Even removing capitalism in society, communism still killed people for reasons outside of capitalism versus communism. Plenty of prisons and labour camps in various communist countries can attest to that. Tankies are willing to kill just to impose their will. Having “better society” as excuse has nothing to do with, they just want power.
You’re right. There are definitely unsavory actors acting under the banner of communism, whom in an ideal world would be dealt with. Historically, many of thrm have been capitalists trying to secure an increase in profit, however.
I’m NOT a tankie, I’m an anarchist, in fact. However, all one has to do is look at history (real history, not propoganda. Actual numbers.) To see that communism’s infamous death toll is actually much, much lower than capitalism’s even when adjusted for whatever factor you can think of. For an accurate, well-researched piece with plenty of nuance and primary sources that deals with this matter explicitly, I reccomend the book ‘Blackshirts and Reds’. It’s a fascinating breakdown of how capitalist propoganda has deeply distorted our view of history, especially when it comes to both fascism and communism.
Not to defend capitalism (I would be more in favour of anarchism provided that certain conditions have to be met first), but I would say that communism only killed less because it is a newer ideology. It is only 150 years old, give or take, with it’s practical existence lasting for 76 years. If we are considering mercantilism as capitalism (both are still looking for maximising profits), then in over 300-400 hundred years it’s logical to say that capitalism killed more, by virtue of how long profit seeking has been part of human economic policies.
And since we are talking about economic policies, barring the death camps, practically speaking, if communism went for as long as capitalism has, it could catch up with the number on death tolls, considering that communist centralisation of agriculture and ignoring experts caused similarly human-induced famines. A lot of people kinda forgot about Lysenko and his deliberate sidelining of knowledge and experience of farmers and scientists, causing poor harvest and many people starving to death. And I probably don’t need to remind everyone what Mao’s war on sparrows caused on China’s agriculture. Moreover, even after Stalin’s death and Lysenko out of the picture, USSR-- and many Soviet satellite states-- have been on ration for many years. USSR struggled to up the agricultural production in spite of being a vast country with abundant fertile lands.
Those are both issues caused by issues that capitalism is subject to as well! Authoritarianism, stupidity and ignorance… Sadly, any working society must be capable of managing these issues. Statistically speaking, as far as the sources I’ve seen have showed me, capitalism tends to cause more death and suffering than communism. One needs only compare the state of Soviet countires before, after, and during the USSR to see that quite plainly represented.
If the very word ‘anarchism’ is outaide your comfort zone, then yes I suppose I won’t be able to be very productive for you.
If you do find yourself curious though, I’m always happy to talk politics, and always open to seriously considering and empathizing with other points of view from my own! Even capitalism 😆
If I had a dollar for every time I heard an anarchist cry for the police when things go south I’d have enough to buy a few books on how to avoid anarchy. I’ve seen and read enough. Thank you for offering.
The use of public facilities does not preclude critique of them. That’s the same argument as ‘capitalism made your iPhone’.
One can both believe that the police should be defunded, and be left with them as the only viable solution to resolve a conflict. The fact that anarchists must sometimes rely on the police, I assure you, is not pleasant for anyone involved 🤣
Except maybe those who profit from police activity somehow 🤷♀️
The foundation of anarchy is specifically based on the absence of authority. It would be unpleasant for everyone involved, but if, by your statement, an anarchist will have to swallow their pride to resolve a conflict with an authoritative entity, then they should perhaps think of another belief that will accept some level of authority. It may even be possible to come up with a whole new societal belief system. It is true that capitalism may not be credited with the direct creation of the iPhone, but it did foster an environment for competition to develop other products you have most likely used in your lifetime. These particular products did influence a culture in a more positive direction. For example, Nintendo’s Gameboy. That’s not to say I am gauging the success of a society by materialistic gains, but again, why not take the best of all worlds and make something new. Bonus points if you can solve for greed in a realistic manner and not in a vacuum.
Because humans can totally exist in perfect harmony under anything but capitalism. Pack it up fellas, this one’s solved inherent evil in human nature!
No one genuine ever said it was perfect. Just better.
Even removing capitalism in society, communism still killed people for reasons outside of capitalism versus communism. Plenty of prisons and labour camps in various communist countries can attest to that. Tankies are willing to kill just to impose their will. Having “better society” as excuse has nothing to do with, they just want power.
You’re right. There are definitely unsavory actors acting under the banner of communism, whom in an ideal world would be dealt with. Historically, many of thrm have been capitalists trying to secure an increase in profit, however. I’m NOT a tankie, I’m an anarchist, in fact. However, all one has to do is look at history (real history, not propoganda. Actual numbers.) To see that communism’s infamous death toll is actually much, much lower than capitalism’s even when adjusted for whatever factor you can think of. For an accurate, well-researched piece with plenty of nuance and primary sources that deals with this matter explicitly, I reccomend the book ‘Blackshirts and Reds’. It’s a fascinating breakdown of how capitalist propoganda has deeply distorted our view of history, especially when it comes to both fascism and communism.
Not to defend capitalism (I would be more in favour of anarchism provided that certain conditions have to be met first), but I would say that communism only killed less because it is a newer ideology. It is only 150 years old, give or take, with it’s practical existence lasting for 76 years. If we are considering mercantilism as capitalism (both are still looking for maximising profits), then in over 300-400 hundred years it’s logical to say that capitalism killed more, by virtue of how long profit seeking has been part of human economic policies.
And since we are talking about economic policies, barring the death camps, practically speaking, if communism went for as long as capitalism has, it could catch up with the number on death tolls, considering that communist centralisation of agriculture and ignoring experts caused similarly human-induced famines. A lot of people kinda forgot about Lysenko and his deliberate sidelining of knowledge and experience of farmers and scientists, causing poor harvest and many people starving to death. And I probably don’t need to remind everyone what Mao’s war on sparrows caused on China’s agriculture. Moreover, even after Stalin’s death and Lysenko out of the picture, USSR-- and many Soviet satellite states-- have been on ration for many years. USSR struggled to up the agricultural production in spite of being a vast country with abundant fertile lands.
Those are both issues caused by issues that capitalism is subject to as well! Authoritarianism, stupidity and ignorance… Sadly, any working society must be capable of managing these issues. Statistically speaking, as far as the sources I’ve seen have showed me, capitalism tends to cause more death and suffering than communism. One needs only compare the state of Soviet countires before, after, and during the USSR to see that quite plainly represented.
Imma stop you right there …
If the very word ‘anarchism’ is outaide your comfort zone, then yes I suppose I won’t be able to be very productive for you.
If you do find yourself curious though, I’m always happy to talk politics, and always open to seriously considering and empathizing with other points of view from my own! Even capitalism 😆
If I had a dollar for every time I heard an anarchist cry for the police when things go south I’d have enough to buy a few books on how to avoid anarchy. I’ve seen and read enough. Thank you for offering.
The use of public facilities does not preclude critique of them. That’s the same argument as ‘capitalism made your iPhone’.
One can both believe that the police should be defunded, and be left with them as the only viable solution to resolve a conflict. The fact that anarchists must sometimes rely on the police, I assure you, is not pleasant for anyone involved 🤣
Except maybe those who profit from police activity somehow 🤷♀️
The foundation of anarchy is specifically based on the absence of authority. It would be unpleasant for everyone involved, but if, by your statement, an anarchist will have to swallow their pride to resolve a conflict with an authoritative entity, then they should perhaps think of another belief that will accept some level of authority. It may even be possible to come up with a whole new societal belief system. It is true that capitalism may not be credited with the direct creation of the iPhone, but it did foster an environment for competition to develop other products you have most likely used in your lifetime. These particular products did influence a culture in a more positive direction. For example, Nintendo’s Gameboy. That’s not to say I am gauging the success of a society by materialistic gains, but again, why not take the best of all worlds and make something new. Bonus points if you can solve for greed in a realistic manner and not in a vacuum.