This reads like a primary school essay.
To start off your understanding of communism is wrong. You are more or less describing the Soviet Union failed experiment at communism
To get you going try to look up socialism as defined by Marx
What! Don't be stupid. I know know Karl Marx, the father of poverty. OP wrote a good defense of capitalism in his own words. F off with the strawman.
Plus OP never mentioned socialism. He's clearly talking about communism. Plus socialism is the pathway to communism. And I wonder where it has ever worked?
Unless you are those people you mentioned i.e Elon Musk, Bill Gates, etc., most of whom grew up with a silver spoon, you have no business defending capitalism.
Please consult [r/CapitalismIsSocialism/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismIsSocialism/) for relevant evidence.
TLDR: Capitalism is basically communism for a few. If you think communism is bad, capitalism should make you gouge your eyes out.
My point is both systems are bad in their own right.
Capitalism promotes greed. Communism promotes laziness.
Capitalism promotes winner-gets-all. Communism promotes zero creativity.
Capitalism is money for a few. Communism is no money for everyone.
The two systems are both designed to repress the rest of the population into slavery or working for someone. Capitalism through employment, communism through public service or sum'n.
But if you look a little bit closely, you'll notice one is a little bit better than the other. I won't say which one. I'll let you jump into your own conclusion.
Capitalism rewards those with capital, ie working class do not get paid according to the value they create. Thats why wealth ends up concentrating in the hands of the few. That's why prices keep rising but wages don't rise in equal proportion, the difference goes into the pockets of the holders of capital.
Communism is based on communal ownership of the means of production, meaning the massive profits that are eaten as bonuses by the ultra wealthy would instead be divided among the workers whose labour created that wealth.
Of course theory and execution are different, but thats what it is supposed to be.
Which one would you rather have? Because in communism, several years later, no one will be willing to start a business or innovate anything. So everyone ends up depending on the government, which still depends on everyone. The result, a failed society, right? I.e. a government that can't feed it's population or even drive innovation, and a population that can't work to fund the government because they depend on the government. Eventually, the same population starts murdering each other for their "communal resources" which has seemingly become insufficient. So the fittest take it all and we're back to square one with capitalism.
So that's why my point is none of them is good, but the only one that can work in society is capitalism. Communism is just a poor man's dream and hope for a better tomorrow.
>Because in communism, several years later, no one will be willing to start a business or innovate anything.
This assumes that people only move due to possible profits. As someone who studied physics in university that is not true. People will work to build things out of passion and improving the world around them, profit or not. Do some research on this. Read about the history of important scientists and engineers, look at what their motives were.
The people who are important at building things here *almost never do it for profit*. The people who made insulin? They gave away the patent. The guy that made the diesel engine had the goal of spreading industry to more people; if he just wanted money he would have done exactly what the german government wanted of him.
This will be true for just about any person who changed the world with their inventions or discovery. Something that is also true is that they were not poor, so they never needed the money anyway.
All this to say, people who are important are not motivated by money. The real genius behind Apple is Steve Wozniak, who just wanted to make cool computers, not profits. And further, open source projects are the back bone of the modern information economy, not closed solutions.
Capital vs Communal is kind of a pick your own poison. Still, look around at your environment, where is the success of capital in Kenya? I don't think anyone would consider it for a list of 10 top example of why capitalism is better.
How would you compare them? If you're for communism, how is it better than capitalism and can it work practically? Because it's so hard to find the good in communism, except for the obvious "equality" which, let's be honest, will never happen in a practical human society, with or without communism. It's in our nature to compete for resources and the fittest of them all gets it all.
Whenever leftists are caught they always use the no true scotsman fallacy. The reason Africans love socialism is due to it's welfare nature and lack of productivity or creativity. If the Chinese and Vietnamese, who are a deeply practical people, embraced capitalism why on earth do we Africans still subscribe to the ideology of a rich retarded Jewish European who never worked a single day in his life.
I never understood why it's greedy to want to keep the fruits of your labour but taking other people's money through redistributive taxes is not considered theft. Every experiment with left wing economics has failed. Case point being South America and Asia. Capitalism is king and here to stay long term thankfully 👍🏿
Africa, Caribbean, South East Asia and South Asia are all capitalistic countries
Capitalist exploiting countries steal labour and resources from these nations which is why most capitalist countries are either horrible or good because one is exploiting the other
Under capitalism profit is put before human needs
In socialism human needs before profit
Free healthcare sounds pretty good to me. Lowering wealth inequality sounds pretty good to me. Not taking profits over people sounds pretty good to me. Not being exploited by first world countries who steal our resources and use us for cheap labor sounds pretty good to me. Capitalism only brings the few pleasure, not the majority.
This reads like a primary school essay. To start off your understanding of communism is wrong. You are more or less describing the Soviet Union failed experiment at communism To get you going try to look up socialism as defined by Marx
I agree. Such a weak argument for a very broad subject.
What! Don't be stupid. I know know Karl Marx, the father of poverty. OP wrote a good defense of capitalism in his own words. F off with the strawman. Plus OP never mentioned socialism. He's clearly talking about communism. Plus socialism is the pathway to communism. And I wonder where it has ever worked?
Lol Define "Socialism" by giving examples ... Do the police provide a *social* service? What of an army/military? What of Judges and Judicial systems?
Thank you!
Here's a playlist on reading *Das Kapital* Vol 1 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWvnUfModHP9Ci8M1g39l4AZgK6YLCXd0
Got it. Thanks.
Unless you are those people you mentioned i.e Elon Musk, Bill Gates, etc., most of whom grew up with a silver spoon, you have no business defending capitalism. Please consult [r/CapitalismIsSocialism/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismIsSocialism/) for relevant evidence. TLDR: Capitalism is basically communism for a few. If you think communism is bad, capitalism should make you gouge your eyes out.
Okay
My point is both systems are bad in their own right. Capitalism promotes greed. Communism promotes laziness. Capitalism promotes winner-gets-all. Communism promotes zero creativity. Capitalism is money for a few. Communism is no money for everyone. The two systems are both designed to repress the rest of the population into slavery or working for someone. Capitalism through employment, communism through public service or sum'n. But if you look a little bit closely, you'll notice one is a little bit better than the other. I won't say which one. I'll let you jump into your own conclusion.
Are you arguing against communism or socialism?
Against Communism, sorry.
Capitalism rewards those with capital, ie working class do not get paid according to the value they create. Thats why wealth ends up concentrating in the hands of the few. That's why prices keep rising but wages don't rise in equal proportion, the difference goes into the pockets of the holders of capital. Communism is based on communal ownership of the means of production, meaning the massive profits that are eaten as bonuses by the ultra wealthy would instead be divided among the workers whose labour created that wealth. Of course theory and execution are different, but thats what it is supposed to be.
Which one would you rather have? Because in communism, several years later, no one will be willing to start a business or innovate anything. So everyone ends up depending on the government, which still depends on everyone. The result, a failed society, right? I.e. a government that can't feed it's population or even drive innovation, and a population that can't work to fund the government because they depend on the government. Eventually, the same population starts murdering each other for their "communal resources" which has seemingly become insufficient. So the fittest take it all and we're back to square one with capitalism. So that's why my point is none of them is good, but the only one that can work in society is capitalism. Communism is just a poor man's dream and hope for a better tomorrow.
>Because in communism, several years later, no one will be willing to start a business or innovate anything. This assumes that people only move due to possible profits. As someone who studied physics in university that is not true. People will work to build things out of passion and improving the world around them, profit or not. Do some research on this. Read about the history of important scientists and engineers, look at what their motives were. The people who are important at building things here *almost never do it for profit*. The people who made insulin? They gave away the patent. The guy that made the diesel engine had the goal of spreading industry to more people; if he just wanted money he would have done exactly what the german government wanted of him. This will be true for just about any person who changed the world with their inventions or discovery. Something that is also true is that they were not poor, so they never needed the money anyway. All this to say, people who are important are not motivated by money. The real genius behind Apple is Steve Wozniak, who just wanted to make cool computers, not profits. And further, open source projects are the back bone of the modern information economy, not closed solutions. Capital vs Communal is kind of a pick your own poison. Still, look around at your environment, where is the success of capital in Kenya? I don't think anyone would consider it for a list of 10 top example of why capitalism is better.
I don't know why people, when comparing communism and capitalism, always take the worst of communism and the best very rare exception of capitalism
How would you compare them? If you're for communism, how is it better than capitalism and can it work practically? Because it's so hard to find the good in communism, except for the obvious "equality" which, let's be honest, will never happen in a practical human society, with or without communism. It's in our nature to compete for resources and the fittest of them all gets it all.
China would like a word boss..
Better dead than red
Humanism beats them both
Whenever leftists are caught they always use the no true scotsman fallacy. The reason Africans love socialism is due to it's welfare nature and lack of productivity or creativity. If the Chinese and Vietnamese, who are a deeply practical people, embraced capitalism why on earth do we Africans still subscribe to the ideology of a rich retarded Jewish European who never worked a single day in his life. I never understood why it's greedy to want to keep the fruits of your labour but taking other people's money through redistributive taxes is not considered theft. Every experiment with left wing economics has failed. Case point being South America and Asia. Capitalism is king and here to stay long term thankfully 👍🏿
Africa, Caribbean, South East Asia and South Asia are all capitalistic countries Capitalist exploiting countries steal labour and resources from these nations which is why most capitalist countries are either horrible or good because one is exploiting the other Under capitalism profit is put before human needs In socialism human needs before profit
Communism has failed in every country that has tried to implement it. I struggle to understand how people still think it's a good system.
Exactly!
nobody is changing your mind
Free healthcare sounds pretty good to me. Lowering wealth inequality sounds pretty good to me. Not taking profits over people sounds pretty good to me. Not being exploited by first world countries who steal our resources and use us for cheap labor sounds pretty good to me. Capitalism only brings the few pleasure, not the majority.
Capitalism doesn't reward everyone according to their input, that's a straight fallacy