Why has communism never gained support in United States although it is a highly industrialized nation?
>>12097302Americans are really fucking religious and see their nation as inherently better than other nations. They were uninterested in an atheistic, universalist political system.
Its people are too individual and not prone to groupthink, also the inherent religious nature of the country puts it at odds with Marxism
Communism thrives in countries that don't have strong liberal traditions because the people there are more likely to put up with authoritarian rule.Communism needs a red tzar, a red caudilho, a red huángdi, etc.
>>12097302Red-baiting has been continuously used to discipline the masses even when it often has nothing to do with communism.
>>12097302The same reason why it has evaporated in its' entirety from every single other country as well. It only works in semi-industrialized nations where the people above poverty line are few in number and the poor can gather in large numbers to seethe.
>>12097302The model of communism that took root was Marxism-Leninism which was, simultaneously, a strategy to catch up to the industrialized world and achieve a socialist state without having to go through the capitalist phase. In effect, it was state capitalism.
it never succeeded in any industrialized country with a strong middle class
>>12097302It did retard we are more communist today than the Soviet Union was at the time
>>12097347This does not explain why many western countries (France, Italy etc.) had strong communist and socialist parties after WWII.
>>12097698France and Italy always had unstable, chaotic politics that were more likely to breed extremist movements. In countries like the UK, Netherlands, Sweden, etc with stable, middle-of-the-road political cultures there was never any chance of communism or fascism being taken seriously.
>>12097302During the Enlightenment, the prevailing beliefs amongst philosophers were that human beings were rational beings that could understand the environment around them, and thus learn to manipulate it to their benefit. In short, the Enlightenment was a period where most people were confident in human ability, human progress and self-determination of the individual (or free will).Enlightenment philosophers can be divided into two camps; the British or Empirical enlightenment, and the Continental or Rationalist enlightenment. These camps had different theories about how reason worked; the empiricists believed it worked on the basis of human experience. The rationalists believed it worked by making logical deductions from intuitively-known first principles.Regardless of this difference, both camps agreed on the broad points stated above: humans were rational beings with free will capable of progress and advancing their condition. As such, the dominant ideology of the time was Liberalism. Both Empiricists (e.g., John Locke, John Stuart Mill) and Rationalists (like Kant, Spinoza, Descartes) generally agreed with liberalism (albeit for different reasons).
>>12097792When the Counter-Enlightenment rolled around in the wake of The French Revolution, things changed. On the British side, Empiricism had been pushed so far that many began to embrace Skepticism (in the philosophical sense — the belief we cannot reach knowledge). Ostensibly, they were following on in the wake of David Hume (arguably, they were going much further than he did). On the Continental side, Rationalism had been pushed to extremes that argued reason has a nature which shapes its user. This is purportedly derivative from Kant, but many additions were made by Kant's intellectual successors (known as the German Idealists). For instance, Fichte argued that one's nationality shapes one's consciousness. Hegel took this even further, diminishing the role of human beings as free agents in favor of making them voices of larger forces.The skeptical British Counter-Enlightenment eventually produced British Conservatism. The Continental (German Idealist) Counter-Enlightenment gave us Hegel (who was a great influence on Karl Marx, although Marx was inspired by The Enlightenment as well as the Counter-Enlightenment) and Fichte (who has been called the father of German Nationalism and was arguably a great influence on Fascism).The Counter-Enlightenment overall constituted a rejection of the Enlightenment view of humanity as rational beings capable of understanding the world and possessing free will. The British Counter-Enlightenment cast doubt on the efficacy of our reason. The Continental Counter-Enlightenment did so as well, by asking how much of our minds and selves were conditioned by external forces (Zeitgeists, Nationalities, Economic conditions, et cetera).It is in the context of the Enlightenment and Counter-Enlightenment that the modern political theories originated.
>>12097698france is on its 5th republic it's a nation of schizos
>>12097442>communism is when the government does stuffamerican moment
>>12097812who are you quoting?
>>12097811France, never mind their bluster about being the mother of liberalism and democracy, has never been able to have a stable parliamentary government. The nation functions only when it has a strongman like Louis XIV, Napoleon, or De Gaulle.
Because the US wasn't an almost-entirely-agrarian, war torn, famine-wracked shithole like Imperial Russia, Kuomintang China etc. The closest the US got was during the Depression, and even before the New Deal shit things were still functioning much better than the other countries mentioned above
>>12097302Most burgers don't even understand what communism or any other word with more than 7 letters means.
>>12097302Because usually having making some regulations and giving our communist friends a bone or two is enough to keep communists calm.
>>12097302Because the elite could always pin a dissatisfied white working class against blacks as they oppress both groups.
>>12097812Given that's pretty much how progressive Americans and Europeans classify the US as a "far-right" country because it doesn't have the En-Haitch-Ess or free university, yeah
>>12097812communism can also come from the private sector retard, from globohomo banking cartels through Advertisements consumerism monopolization of industry and employment etc also, communism isn’t just economics it is also sabbatean morality Jewish subversion etc
>>12097865>American right wing is far right in EuropeIt’s fucking over
>>12097890It’s not surprising desu pic related
>>12097302we have race communism in the US
>>12097302The Marxist concept of history is harder to grapple for the Anglosphere owing to the diverging historical development. In Continental Europe where Marx spent and wrote about the most, aristocratic interests and elite did not properly devolve to the "natural" growth of liberalism as it had come to be seen in England and America in the same timeframe. On account of constant revolutions, people in living memory saw the aristocracy toppled by the bourgeosie (The word comes from the word "Bourg" or "Burg" which refers to the city-walls that town dwellers lived in, and in time became a metonym for "city-dwelling propertied rich guy"). only for the bourgeosie to rapidly build a new world where a new kind of inequality took to root. As such, Marxism became a mainstream political philosophy in nations like Italy, Germany, Russia (and only belatedly in France, where people connected it, incorrectly, with Jacobinism), and later in China, where Marx's idea of development and class conflict had direct real examples and practical application. Outside these places, Marxism was absorbed by or co-existed with earlier anti-imperialist strains, such as Vietnam which saw itself in nationalist terms, and Cuba where Castro did not turn Marxist-Leninist until after taking power, and he originated as a revolutionary in the old anti-imperialist mold.
>>12097938also as mentioned before countries like the Netherlands never had a use for Marx as they were middle class societies without great social stratification and had a strong history of liberalism
>>12097302It did. FDR and the New Deal alleviated the tensions.
>>12097302The United States had a ridiculously violent physical suppression of the labor movement. When the Germans or English were throwing striking miners in jail, the US government and private companies were machine gunning them down, dropping bombs, arranging assassinations and so on. Literally murdering so many natural worker's leaders gave socialist parties less of a base to draw from - if you look at a lot of 2nd and early 3rd international European socialist party cadre, they greatly benefited from those kind of people. Any answer you receive that neglects to mention the unusual violence and extreme measures taken against unions and workers rights in the US is fatally flawed.
>>12097302It didn't exactly because it is an highly industrialized nation. Vanguard party leaders have an hard time LARPing as workers when there are many of them.
>>12097316>They were uninterested in an atheistic, universalist political system.>most americans are boomercon globalists??
>>12097302>Why has communism never gained support in United States although it is a highly industrialized nation?You are looking at US as if it was self-contained system. However, that is not the case. US exists on top of (neo)colonial states. And if we account for those states, then you'll get communism out the wazoo (in full accordance with the expectations).Conversely, should the (neo)colonial empire of Pax Americana implode (either through NATO being demolished by EU, or through collapse of US-centric finance due to retarded "money isn't commodity" policies), you'll get the rise of communism within US (obviously, assuming that powers that be will be able to keep industry functional - if that doesn't happen, you can forget about US).This is provable by the pre-WW2 American politics: when US was sufficiently industrial but insufficiently colonial (~1930s) communism had a growing presence within US.This is also becoming provable today due to slow erosion of American dominance: even with de-industrialization, the niche for socialist movements is being created in US as wage workers are being pushed into abject poverty by banks/corporations.
>>12098029Most boomer neocons are Evangelicals. Retard.
>>12097865Those aren't commies Commies understand that immigrants are scum scabs and bust unions
>>12098046Neocons are democrats
Neocons are Trotskyists who become part of the anti-Stalinist left, steadily became more right-wing, and joined forces with the Evangelist against the the rising New Left that supplanted the Old Left.
>>12098065>imperialists are trotskyists and they're republican now nani?
>>12098073Don't argue with them 2015 and newer /pol/ rots your brain
Because it’s incompatible with American culture
>>12098073A substantial number of neoconservatives were originally moderate socialists who were originally associated with the moderate wing of the Socialist Party of America (SP) and its successor party, Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA). Max Shachtman, a former Trotskyist theorist who developed a strong feeling of antipathy towards the New Left, had numerous devotees among SDUSA with strong links to George Meany's AFL-CIO. Following Shachtman and Meany, this faction led the SP to oppose immediate withdrawal from the Vietnam War, and oppose George McGovern in the Democratic primary race and, to some extent, the general election. They also chose to cease their own party-building and concentrated on working within the Democratic Party, eventually influencing it through the Democratic Leadership Council.As the policies of the New Left made the Democrats increasingly leftist, these intellectuals became disillusioned with President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society domestic programs. The influential 1970 bestseller The Real Majority by Ben Wattenberg expressed that the "real majority" of the electorate endorsed economic interventionism, but also social conservatism; and warned Democrats it could be disastrous to adopt liberal positions on certain social and crime issues.The neoconservatives rejected the countercultural New Left and what they considered anti-Americanism in the non-interventionism of the activism against the Vietnam War. After the anti-war faction took control of the party during 1972 and nominated George McGovern, the Democrats among them endorsed Washington Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson instead for his unsuccessful 1972 and 1976 campaigns for president. Among those who worked for Jackson were incipient neoconservatives Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Richard Perle.
>>12098082>we wuz oldfags n shieet
>>12097302Communism never gained strength in America because labor movements had momentum and political power to get what they wanted. The Populist movement, progressive movement, the unionization of workers were all effective in getting the most egregious parts of the Victorian economic system to change. Not to mention the movements in America typically found themselves arguing for each man to be "independent" rather than a collective. The idea of the workers banding together and working on collectives really was only present in Europe, so the only areas where Communism took a deep hold was in areas that were wholly controlled by immigrants like Tampa, FL. Another reason could be in the aftermath of the Civil War many American's in the industrialized north, weren't open to a political ideology that by its very nature led to violence and the overthrow of the government.
>>12098073NAYRTAnon messed up his explanation a bit.>> Neocons are Trotskyists who become part of the anti-Stalinist leftA bunch of opportunist fucks joined communists, expecting an easy gig (in fleecing the masses by promising them utopia), but got BTFO'd by actual communists (so-called "Stalinists") in 1920s.Opportunist fucks became known as Trotskyists (though, they've had only tangential relation to Trotsky and often opposed him) and formed coalition with other opportunist fucks. That coalition would became known as "anti-Stalinist left" (formed in ~1930s).Post-WW2 this "anti-Stalinist left" completely abandoned support of Soviet Union and communism, shifting instead to support of First World as prime civilizing force, thereby promoting international dominance of United States (NATO and intervention into affairs of other nations by Americans), becoming neo-conservatives (there was a legit Trot->neocon pipeline).
>>12098117All of those people are anti-communist though so how are they Trotskyists?
>>12098174Democrats and Republicans believing they were a civilizing force predate Communism entirely
>>12098176>All of those people are anti-communist though so how are they Trotskyists?See above. You are searching for actual communists when that shitshow had only opportunist politicians. None of them were either anti- or pro- communist. They cared only for themselves.Trotsky himself essentially started supporting Reich by late 1930s (resorting to some extreme mental gymnastics to explain how it is anti-communist to resist German invasion into Czechoslovakia or any future invasions of Axis into other nations, even into Soviet Union).>>12098214And? I am talking about the reason Trotskyist anti-Stalinists justified their switch from support of Soviet Union to support of United States.
>>12098244You're drawing lines that aren't there, sure there was some support later by communists to support american progressivism like Frankfurt School of thought in the 40's and 50's but most of what you describe was intrinsic to US imperialism already and predate most of that trash entirely.
>>12097302because our culture is largely built upon the ethics of independence, self-reliance, and individualism, which don't mesh well with the Communalism and class identity found within Communism. that's not to say we didn't flirt with the ide from time to time, but that was mostly limited to a specific time-frame when the infamous robber barons had practically no limitations on their ability to do whatever they wanted, and even then it was a fairly fringe belief in American politics. it was partially thanks to the efforts of progressives who desired to remove the possibility of class conflict by placing limitations on major corporations that communism retreated even further into the political outskirts.
>>12097302It actually has had a great deal of support over the years. Especially among the poor and the well educated. The US was even electing socialists for a time. But then came two red scares, one due to mass mail bombings, the other due to the rise of the soviet union, and the soviets stealing atomic secrets via it's spy network.Then of course there's the New Deal, which embraced a large number of socialist policies and thus took away any economic arguments american communists could make (just before the second red scare hit them like a hammer) and the post-war boom that the new deal enabled, when combined with the growing cold war, basicly rendered them nonviable and they have had a hard time gaining traction for the rest of the 20th century.Boomers repealed a lot of the new deal and went full on Neoliberal lazzie-fare for four decades. So as a result we're seeing the rise of the reds again.>>12098052Neoliberalisim is a school of economic theory and both parties in the US subscribe to it Ever since Regan cleaned house in the 80s and got credit for ending the cold war.Republicans also get the nickname Neoconservitive because they turned "liberal" into a meaningless buzzword during bush senior's run for the white house.Since then the GOP keeps doubling down on it's regan era policies that don't work, and relying on the same voter blocs which are slowly shrinking.If you want to speculate further about modern and future political results that's another thread. I'm just explaining where we wuz, and where we are nao.
>>12098333neoliberalism doesn't exist off of 4chan
>>12097302Marx was flat out wrong about industrialization gradually getting worse; instead countries like Britain and the USA developed high socio-economic mobility and a strong middle class, which made communist movements unpopular. The labor lobby was able to address the worst abuses of workers, which really takes the wind out of the sails of revolutionaries, and by the 1900s life was pretty good for an average person, and even those born into poverty had access to an education and other opportunities that gave them hope moving forward.
>>12098333i see you LBJfag
>>12098362He's right, communism is jewish. No amount of wojak variant spamming will make that fact any less true.
>>12098261>You're drawing lines that aren't thereAnd you are making no sense.>what you describe was intrinsic to US imperialism alreadyAre you saying its impossible to switch to support of US imperialism because some other people already supported it?
>>12098411I'm saying that even if you're right about unnamed "trotskyists" in the US government nothing really would have changed under their influence
>>12098377The idea of Communism predated Marx. You know that, right?
>>12098261While Neocons align themselves with the America's Wilsonian liberal internationalism, (as Cold War warriors) Neocons are a lot more openly militaristic and even imperial in their nature. Some even propose open imperialism as the alternative to liberal internationalism and even an American Empire to perpetuate the Pax Americana, but have to lay low on that because this runs against America's liberal tradition.
>>12098441liberal internationalism is american imperialism lol
>>12097317Communism is a 10/1 ratio of oil to iron production /thread
>>12097302I think the U.S. basically solved (or at least delayed) a reckoning with capitalism by creating a large middle-class society by global standards. Abundant land. Relative safety. People had a stake in the system. Look at America, and look at the world, and who would tear that up for a communist revolution? It doesn't really make sense unless you were excluded from having a stake.Labor radicalism and violent class conflict was heavy in the late 19th century and during the 1930s when the Communist Party reached peak strength. In the 1970s too, as well, but the old-style communist groups had been smashed. Their core support was often among immigrants and African-Americans (not entirely of course). There used to be "red" bookstores in cities, often run by the party or other small communist parties, and they existed in major cities like New York -- and still some today -- and Chicago and... Montgomery, Alabama. And the Communist Party "club" in that city would've probably been 95% black.This is interesting:https://youtu.be/MMIC4JIlxZc>>12097698>>12097726World War II as well. The communist resistance was a big deal in those countries. Greece, too. There has been a talk going around recently about "socialist patriotism." And if you look at the KKE in Greece, they're very patriotic in a sense, but there are party members whose parents (or maybe even a handful of really old people if they're still alive) were guerrilla fighters against the Nazis. >>12098039Yeah. People think of the "U.S. empire" as the contiguous borders of it and not a system that expands across the globe. In, South Korea, you'll see U.S. military police patrolling entertainment districts (policing their own troops who are out parting). Imagine the PLA in Canada doing that. Cecil Rhodes meanwhile openly stated that colonialism was necessary to ward off a civil war in Britain which he feared would happen after seeing unemployment councils full of pissed-off, angry young men.
>>12098029Every globalistic view of boomers always imagines a world where America is first among equals; where it's all democracy as far as the eye can see and all the other countries worship America.
>>12097886Americans should be gassed.
>>12098125Yes. Now go back to Parler or Facebook or whatever shithole you came from when BLUMPFTZ took office. Nigger loving Cuckservative kikeslave.
>>12098816>Every globalistic view of boomers always imagines a world where America is first among equalsBest illustrated by Star Trek in the 60s. There's an international crew but Captain Kirk is basically America and he calls the shots. Uhuru speaks in an American accent because Nichole Nichols is an American actress, but the character is supposed to be Africa and she speaks a ton of languages.
>>12098176Opposing Soviet Union is the pretty much the best litmus test for someone who will stop self-identifying as a left-winger and "grow up". Also, Shachtman is single-handedly responsible for every single bad stereotype you can have of Trots.
>>12098878There's smoke but there's no fire, there's no connection between liberalism and trotskyism
>>12098366And how have things gone for the strong American middle class since 1980
561 killed the thread
>>12097886>private banking cartels lead to public ownership of productive plants
>>12097302Because not a single industrial nation fell for this scam?
>>12098946>liberalismNeoconservativism, actually, and it's very easy, you're pro-US, but you want to be super-edgy when sticking it to your liberal parents, so you wear the the Marxist-Leninist hat, but you're still anti-Soviet, so you go for the horrible perversion flavour of Trotskyism.Progressive liberal Hilldawgs actually come from former anarchists.
>>12097938>As such, Marxism became a mainstream political philosophy ... in China, where Marx's idea of development and class conflict had direct real examples and practical application.I also think the revolution which established ROC was basically a officer's movement and didn't incorporate rising political, social and class forces into the system or give them a stake. At the same time, there was a tempest of new ideas circulating among young intellectuals which ranged from neo-Confucian ideas to liberalism, anarchism and Marxism. But it was Marxism that took off because of the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, which had a huge impact in China, and because Marxism contained anti-imperialism built into the system from the start. And that became more important because the ROC signed away ports to the Japanese (which they captured from Germans during the war) at the Versailles Treaty. Plus, the British controlled Hong Kong and had their agents all over the place.The class analysis is almost like the beginning of a method to solve those *political* problems. The economic system is at the root of things, but Lenin warned communists against mere "economism" where you're just bargaining for better wages -- the point is to organize the masses and various class forces who can be organized in a revolutionary and political way with the goal of seizing power. It's not about being loyal to 1960s economic policies. What are you trying to achieve, and who are your friends and enemies. So for these young Chinese intellectuals, they were thinking: oh, we're oppressed by imperialism, feudalism and capitalism and there's potentially a giant army in the countryside who are just waiting to rise up.Then they present this historical arc today (in a positive way). You see Li Dazhao with his mustache (China's "first Marxist," executed in 1927), and then poverty, and then development. And the party is like the agent of history making it all unfold.https://youtu.be/ACA774bm9wU
>>12099063Also mao supported japan and the entire thread is retards.
>>12099026I don't see how being a socialist automatically makes you a Trotskyist
Because leftism does not work.
>>12099095Cops are niggers that's why
>>12099068is that you phone-schizo?
>>12098754Philadelphia has one of the largest anarchist and communist support in all of modern America and still has a couple commie and anarchist bookstores. Moreso than the meme'd to death Portland.
>>12099026I think the primary contradiction as Trots see it between the left and its leadership, because their origin story is the assassination of their leader after he lost out in a power struggle (Trotsky being the only Trotskyist to ever participate in an actual revolution), leading to endless "denunciation" or "critique" without a coherent ideology or position behind it, manifesting in leaps from ultra-leftism to right-wing opportunism to fascist collaboration -- and it's also why they split up so much.And I think this shows up in different forms. You mention some neocons who started out as Trots. I see this tendency in left-wing Twitter micro-celebs. Also some "post-left" people like mean girl Aimee Terese who are like "I'm the real left and the other leftists are neoliberals." That's like Trotskyism which turns into neoconservatism because the mainline / "official" left are not leftist at all (for... reasons), but "reactionary." Christopher Hitchens would say that about the left, and by opposing the war in Iraq, you're on the side of "fascism." He was a former member of the International Socialists which was a Cliffite-Trot group.This general mentality -- in different forms -- is really common on the left in developed, Anglo countries. Trotskyism can also be very Eurocentric and often posits that any revolution in the third world will be a bureaucratic Stalinist monstrosity and there's no condition in which people in these countries can liberate themselves. Not surprisingly, Trotskyism has been a total failure in the third world and is of interest to practically nobody. It's kinda funny reading about the history of communism in these countries, and there would be some Trots who'd try to get something going and immediately fracture into different groups. But the other communists are like, "uhh, can you carry a rifle?"https://youtu.be/9q7ub4aMOFs>>12099162That's interesting.
>>12097302Highly industrialized countries don't become Communist. Poor backward countries that want to be highly industrialized become Communist.
>>12099007>public ownershipDisgusting retard, there is nothing “public” about a goverment owned industrial plant, the owner and manager is the government not the “public” Banks and investment firms with links to the FED and the Rothchilds virtually control all industry worldwide without exaggeration This is used to further a communist agenda of world control
>>12098835I'm not a cuckservative though, I'm more like what Marx called a "reactionary socialist", albeit I know it's an impossible system to return to.
>>12097849You're a fucking retard.
The only people I know who support Communism are fucking spoiled rich assholes. Coincidence?
>>12099743Those are the educated ones.Communism usually draws from spoiled rich faggots, the desperate, and thugs. Exceptions apply, a lot.The rich fags are usually the leadership, while the desperate people and thugs usually for the spearhead bulk and chaff of the movement.
>>12099743you don't know alot of people
>>12097302Communism can only be violently forced down on a population. Americans have guns.
>>12100926> forced down on a populationBecause it is ruling elite that wants communism, yes.
>>12097302Because Marx's linear progression of society is bullshit cope he made up to make himself feel better.
>>12098878>Opposing Soviet Union is the pretty much the best litmus test for someone who will stop self-identifying as a left-winger and "grow up".This.
>>12100983Also ford ran the soviet car industry and communism is a market economy.
>>12099080>I don't see how being a socialist automatically makes you a TrotskyistHe isn't saying this.He is talking about people who want to SELF-IDENTIFY as socialists because they want to be edgy (but not stupid edgy, like incels). Supporting actual socialist movements (like Soviets) is impossible for them, as this would contradict their real political views (which have nothing to do with socialism, as they are liberal at best) and force them to do actual socialist things (like organizing illegal trade unions).Hence those people choose movements that do not require any of this, that are anti-Soviet, that do not interact with dirty reactionary workers, and don't do anything illegal, but - instead - pander to their actual views through some bullshit reasoning. Trotskyist movements fit the bill for future neo-cons: they focus on anti-Soviet propaganda and organization of pseudo-left larping on campuses, while also promoting American exceptionalism and the like.
>>12100988>>12101034Can you, please, die?
>>12101124Also Mao was literally tik
>>12097317America is secular and Christianity is groupthink
>>12097812Fuck kind of strawman is this? He couldn't have possibly meant that when the USSR was far more controlling than the USA
>>12100966Marx supported gun ownership for the working class, for logical reasons.
>>12097302Communism doesn't catch on (outside of swivel eyed lunatics) in countries with even the cultural memory of freedom and private property in the general population. Those nations usually don't get more radical than some form of social democracy (or 'Social Fascism' as the communists call it) if that.
>>12101324>cultural memory of freedom and private property in the general population.Either is fading fast in US. Millenials at least saw their parents owning stuff. Zoomers don't have even that.
>>12101124No. You tried to force communism into my country but you were annihilated. If you had succeeded then you could kill me yourself (given that you would not be executed already by your comrades for whatever irrelevant reason), but now I'll live free and say whatever I have to say. You are free to move to China or Cuba if you want to live your commie simulator.
>>12097302Communism only start in nations that can be industrialized bunt don't for political reasons. Once industrialization is over, communism loose all support. See Russia (medieval agrarian country ruled by a corrupt oligarchy preventing progress), China (medieval agrarian country ruled by a taoist cast that reject modernity, even guns), Cuba (same as Russia), Korea (former Nip colony), Vietnam (former French colony)... History have proven dialectic to be wrong.
>>12101346You've still got a few generations before that trajectory becomes unrecoverable. Even with the god-only-knows-how-many-billion being spent on social engineering there's a huge amount of inertia to overcome, and don't think that their current footsoldiers are zealous or ideologically pure/committed enough to hold their ground when things start to get tough. It's one thing to riot when you know that the police have been ordered to stand down and let you have your fun - and something else entirely when you know that the police, military, and various militia groups are going to be on the scene within minutes, with orders involving the phrase 'shoot to kill'.
>>12101420It will likely end for the same reason it went extinct in Europe: society transitioned from a owners/workers to one of debtors. A gun is not going to erase your debts. That said gun culture in Europe had more to do with preparing for war with neighbours.
>>12101420Gun property is closely tied to ownership rights. Ownership is on the decline. With American gun culture being so deeply tied to property rights what is most likely to in the end change the legal landscape and firearms in the United States is the change of American society itself from property owners into indebted rent paying day laborers. Gun ownership ends with a whimper not with a bang.
>>12101371>History have proven dialectic to be wrong.Knock on wood. History isn't over yet. When was the first liberal revolution? The Glorious Revolution in 1688? That was 333 years ago. It has been 104 years since the first real socialist revolution while China is reemphasizing socialism nowadays, and they economically more productive than the USSR ever was and far more integrated into the rest of the world economy. I think socialism is the probable future of mankind but history is like a car crash after car crash, and what lasts into the next stage of history is whatever survived being thrown through the windshield. World War II led to a victory for liberals and socialists (the Nazis died in the three-car pileup), but the Soviet socialists were damaged more in the car crash and wobbled around for a few more decades until falling over and dying. But then China was the baby that was thrown clear and survived. There might even still be a monarchy here and there in the future, Saudi Arabia has survived for awhile, and liberal systems might still exist in different parts of the world, but socialism becomes the main thing.https://youtu.be/hYUbd7TPFWM
>>120973021. Propaganda put up by the Wealthy during the Cold War in order to keep their wealth2. Individualism that has existed since the start of the countrycombine those two and you have a poor,but radically economically right-wing population thats only starting to move slightly left because of Gen Z
>>12099903In any succesful communist movement there has been a strong base of peasant or worker support. Antifa vandals in the west does seem to attract edgy, thrillseeking degenerates, rich kids and maybe lumpen though.
>>12101143Cops are based.
>>12101723>thats only starting to move slightly left because of Gen ZWe're all neoliberals who are just pissy that we aren't getting our cut. 99% of us have no problem with the system fundamentally.
>>12101484The capitalistic system as we know it may, or may not, change in the future or even get abolished entirely. Some sort of socialism, as in the Nordic model for example, or in another form, may become more prevalent, sure. Economical and political systems appear and disappear throughout history, they change, they syncretize, it's a neverending procedure so nobody can be sure of what kind of system will be the most popular in the future. But communism as you have it in your mind is never coming back. State atheism is never coming back. Totalitarianism, as in the case of China, can only be enforced when the population is illiterate and starving, but it always gets overthrown when the quality of life increases or new ideas are introduced and come in contact with the common folk. The only way a totalitarian communist state can remain in power forever is if they manage to isolate their population entirely from the outer world, and that's what communist states always tried to do, but, as we already see, that's impossible. It was impossible in 1950, let alone now in the era of information. Economical and political systems change all the time in the history of humanity. But forget about communism, communist ideas are dead.
>>12101917Completely wrong. China is as totalitarian as ever, has an educated population, and a society subservient to the state. If anything making people more educated also makes them more indoctrinated. You can see it in any modern communist state from Cuba to China were the most highly educated professionals are the strongest believers in Communism.
>>12097302Because Jews had already attained the status of a ruling class just by taking over media outlets and corrupting capitalist institutions.
>>12097302What is FBI and CIAWhat is FBI and CIAWhat is FBI and CIAWhat is FBI and CIAWhat is FBI and CIAWhat is FBI and CIA
>>12097886pic>execution of unvaxed by globohomo police
>>12101841You'd find that most of those workers/peasants were pretty fucking desperate, Russia and China were rough places, though there are several exceptions, you could also argue that the formula of marxism was also heavily modified. Spain is what you get when the movement is more thugs than workers, that and because the nationalists and Russian whites (Which yes, of course, they fought in the Spanish civil war) had learned of their mistakes.
>>12097886American education system detected
>>12097302Heavy propaganda campaigns and purges/crackdowns.
>>12097302Because the idea that communism is the workers party is false. It is a tyrants party that takes control of the middle class by pretending to be workers party. They take control by appointing "experts" like Fauci, who know nothing about health or science; yet he is to force whatever mandates he feels necessary.
>>12097302Different material and social conditions led to much of America being far more individualist than their European and Asian counterparts.That said, Communism was popular in certain areas of the US like the North East and Agarian Socialism was popular among swaths of farmers.The reason Communism died as a political force in certain areas of the US (like New York where it was absolutely mainstream), is largely due to large scale state repression and wrecking.
>>12097302communist revolutions generally only happen in fairly extreme conditions like famine or WWI. The US hasn't really had famines ever and we entered WWI fairly late in the game, just enough to supply our fresh troops to utterly crush the G*rmoid menace
>>12097302because fuck you and fuck your mother, that's why
>The Communist Control Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 775, 50 U.S.C. 841-844) is an American law signed by President Dwight Eisenhower on 24 August 1954 that outlaws the Communist Party of the United States and criminalizes membership in or support for the party or "Communist-action" organizations and defines evidence to be considered by a jury in determining participation in the activities, planning, actions, objectives, or purposes of such organizations.Its illegal in like all states but Arizona. Communism isn't really even explained by anyone here except like " red dictator everyone steal your stuff you won't be an individual anymore "
>>12102948Note that this has only been enforced in two cases in history due the nature of the language used in it which contain several ambiguous terms.
>>12102948Why do you post this trash?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZSktHDmmWg
>>12103414>>12103406is unconstitutional anyway since the 1st Amendment protects freedom of association so who gaf?
>>12097698They didn't. Those countries have never been communist states.
>>12097302Because communism has a track record of straving people, and the American public is well-educated on the disaterous effects of it. Because capitalism, in the United States, has provided such a great quality of life, and communism has historically failed, there is literally no incentive for someone to be a communist unless they are absolutely delusional.
>>12097302Because america was born from trade.
>>12097302It got like 30% at one point. Answer why it never succeeded: state repression. Communism is illegal in the USA despite the 1st amendment.
>>12097812I mean unironically yes. Regulations are the gov telling you what to do with your captial or labor, it is a gradually seizure of means of production
>>12105856Marx himself said communism would be the government planning everything though.>"The nationalisation of land will work a complete change in the relations between labour and capital, and finally, do away with the capitalist form of production, whether industrial or rural. Then class distinctions and privileges will disappear together with the economical basis upon which they rest. To live on other people's labour will become a thing of the past. There will be no longer any government or state power, distinct from society itself! Agriculture, mining, manufacture, in one word, all branches of production, will gradually be organised in the most adequate manner. National centralisation of the means of production will become the national basis of a society composed of associations of free and equal producers, carrying on the social business on a common and rational plan. Such is the humanitarian goal to which the great economic movement of the 19th century is tending."I don't know how you read this, and say it wouldn't be. He said this in 1872.
>>12105873guys a retard, as if the state will ever give up its power
>>12105892That's the point; Marx believes the revolutionaries should stay in power indefinitely until communism happens. Its absolutely fucking retarded.
>>12105905can't believe people buy this
>>12105915Read what Trotsky said a communist america would look like; its some of the most creepist shit I've read in my life. Communists are insane. He sounds like the villian from Fallout 1 when he talks about it.https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1934/08/ame.htmThe best thing communists ever do is kill each other
>>12105892The state wouldn’t give up its power. It would naturally dissolve as it would no longer be necessary.
>>12105935what a nutcase
>>12097316>>12097317>>12097325>>12097430These four are all correct. Another reason may be because of the Second Amendment. Any attempt at a communist revolution would cause large scale anti-communist militias to also rise up.
>>12097302We value freedom. The last time a tyrannical government was in power we got rid of 'em
>>12097430This was Nietzche's take and it looks like he's been right
>>12097325Another way around, Communism thrives in countries WITH strong liberal traditions. Communism cannot take root in nations steeped in tradition. Liberals love authoritarian rule and always have.
>>12106460You’ve had a tyrannical government for hundreds of years yet you haven’t done shit.>>12106465Traditionalism is authoritarian.
>>12106465China, Vietnam and Russia had strong liberal traditions now? That's just not factual. Retards like you quote liberals with communists, so, you have no reason to be taken seriously.
>>12106460lolnoUS gov has behaved openly tyrannical since FDR.
>>12097302Sharts unironically thinking they will become billionaires, if they suck up to their boss long and hard enough.Like, look at linkedin and corporate posts over there. It's a nation of slaves who are happy being the amalgam between children, clowns and cheap labour for their bosses.These people have no self-respect, no self-interest, no deeper thought than "hurr durr, one day, if I suck enough dicks, I will be the one whose dick others suck"
>>12106460>Peg me harder, NSA queen!:)
>>12106637If it was any remotely close to communist tier tyranny now they'd be tracking down your IP and tomorrow all your relatives up to the third degree would be in some underground prison. Enjoy LARPing as a totalitarian shithole citizen from your PC, but the real thing is not a joke.
>>12106653Fags quoting that turbo-fag Steinbeck have been a disaster for online discourse
>>12097430Because when shit is good, you don't need communists.Communists take traction when a country is a corrupt shithole, where the people on top went beyond being retarded and are acting as an occupational force in their own country.In case of Russia, I would also point out that even the most "nationalistic" Russians were full on sucking German cock.I shit you not, the Mikhail Osipovich Menshikov - a famous Russian nationalist - straight up was publishing shit like "If germans will bring order and fix Russia similarly to how POW Jacob Martin fixed my dacha, then paying for that with our culture and language is a small price"Even commies didn't go THAT far in cucking their own country.
>>12101160I don't necessarily disagree but communism is 100% group think on steroids.
>>12097865Nah, we classify USA as a retarded shabbos-goyim country.
>>12097897>Eugenics>Racial unity>Protect the folkGee, the things that Nazis have failed, spectacularly so, to do.>Subhuman filth leading the NSDAP>Screeching about fellow germans when they don't follow suit>Kicks up the Russians who then, with allies, gleefully proceed to rape their country so hard it splits in two.
>>12106673You LARP as a flag waving rah rah anti-authoritarian while simping for the greatest imperial power since Great Britain.Practice what you preach, you ridiculous poser.
>>12101369You are free to move to Honduras or Russia if you want to live your capitalist paradise.And for fucks sake, stop leeching the fucking EU/
>>12105935>"take your unconvinced millionaires and send them to some picturesque island, rent-free for life"This genuinely sounds horrifying and would probably be extended into something worse. Fuck communists.
>>12106713I am a flag waving anti-authoritarian and I do simp for the greatest imperial power since Great Britain even though I'm European. The simple reason is that the USA is the only thing right now that keeps the world in balance and the communist and post-communist hellhole dictators in check. I've seen how people live in third world authoritarian shitholes and I came to appreciate whatever freedom I have.
>>12106483Not real communism. Real communism has only been practiced by Antifa and allies in Europe and the USA.
>>12097442Found the confused boomer with the sixth grade education.
>>12097316This. Also do not forget a child-like naivete for private corporations.
>>12106887Jesus, true communism™ is worse than I actually thought if that's the case
The United States being a highly industrialized nation is precisely why communism never take hold there. Communism is only popular in agrarian peasant society with high stratification between the rich and poor, hence why it succeeded in the likes of Russia, China and Vietnam. Industrialized society have a strong middle class that can sway the masses to become more centric
>>12098082>implying you know what your talking aboutt. been on /pol/ from the very beginning
>>12101160>America is secularOn paper but it's also home to some of the most fanatical christians.
>>12106681Cope harder, mutt.One of the cornerstones of american mentality is a pride of "good work ethics" which, in reality, is a blanket term of being a compliant faggot who will lick his bosses dick no matter how retarded he is.Also, in any online discourse regarding the oligarchy, pretty much, only americans try to actually argue from the position of the rich and powerful and straight up simp for them. Everyone else is, at least, aware of their place in their country and it's hierarchy. Add to it a mentality where you need to show success by any means necessary, even if you are a complete poorfag and you have a country filled to the brim with faggots who think it's only the matter of time until they will be on top of the world.And don't get me started about the cancer, that is corporate politics in USA, which could be toppled, probably, only by Japan and Worst Korea in their retardation, ass-kissing and backstabbing.
>>12106887>Real communism has only been practiced by Antifa and allies in Europe and the USA.And that's why Stalin was based in shutting down international and smelly anarchist fags.
>>12097325Wrong reasoning.Communism thrives in those countries because the current "aristocracy" goes full "degenerate retard" in their own country.Which provides:a) Effective soil for left sentimentb) Population tolerance to more radical solutions.
>>12101184>that when the USSR was far more controlling than the USAUSSR wasn't. "The strictness of the rules is compensated by the non-mandatoriness of their enforcement" (c) Soviet saying.
>>12107325Steinbeck was a fucktard that assumed that the get-rich-quick dreams of immigrants to California could be extrapolated to the rest of America
>>12107325>Don't want to usher in a communist hellscape?>Quit trying to be the next Bezos, faggotIs there a smuggie for you dumb niggers yet?
because marx was wrong
>>12097302Communism at no point ever existed in actuality.
because communism in america was a mainly immigrant and jewish movement, that openly stood against the american way of life - against the family, against Christianity, against the constitution, against American hegenomy, and against the interests of the white americans. such an ideology that sought to destroy the american nation was beaten back and never adopted by the american people.
>>12097302It gained support in the early decades of the 20th century. Then the FBI pretty much took over all communist organizatiosn and killed them from within, in the 30's, 40's, and 50's.American leftism is a total joke pretty much.
>>12108835You're actually retarded
>>12097316>The greeks and russians would never have a communist movement! They're too religious!
>>12097302worker union was their own private army back in the day
>>1209730210 cents has been deposited into your account
>>12097302It's the centre of world imperialism and reaction and the US bourgeoisie has been waging war against it for 140 years.
>>12109484North Korea has a state head and currency
>>12097886isn't that from Schindler's list?
>>12109428Communism in Russia took over exactly at a time when religion, Orthodoxy at least, was losing ground and the people were distressed with the Church. Greeks crushed the communist attack.
>>12097886This is a strange photo, why is he falling over before the gun was even fired? Why would they take pictures of themselves doing this in the first place and then time the photograph at the exact moment the shot is supposedly fired?
>>12097302Three letters for yaFBI
We like food
>>12110015Too much, you fat fucks need rationing.
>>12097302Communist only infects weak people and weak nations
>>12108824back to your containment board broski
>>12097302The American Revolution gave its people the full rights of an Englishman and thus became a part of their traditions where as Marxism either offers rights Americans already had or sought to undo the aspects Amercians fought for such as land rights and representative democracy.
>>12109964Because it never happened