Comments by "Ameni0" (@Layde36) on "Privatization is a stupid idea (and destroys economies)" video.

It's also successful as it employs slave labour from foreign third world nations and builds its Empire from state imperialism
7
@MercurySteel " you will own nothing" More like your personal property (including your house, personal belongings *toothbrush 🤭 and other utilities) which you own and your family owns will be untouched while only private property which includes large amounts of land owned by private businesses, industries owned by capitalists, and other things which creates the means of production will be seized by the state So maybe stop being ignorant and repeat tiring talking points as the Soviets didn't own your toothbrush or any other nonsense which you kept and always did, the Soviets only took stuff which you owned on a massive scale while you made the rest of the people around you poorer so don't whine when your punished for making others poor and taking up their lands as your ownership
6
@v-corps India wasn't even a real country until the British Empire created it, it was never an "independent" state as it wasn't even a state to begin with as it was a mixture of multiple ethnic kingdom India also had the US as their main trading partner against the Chinese as the US and Soviet Union (post 50s after Krushchev took over was not socialist), the Indian government was created by the previous remaining caste system preferring the high caste while also having a class based capitalist system which also was privatized by the US and the USSR, privatization was more confined to specific countries and not being globalized as private property still existed while the state owned majority of the country's economy instead of private rich elites India is more similar to the right wing neoliberal state of the US regime around the 50s (but the opposite as in they barely prioritised the needs of their people) than being purely related to Nazi Germany as their political compass is still not close enough to being a full on regime as the class nature prevents any such barriers from being accomplished The word privatization is thrown around without any meaning while in socialist terms it just means the private ownership of the means of production of any entity over the working class whether it's the state or private corporations owning them
4
@ninyaninjabrifsanovichthes45 tbh the Soviet Union including the Ukrainian SSR was already on a downhill after the privatization efforts started in the 80s-90s and the Soviet Union as a whole suffered after Krushchev couped the Soviet Union and overthrew the democratic socialist state of the Soviet Union and allowed state officials to gain profits over the working class and reduce their social welfare in a declining state
3
@Gastemaz don't bother with a capitalist who tries to justify his million dollar apartment which he owns and makes others pay their rent for him while he sits on his ass making millions from the money that his grandfather made by stealing from others
2
 @morningstararun6278 typical capitalist mindset trying to ignore a lot of talking points
2
@morningstararun6278 doesn't matter, whether it's state owned or privately owned, imperialism is carried out regardless in a capitalist system whether its the economic exploitation of the working class in Singapore where the system is similar to the social democratic system that Nordic countries have who often carry out their economic exploitation in foreign countries and also in their own country with the Kafala type system which encourages a monopoly of the employer over the employee as their complete economic well being is tied by the employer migrant workers often are exploited by such a system which exploits their labour for the development of their country similar to the policies that US and other western powers also utilise but not as draconian as east Asian countries, the minority population of the Malay and Tamils (who themselves create discrimination amongst their own population via the caste system) also faced discrimination with the Han majority as recent state laws have been more tough on immigration and also supports the wealthy elite So the wealth and prosperity of Singapore is built by the very state itself and not just solely by American corporations which also contribute to the exploitation, the point has always been that most countries which are capitalist always follow an economic model which prioritises the rich elites more than the working class of their country
1
@chester9585 well does it still take away from the fact that imperialism is bad regardless of whether it's committed by the state or private entities? You seem to endorse imperialist ideas and exactly why your country ends up like Nazi Germany and you know the rest
1
I'm sorry but your country was never great since it's inception when it was created in 1947 and did not exist before the British Empire created it, western academics have always stated that India is one of the most invaded countries in the world and due to its discriminatory caste system and the typical class capitalist system it's left hundreds of millions impoverished and in fact created as worse circumstances as the British Empire in regards to how they managed their state They were looted from imperialists from the US regime and were made richer by the state Capitalist USSR which although wasn't nearly as worse as the western powers they still did not help anything with the conditions of the old century systems of the Indian subcontinent other than make the bourgeois high caste elites of the previous kingdoms richer The Indian subcontinent always had dark days and still does to this day which Indians sadly never acknowledge while current Indians flauntly claim that they had dark days while in reality choose to ignore the hundreds of millions of people they abandoned for decades on purpose and made the overpopulation crisis significantly worse than before At least China which in fact suffered from direct extermination by the Japanese and severe famine policies which lead to their overpopulation crisis even if they had better circumstances they are much more united in their cause while Indians due to their backwards culture still don't look for long term solutions like the Chinese did and are still doing even if they are state capitalist in nature
1
@re11ik96 the concept of state was around during the 16-17 century considering many countries in the developed world still were classified as states as the feudal system collapsed during those times in the developed world but the idea of statehood itself was recent as states were rather being forcibly created by foreign powers than being naturally formed by the Kingdoms and their Empires which were created Multiple feudal systems were forced to be converged into one rather than them always have been part of it, India's formation of a state led to it justifying their annexation of Eastern parts of India where they shared more of an East Asian ethnicity completely different than the Indian subcontinents ethnicity, the formation of the state also itself wasn't even allowed by the participation of the representatives of that particular region, something which Eastern parts of India have always been trying to fight against especially when they faced annexation from them continuously, the regime state left by the British carried on their colonialist expansionism on the east and tried to colonize North of Pakistan and many parts of China too under the name of establishing statehood
1
@Alex-u1w1w the point of the dissolution of the Soviet Union started when Kruschsev took over and undid all the Marxist ideals that Lenin and Stalin had implemented which looked forward with the Soviet states as a collective rather than live separate as regimes which would be invaded by the west The ultranationalism of each state and not nationalism for the Soviet Union as a whole was developed after Kruschsev took over the Soviet Union in a coup against the state, after destalinization which abandoned Soviet nationalism for Russian nationalism and promoted more Russian superiority over the rest of the states is exactly what led to the ultranationalism among those states and in turn subsequent regime changes changing their socialist state into a state capitalist state like a lesser version of the NEP with less focus on the condition of the working class for state profits and eventual privatization which sealed the deal for the Soviet Union to be dissolved by the US regime who probably were the reasons why they pushed the Soviets in an extreme position with the help of the Nazis and the Axis in WW2 while pretending to fight them at the same time supplying and trading with them as partners
1
MeansTV isn't even an anti capitalist service especially when it's owned by people who have ties to the social democratic party that Bernie Sanders is in
1
 @RyuKyu.77 your country was always privatized by the British and now Americans
1
 @Sadnessiuseless your country was always privatized by your state and the rich elites since it's inception
1