Why is fascism more taboo than communism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Communism is evil to the core? Are we in some sort of 1980s time warp? Communism doesn’t even exist any more and yet they are still idiots doing the whole capitalism versus communism bullsh*t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

Communism doesn’t exist?

Why don’t you try telling that to the communists parties who rule North Korea, China, etc., with iron fists?

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Communism is evil to the core? Are we in some sort of 1980s time warp? Communism doesn’t even exist any more and yet they are still idiots doing the whole capitalism versus communism bullsh*t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Yeah, I'll take your very sound advice under consideration.

I grew up where all of our healthcare was of great quality and free.
College was free.
Education was excellent and free for everyone.
If you had a job, you were given a place to live by your company.
If you wanted to run a farm more power to you.
The middle class was strong and the largest part of the population.
We took a month off every summer and vacationed at low cost.
People worked from 7-1 or 2 and had the rest of the day to spend with their families.

Sure, you couldn't really practice your religion or talk about the party. Most people couldn't care less about any of that.

[Anonymous]

Yugoslavia under Tito was a hybridized system. It allowed joint ventures with private companies and its worker councils were not centrally controlled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Yeah, I'll take your very sound advice under consideration.

I grew up where all of our healthcare was of great quality and free.
College was free.
Education was excellent and free for everyone.
If you had a job, you were given a place to live by your company.
If you wanted to run a farm more power to you.
The middle class was strong and the largest part of the population.
We took a month off every summer and vacationed at low cost.
People worked from 7-1 or 2 and had the rest of the day to spend with their families.

Sure, you couldn't really practice your religion or talk about the party. Most people couldn't care less about any of that.

Uh huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Hello,

Can I help with the deprogramming?

Hillary Clinton

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Communism is evil to the core? Are we in some sort of 1980s time warp? Communism doesn’t even exist any more and yet they are still idiots doing the whole capitalism versus communism bullsh*t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yugoslavia under Tito was a hybridized system. It allowed joint ventures with private companies and its worker councils were not centrally controlled.

It started about halfway through and it was very rare. It had very little impact on the overall economy. It still doesn't refute that Yugoslavia was a socialist, communist country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason planned economic systems with collectivism as the fundamental matrix (what simpletons refer to as “communism”) hasn’t been 100% successful is that frankly, the right people haven’t been in charge.

Collectivism is THE ideal economic model. There is nothing more egalitarian than collective ownership of the means of production and no need for private property. This isn’t subject to debate.

But the right people haven’t been in charge. That is a failing of the people, not of collectivism.

No, it's fully subject to debate and you don't know what the F you're talking about.

Central planning of economies is the death knell. Communism and collectivism have never been successful anywhere they have been tried.

Command economies can't be properly planned because there is never enough data to properly distribute goods and services efficiently. It's impossible.

That leads to shortages, resources that go unused, unintended consequences, and demand destruction at a much faster rate than any westernized economy.

BTW, we haven't had Capitalism in the U.S. for one hundred years.

There's is nothing more efficient than the hidden hand of market economics.

'The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." - Soviet Political Joke

I love how you tell PP that he doesn't know what the F he is talking about and then proceed to spew a bunch of utter nonsense not supported by any historical account.

I was the PP who wrote the post praising collectivism and planned economies and eliminating private property in favor of state ownership of everything, and “the only reason it hasn’t worked so far is the right people haven’t been in charge”.

I’m a troll. I was just putting the stupidest cliches I know of about communism down in one post, just to see if some idiot would agree with me - and of course someone did.

I need to dumb down my game for y’all. It’s pointless to be sarcastic when people start agreeing with you.

Well, the idiot is you.

I've lived the communist experience with a leader in charge who was, yes, a dictator but a benevolent one. Things worked for a very long time and people still look back fondly on the years that he was in charge.

You think WAY too highly of yourself, the self-proclaimed troll.

DP.

You were brainwashed, PP. communism is evil to the core.

If you can’t see that and refuse to accept the truth, I suggest you seek out de-programming therapy from a mental health specialist.

Yeah, I'll take your very sound advice under consideration.

I grew up where all of our healthcare was of great quality and free.
College was free.
Education was excellent and free for everyone.
If you had a job, you were given a place to live by your company.
If you wanted to run a farm more power to you.
The middle class was strong and the largest part of the population.
We took a month off every summer and vacationed at low cost.
People worked from 7-1 or 2 and had the rest of the day to spend with their families.

Sure, you couldn't really practice your religion or talk about the party. Most people couldn't care less about any of that.

Uh huh.

Uh huh, what? Read a book or even do a Google search.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yugoslavia under Tito was a hybridized system. It allowed joint ventures with private companies and its worker councils were not centrally controlled.

It started about halfway through and it was very rare. It had very little impact on the overall economy. It still doesn't refute that Yugoslavia was a socialist, communist country.

socialism and communism are two different things. especially in regards to how political control is asserted.

for what it's worth, Macedonians and Kosovars probably have a different view of life in Yugoslavia than Slovenes and Croats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yugoslavia under Tito was a hybridized system. It allowed joint ventures with private companies and its worker councils were not centrally controlled.

It started about halfway through and it was very rare. It had very little impact on the overall economy. It still doesn't refute that Yugoslavia was a socialist, communist country.

socialism and communism are two different things. especially in regards to how political control is asserted.

for what it's worth, Macedonians and Kosovars probably have a different view of life in Yugoslavia than Slovenes and Croats.

It was literally called the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It was governed by a communist party.

I can assure you that both Kosovars and Macedonians look much more fondly on the time of Tito than they do on the time after he died.

What made the whole experiment collapse was the power grab after Tito's death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yugoslavia under Tito was a hybridized system. It allowed joint ventures with private companies and its worker councils were not centrally controlled.

It started about halfway through and it was very rare. It had very little impact on the overall economy. It still doesn't refute that Yugoslavia was a socialist, communist country.

socialism and communism are two different things. especially in regards to how political control is asserted.

for what it's worth, Macedonians and Kosovars probably have a different view of life in Yugoslavia than Slovenes and Croats.

I will also add that I love the mansplaining from a person who tangentially heard of Yugoslavia 30 years ago and now wants to tell me how it really was.