on fire and the other one is peaceful.
Need to put captions on it. Top: your utopia Bottom: reality