Could be, I haven’t investegated as much as I should have, I probably could have attacked the notion that sortition was a good idea of gathering information on Communist movements.

I guess the central premise of capitalism is that while every society has its haves and have nots, capitalism is supposed to encourage the haves to invest in the economy rather than hoarding their wealth. In return, they stand to get even wealthier, but a stronger economy ought to generate more employment and generally improve the lives of commoners as well.

Nitpicky, but that’s the premise of Liberalism, not Capitalism. Capitalism emerged not because it was an idea, but an evolution in Mode of Production. Liberalism is the ideological justification.

Unfortunately, in a never-ending quest to make wealth-generation more efficient and streamlined, employment is being eliminated through automation, outsourcing, etc. and the system is eating itself out from the inside. I doubt it can persist much longer, but what will replace it remains unclear. I pray that it will be something sensible that ensures everyone has their basic needs met and can still find rewarding pursuits in life. But there are so many ways it could go very wrong, and that includes staying on the current course.

Have you read Marx? He makes the case that due to Capitalism’s tendency to centralize and form monopolist syndicates with internal planning, the next mode of production is Socialism, ie public ownership and planning of the syndicates formed by the market system.

Do you believe ideas to create matter? Am I misunderstanding you?

No problem! Let me know if you have any questions.

Interesting, didn’t know about that. Didn’t say anything about the USSR forcing it on him, though, nor did it seem to outweigh the west’s spread of the Nazis take on the famine.

Circling back, my stance is

1. In the early 1930s, the USSR tried to collectivize agriculture from the bourgeois Kulaks

2. At the same time, there was drought, flooding, and pests which lowered harvest yields

3. The Kulaks resisted collectivization, burning their crops and killing their livestock rather than handing it over to the Communists

4. The Red Army retailiated violently against these Kulaks

5. The Nazi Press spread stories about it being an intentional famine amounting to targeted genocide, rather than a humanitarian tragedy

6. The West tended to favor the Nazi’s story

7. Outside of WWII, this was the last major famine in the USSR, as collectivization ultimately allowed for industrialized farming. Even if the collectivization process was botched and should have happened after industrialized private farming was mastered, it ultimately ended famines after the tragic famine.

Which of these 7 points do you disagree with? All are supported by the Holodomor Wikipedia Article, so if you do disagree you can help edit the article on Wikipedia if you have evidence.

USSR deliberately stole farmers food as result of which millions starved.

Mind sharing evidence? The USSR tried to collectivize the bourgeois farms run by the Kulaks, yes, they didn’t try to starve anyone intentionally.

People who don’t okay ball were executed on the spot. Peasants were not permitted to leave their towns, people who attempted were executed.

Moscow was petitioned to stop and they refused.

People can make their own conclusions.

There was resistance from the Bourgeoisie, yes. The Kulaks resisted, often violently, in the middle of drought, flood, and pestilent famine.

All the other bullshit you are spinning is trying to undermine these facts which are suppoted by historical records.

I did not once undermine this. I, in fact, directed you to a wikipedia article affirming what I had said. Are you calling Wikipedia genocide deniers too?

USSR even got a NYT regime removed to tell American public nobody is starving because it was getting a bit awkward on global stage due to the reports coming out from Ukraine.

Mind sharing a source? Western media tended to share the German narrative, the aforementioned origin of the “genocide” stance on the famine coming from the Nazi press was repeated in Britain and other western countries.

Which part do you disagree with? This isn’t genocide denial, not even western historians believe the USSR’s 1930s famine was genocide. Please explain what you mean, before resorting to libel.

While scholars are in consensus that the cause of the famine was man-made,[10][11] it remains in dispute whether the Holodomor was directed at Ukrainians and whether it constitutes a genocide, the point of contention being the absence of attested documents explicitly ordering the starvation of any area in the Soviet Union.[12] Some historians conclude that the famine was deliberately engineered by Joseph Stalin to eliminate a Ukrainian independence movement.[c] Others suggest that the famine was primarily the consequence of rapid Soviet industrialisation and collectivization of agriculture. A middle position, held for example by historian Andrea Graziosi, is that the initial causes of the famine were an unintentional byproduct of the process of collectivization but once it set in, starvation was selectively weaponized and the famine was “instrumentalized” and amplified against Ukrainians as a means to punish Ukrainians for resisting Soviet policies and to suppress their nationalist sentiments.[13]

Straight from Wikipedia, are you accusing them of genocide denial too? Archival evidence points to the second, it was a consequence of collectivization and the reaction against collectivization, combined with natural factors.

You’re conflating disparate factors. Ukraine was the breadbasket of the USSR, that doesn’t mean there was a targeted famine towards them.

Kulaks were a group of bourgeois farmers that opposed collectivization. Many of these Kulaks burned their own crops and killed their livestock to avoid handing it over to the Red Army and the Communists.

The famine in Ukraine and parts of Russia was a separate but linked matter. The Kulak resistance to collectivization was multiplied by drought, flood, and pests, making an already low harvest spiral into crisis. The idea that it was an intentional famine and therefore a genocide actually originated in Volkischer Beobatcher, a Nazi news outlet, before spreading to the west. It isn’t “genocide apologia,” it was a horrible tragedy caused by a combination of human and environmental factors.

Pretty sure its fishing.

Do you think Kulaks were an ethnicity, and not a bourgeois class? Collectivization of agriculture was poorly done, yes, but it wasn’t what powered industrialization. This is a misanalysis of the USSR.

The notion that ideas create matter, rather than the opposite, is anti-scientific.

So what does a blend of capitalism and socialism look like to you? I’m saying that sectors which can lead to unfair control over necessary resources should be solely controlled by the government.

There isn’t really such thing as a “blend,” systems are either controlled by the bourgeoisie or proletariat. A socialist country with a large market sector is still socialist, a Capitalist country with a large public sector is still Capitalist. I recommend reading Socialism Developed China, not Capitalism.

And you say monopolization. Monopolization of what exactly? I don’t think you care too much for the monopolization of the gaming industry or the video streaming industry do you?

Monopolization paves the way for socialization. Large, monopolist syndicates make themselves open to central planning and democratic control.

Also, you emphasize wealth concentration. What exactly do you dislike about it? Especially considering that under a social democracy wealth is only at that point luxury since there is welfare available.

Wealth concentration leads to influence, which results in further privitization and erosion of social safety nets, like we see in the declining Nordic Countries.

Trends.

If you are big daddy owner, centralized state permits you to have access to the top guy who can do anything.

It is a lot easier to corrupt one guy, then it is to do one guy in every state for example is the logic here.

This is inherent defect of centralization. Sure we can get a lot of shit done effectively if everybody is good faith actor. And progress has been made but it was done with a ton of grift that we just accept

This isn’t really accurate, though, this is just an argument against democracy. Recall elections are standard Marxist practice, which pretty much eliminates this problem outright. It seems like you haven’t engaged with Marxist organizational theory.

Capitalism and socialism are economic system for property. We are talking about the state in of itself here.

They are always present linked. You can’t divorce them, the Base creates and supports the Superstructure.

I would posit the issue not economic system choice but rather corruptions of the ruling class.

This is generally unfounded.

I bet any properly set up system would work as long as it was designed to work properly.

You can’t “design” a system, that’s utopianism.

If you notice the best systems we currently have are actually a mix of both.

No, the best systems currently are Socialist. There are no “mixes.” Or, at least, everything is a mix, no system has made it to Communism yet, but the best systems are run along Marxist lines.

There is a strong correlation between quality of life of the working class and corruption.

Countries with low corruption are able to deliver high quality of life because they don’t a lot of blatant looting.

I bet this will be the down fall of the US empire, the parasite class taking too much and it is causing serious social issues for Americans. They know something is wrong bit they jerk politics without realizing it is a futile exercise.

This is more correlation and not causation.

Idealism is wrong, though, so focusing on it is useless IMO.

It reversed industrialization and shifted internationally.

I defend capitalism because it is the most equitable and productive economic system that has ever existed, lifting more people out of poverty than ever before.

Incorrect, Socialism gets that honor, the PRC is responsible. Read Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism.

Free markets create space for those who don’t fit in. As an autistic person, I appreciate a world where I can find a way to survive other than convincing a committee that I deserve to exist.

This is an absurd strawman of central planning.

Under a free market, one gets rich by providing value. Economic relations are mutually consensual. That’s the definition.

Even more absurd. Individuals get wealthy by exploiting laborers. Economic relations are enforced by the system itself, not consent. The Laborers must work to not starve.

What is called “capitalism” these days is, generally speaking, the places where the free market has broken down. Slaves aren’t a free market scenario. Only having one available job isn’t a free market scenario. Big corporations controlling the government to prevent their competition from surviving or arising isn’t a free market scenario.

Yep, Capitalism defeats itself. You can’t turn the clock back.

All the “worst aspects of capitalism” that people complain about are exactly the aspects of the world that most resemble capitalism’s alternatives like anarchy and centralized command economies.

Correct, Capitalism socializes itself and paves the way for central planning.

We need more free market, not less. We need to let people buy a pack of cigarettes and then sell them for $2 a pop to make a profit, not kill them for doing this.

An absurd comparison and a strange call to go back in time to less developed Capitalism.

The anti-capitalist hate is the result of decades of anti-working class propaganda that has made generations of people dedicated to destroying the very thing that gives them hope and possibility in the world.

Capitalism’s decay.

Biggest psy op in history, as Marx himself would be the first to recognize if he were alive and commenting today. I defend capitalism NOT because I want to fit in, but because it is the right thing to do.

Marx would be elated to be proven correct.

I am aware of the process, the US produces the vast majority of its commodities oversees before “finishing” or “assembling” in the US. It’s Imperialism in action, where it hyper-exploits the Global South for super-profits.