The double standard between Capitalist genocide and Communist genocide

Which pretty much proves that capitalism is not a government system but an economic system.

 

Why did you skip the second half of my post which talks about GOVERNMENT police enforcing this economic system? You have ignored it twice so far in a row, going to try a third?

 

Again you keep proving my point. Government enforcing an ECONOMIC system.

 

What do you think Communism is than? Communism is also an economic system, that the government forces.

 

What your post ignores and gets completely wropng is the difference between a simple crime based on greed and deliberate genocide by intent to impose an idealology.

the examples you give about capitalism are merely crimes of greed. Yes they happened but such crimes happen to one degree or another throughout history even long before capitalism was ever thought of. They continue to happen and often even in socialist/communist nations.

The genocide of communists in the 20th century was far worse ( even worse than Hitler's genocide ). It's purpose was to impose an ideaology and way of life onto people who did not want it. Yes this is a greater crime.

Capitalism works and works well it has in fact allowed more progress prosperity and advancement than any other system. Communsim is simply slavery dressed up in nice rhetoric.

- - - Updated - - -

Capitalism cannot be enforced. It is rooted entirely on volitional choice

 

Allowing over a million people die of starvation of your doorstep is just a "simple crime of greed"? This is truly despicable, its sad to see Capitalists even to this day defending atrocities like that.

The crime of imposing your ideology on an unwilling participant existed long before Communism, it does not mean its off the hook for doing it and the same goes for capitalism when it comes to allowing people to starve on your door step while you over indulge in luxury. If you were starving on someones door step who was over indulging, you would want to force your ideology on him to trust me.

Imposing an ideology on someone who doesnt want it is worse than genocide? Have you lost your mind? You are insane.

Yes it works well, for the rich. Ever heard of the Gilded Age? It was a time when Americans economic policy was laissez-faire, meaning something like "hands off" in French which is a completely free market, we had a huge boom to prosperity during that time but the rich's gains overshadows the poor's losses, thus giving it the name "Gilded Age" meaning a thin layer of gold "The term was coined by writers Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner in The Gilded Age: A Tale of Today, which they published in 1873, and which satirized what they believed to be an era of serious social problems disguised by a thin gold gilding. There was a significant human cost attached to this period of economic growth,[26] as U.S. industry had the highest rate of accidents in the world.[27] In 1889, railroads employed 704,000 men, of whom 20,000 were injured and 1,972 were killed on the job.[28] The U.S. was also the only industrial power to have no workman's compensation program in place to support injured workers."

Thats weird, because it was the Right wing Capitalists who enslaved tens of millions of slaves and allowed tens of millions more to die on the journey to the plantation, right wingers today are even calling Abraham Lincoln a war criminal saying they should have let slavery die a natural death rather than killing Americans to stop it. Oh, and guess who wrote Lincoln a letter congratulating him on ending slavery and helping the working classes while winning a huge democratic election? Karl Marx, the inventor of Communism. He was in favor of democracy and vehemently opposed to slavery, and this includes wage slavery which we have today where you make barley enough money to live and rarely enough money to move out of your hole. That is slavery dressed up in nice rhetoric.

- - - Updated - - -

Capitalism cannot be enforced. It is rooted entirely on volitional choice[/QUOTE]

If someone tries to go into a store and get free bread, as Communist countries have allowed, than police will come in and enforce the capitalist system taking you to jail. Capitalism can and very much is enforced, you are just trying to wrap it in nice rhetoric to distance it away from the government because you hate government so much.

 

So you believe in theft.

 

I believe in forced sharing, you can call it theft if you want too lol.

I think food, healthcare, and college are rights and giving these rights to everyone will benefit all of society for very very obvious reasons. The right wing believes in trickle down economics where the wealthy get super rich and it trickles down to the poor, well I believe in trickle up economics where the poor and middle classes receive much higher wages, better education, and healthcare thus allowing them to contribute to society in a far more efficient manner, and when the poor/middle classes have more money they will be able to buy more goods from the rich making everyone benefit equally rather than a small 1% receiving 99% of the benefits. I do not believe if you dont work you should receive free money, if you dont work you shouldnt get anything from the government unless you have some sort of medical issue or something. But if you do work and you work hard, you should not be paid barley enough money to live you should be paid a decent amount to live a decent life. Its a rather simple concept.

 

So you still believe in theft forced by government. Authoritarians not interested in freedom often do.

 

One mans freedom can impede on another mans freedom, for example one mans freedom to pollute the air impedes on another mans freedom to breathe that air in a safe and reasonable manner, thus government steps in to ensure freedom for the majority rather than freedom for the wealthy elite at the cost of the poor and middle classes well being. One mans freedom to refuse to hire black people impedes on the black mans freedom to get a job, so the government steps in and makes it illegal to discriminate against blacks and gays, or anything.

You see, we both want freedom but we have very different conclusions on how to get there. You want freedom by sitting back and letting the pieces fall where they may, even if that means allowing racial discrimination in the work place, whereas I want freedom by having the government, which is for the people and by the people, to ensure this freedom in a transparent democratic manner. Our objectives are essentially the same, our solutions are radically different.

 

If someone tries to go into a store and get free bread, as Communist countries have allowed, than police will come in and enforce the capitalist system taking you to jail. Capitalism can and very much is enforced, you are just trying to wrap it in nice rhetoric to distance it away from the government because you hate government so much.[/QUOTE]

No one defended it.

On your doorstep or the other side of the planet we all allow people to die every day and this includes you.

Emotional rhetoric is what you base that argument on and it is not a valid argument.

I never said imposing an idealogy is worse than genocide I clearly stated genocide in the name of imposing an idealogy is worse. Try reading comprehension for a change.

Putting someone in jail for stealing break is not enforcing a capitalist system it is punishing someone who violated the rights of another individual plain and simple.

Allowing someone to walk in and take break as some communist nation have done ( your claim ) is simply legal protection for the same crime..

One of Marx's many many sins is the idea of wage slavery which does not and never has existed.

Marx practicied de facto slavery with his own maid who he never paid bu only BARELY supported even refusing to recognize the son he knocked her up with.

he was a drug addict alcoholic pig and a dead beat fool who never worked a job in his life yet claimed to be an expert in industroy and capital which is why his monstrous vision belongs in the garbage can of history

 

No reasonably modern nation on Earth can go to war without at least the willing acceptance of the bulk of its civilian population.

The Nazis had widespread support in World War Two from their civilian population.

Saddam Hussein had the support of millions of his civilian countrymen.

 

You are still talking about government enforced theft. Your analogies are not even close.

 

On your doorstep or the other side of the planet we all allow people to die every day and this includes you.[/QUOTE]
The difference is this was the richest nation on the planet allowing its direct neighbors to starve to death while the English hogged the food to sell for insanely high prices just to make an extra buck of the starving poor. I dont "allow" people to die around the world, if I could stop it I obviously would but the problem is it costs huge amounts of money, which the ruling 1% has horded and wont let go.

Simply dismissing everything as emotional rhetoric is also not a valid argument.

Did you even think about what you said? How do you impose an ideology on a group you are committing genocide on? That makes absolutely no sense, you cant force your ideology on a dead man. Unless your a Mormon, they have special magical powers for that situation

Yes, but where does the idea to have the right to buy and sell goods come from? Capitalism, so for someone to take someone elses bought goods is impeding on Capitalism, then the police come and haul you away.

lol....its fun to see republicans rage over things they think Karl Marx did

 

Wow, you didnt even try to use reason or logic to prove your point you are just dismissing everything as "not even close" or "thats a logical fallacy, but im not going to say how or why, im just going to pull things I say out of my ass"

 

Ah, pot meet kettle. You think theft is OK as long as it is authoritarian in nature and you think theft is the same thing as protecting from something. No logic in anything you have presented so far.

 

The difference is this was the richest nation on the planet allowing its direct neighbors to starve to death while the English hogged the food to sell for insanely high prices just to make an extra buck of the starving poor. I dont "allow" people to die around the world, if I could stop it I obviously would but the problem is it costs huge amounts of money, which the ruling 1% has horded and wont let go.


Simply dismissing everything as emotional rhetoric is also not a valid argument.


Did you even think about what you said? How do you impose an ideology on a group you are committing genocide on? That makes absolutely no sense, you cant force your ideology on a dead man. Unless your a Mormon, they have special magical powers for that situation


Yes, but where does the idea to have the right to buy and sell goods come from? Capitalism, so for someone to take someone elses bought goods is impeding on Capitalism, then the police come and haul you away.


lol....its fun to see republicans rage over things they think Karl Marx did[/QUOTE]

No you personally allow it because you do not prevent one person from starving to death when you could probably keep 100 from starving to death.

It was Not ENGLAND who allowed people to starve in Ireland it was a few.

I did not dismiss everything as emotional rhetoric I dismissed your emotional rhetoric as emotional rhetoric.

Ask the jews of Poland how an idealogy was imposed on them while genodice was also being commited against them. Your attempt at evasion of that fact is a failure.

The idea of the right to have goods to buy and sell comes not specifically from capitalism but from human rights specifically the right to self determination and the right to keep and dispose of the product of ones labor as one sees fit the opposite is slavery which demands the labor or others as a right.

The latter is also communism.

Not what I think he did but what Is proven he did ( or did not ).

He designed one of histories worst philosophies and most evil idealogies. The worst crime ever commited was his mom failing to get an abortion.

 

What he ^^^ said.....

 

When you pollute the air you are stealing my freedom to breath that clean air, so I will take your freedom to pollute the air. That is Socialism in a nutshell.

 

As far as im concerned the Nazi's could care less if the Jews embraced their ideology or not, their only mission was to kill them and and force them to work.

Non-violently getting free bread from someone who has an over abundance when you are starving can easily be considered a right to determination, but since it favors the lower classes rather than the upper it is simply disregarded entirely, as you are about to do.

 

You are still avoiding what you approved of before and that is government enforced theft. You keep going off on tangents.

 

GOvernment does nothing in a non violent manner. The example you gave was a violent theft. Starving or not it is still theft.

It favors no one and communsim creates those classes while capitalism tends to get rid of them

 

Yeah, just like the Bolsheviks had no intention that the Ukrainians and Belorussians starve to death. It's just an unintended consequence of removing their food. LMAO

 

I explained to you why government enforced "theft" was necessary but you simply dismiss it every time lol.

I will explain again short but clearly, the poor are stuck in a position that is extremely hard to get out of despite the anecdotal nonsense the right flings around about how "I had a buddy who got out, so anyone can do it!", yes you may of had a buddy who got out but there are exceptions to everything and its far more complicated than "I was poor now im not, boom capitalism is amazing" because the fact is there are people who worked twice as hard and got half the results due to environmental factors such as never having their education paid for by their parents or having to drop out of school due to massive gang violence. With this being a definite reality, its very simple to believe the rich need to begin repaying the working class for its exploitation of it.

Tell me, do you honestly believe someone who makes 7,500,000$ a year works 100 times harder than someone who makes 75,000$ a year? You are either really really bad at math or incredibly delusional if you think he works 100xs harder.

 

Capitalism gets rid of class? Government does nothing in a non-violent manner? You are so incredibly ignorant I dont know where to begin and im hesitant to even continue but I may as well or get in trouble for trolling lol

First of all, saying the government does nothing in a non-violent manner is simple fearmongering plain and simple. As for Capitalism getting rid of classes, show me a single capitalist society that has ever gotten rid of class in any time in history, ever. You wont, because you pulled that out of your ass just like everything else you said.

Also you are saying letting someone starve to death at your feet is not as big of a crime as stealing a meager piece of bread from someone who has a large abundance, actually you are saying its not a crime at all! The fact is its a crime against humanity to purposefully let someone starve at your feet while you horde the food for yourself. "Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do" - Voltaire
Im not saying give everything you have away, im saying rich people at the very top who are hording resources exploiting the poor and working classes need to be held responsible for this and forced into redistributing their ill gotten gains back to the ones they stole it from.