Comments by "" (@soulcapitalist6204) on "Jordan B Peterson" channel.

  1.  @bubblegumfacebabe  USSR applied marxism in its first stage. Once you eradicate the autonomy entailed in capitalism in the name of collectivism, this is your 100%. There's no half-assing the economic ruin, unfortunately.
    16
  2.  @tomhawkinson2162  I have read all major works of marx completely and most of his translated letters and articles. I have read Lenin's State and Revolution. You are confused concerning what happened with Lenin visavis marx's theory and you are ignorant about the nomenclature marx prescribed for communism, communist society, marxist partisans, the first stage of communist society and capitalism. Since I am more read up on the topic, I will inform you that marx dubbed marxist partisans "the communists" (Manifesto). A communist party operates a socialist state per marx (Critique of the Gotha Program 1&4, letter to the commie league) Per marx, the first stage of communist society, socialism, and the leninist notion of state capitalism which he describes clearly are used interchangeably (gotha 1). Lenin makes this connection (State and Rev) and executed the marxian vision of early communist society rather faithfully. "State capitalism" is early stage marxian communism (gotha 1, State and Rev)
    12
  3.  @ubuntuposix  Marxism refers to marx's communist political economy, actually. Marx has other mostly immoral social and economic theories including his famous classist bigotry. This is simple minded majority rules politics, but marxists elevate it to marxian theory of revolution. USSR took it upon themselves to racially order Russia and all of the nations entailed. Economic sanctions are the default expectation for states based on authoritarianism, especially when said is specifically economic authoritarianism. Socialism, communism, marxism - all the same collectivist economic basis - is the political economy that drags millions into starvation in pursuit of this autarky. Marx also has innumerate economic theory whereby macroeconomics are inherent in eliminating upper class. This stupid shit: marxian theory of capitalist accumulation is responsible for the dead and the sanctions.
    6
  4. The relapse is unacceptable. A line in the sand has to be drawn about the ethics of marxism.
    6
  5. This is mostly from the center and not the right wing where we find more socialists again. You can expect communism to be demonized because it is a system of authoritarian dictatorship which only charlatans and useful idiots promote.
    4
  6.  @renierbezuidenhout6150  That is profoundly illogical commentary.
    3
  7. Communists are my enemy. You people have abrogated the basic human rights of billions of people and are responsible for over 100 million mortalities directly related to stupid and brutal socialist authoritarianism. Read your own innumerate sophist demagogue, Marx. He prescribed the horrors of USSR, DPRK, Vietcong, Pol Pot and 3rd Reich - claiming radical socialists have no option other than dictatorship (Critique of the Gotha Program, Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League) and suggesting socialism for the ethnic cleansing of Germany (zur Judenfrage).
    3
  8.  @datpusilanime1  You have to additionally learn how economies behave. If you do so as a math, you can recognize instantly why marxism and collective allocation will always fail. Mankiw's Principles of Economics is the best economic primer for someone with the maths.
    3
  9.  @datpusilanime1  I couldn't pick any economics value out of the works of communists. Generally communists have their ideas because the couldn't and never did algebra at a modern high school level. Marx was innumerate and not sincere, whatsoever, in his attempt at understanding and analyzing economy. This is what you will find of marxists and marx's body of work. Have you read any JS Mill, Pigou? These were actual economists of the 19th century. If Manqiw was a breeze, pick up General Theory. That is actually how economies work with a minor asterisk.
    3
  10. Not even close regarding those killed. More importantly, the living - billions - have suffered the abrogation of basic human rights based on foolish collectivism.
    3
  11. United States has the most prosperous population on earth. The complaints that come from this environment are not important. The worst part of the US is the US government. Socialist twats who hope the government will change Americans with their authoritarianism are not even entertained by the general US public.
    3
  12. WW2 was primarily infighting between communist Russia and national socialist Germany - an infight between socialists.
    3
  13.  @heheheha5726  Politburo is an authoritarian governance institution, guy. Read a book.
    3
  14. Bismarck did not fund the bolshevik putsch of St Petersburg. Philosophy matters. It's Marx's fault, if not Hegel's
    2
  15. Socialism is the worst form of fascism in history.
    2
  16. ​ @weirdpuppet326 There's no such thing as capitalism without regulation. No philosophy of capitalism is this way and no praxis, either. The role of state in capitalist economies is to regulate markets, provide the means of exchange and guarantee human rights by force at a minimum.
    2
  17. @Supersaiyanbuddha So, no. Socialism will struggle to have basic needs and not all the technology you use. What USSR lacked was basic regard for human rights, safeguards against enslavement by government and any recognizable democratic franchise in government.
    2
  18. @Evil0tto  Socialists just say anything to move towards a tankie takeover. There have never been societies with as much accessible wealth as United States and Canada. You'll think it was Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.
    2
  19. China is national socialist like the German national socialists or the Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia national socialists or the Congolese national socialists or the Angolan national socialists or the Bolivarian national sociaists in Venezuela.
    2
  20.  @evandubois3364  Medicare - the US social program - is a means of production developed and used by the state. In capitalist nations like UK, the state owns/opps healthcare infrastructure too, but there is no socialist ban on capitalism there, either. Sanders proposes to ban capitalist healthcare because he is proposing socialist healthcare. Capitalism is defined as a private and market based means of production/economics.
    2
  21.  @malms4026  He is exactly because he invented communism - an authoritarian dictatorship polity which has taken the lives of millions and abrogated the human rights of billions. He wrote the formula for politburo, he claimed it would be state capitalist, he claimed it would be nationalist and he thinly veiled his proposed national socialism from the start of his career.
    2
  22. Yes. Basic human rights are always a joke for socialists.
    2
  23. Stalin didn't betray any internationalism. Instead, no country or populace desired being like communist Russia. If there was no internationalism, how do you people explain Stalin's USSR or trying to take Greece?
    2
  24.  @enerpro2955  You are an ignoramus. A soviet socialist state is communist. Any marxist or marxist leninist state is regarded as a communist state. The citizens are communists, etc. You have not read a lick of this philosophy as this nomenclature is one of the most prominent themes in marxism.
    2
  25. Democide: bad. Questions?
    1
  26. Should've grabbed your guns in the 19th century. Commonwealth is a complete mess of authoritarianism.
    1
  27.  @vistor5376  This is because marx makes an immoral call for revolution in the places which have achieved social democracy. His revolution called for dictatorship and government allocation of goods and determination of the public's work life. Anywhere where people have obtained the freedom of career and freedom of enterprise and limited government will be diametrically opposed to marxism. Only people who are suffering in poverty with little or no economic activity in their society have ever considered marxism.
    1
  28. Communism made members of society hate one another and love government or else.
    1
  29. No reading. Most communists are not familiar with either history or communist theory and make this claim as some guess.
    1
  30. ​ @weirdpuppet326  Communism is a set of moral dogmas which make workers out to be the chosen people and which is based on an impossible utopia. Communist philosophy saw religion as a direct threat and called for their abolition, whereas economic approaches are ambivalent to religion. In early all cases of capitalist societies, religion is a matter of guaranteed autonomy.
    1
  31. ​ @weirdpuppet326  You are wrong about several points. For example, communism is not classless, moneyless society. Communism is Karl Marx's theory of socialist political economy. Marx described several stages of communism with only the impossible stages being classless and moneyless. According to Marx, communism is exclusively effected through an autocratic state, so this debunks your claim that authoritarianism can somehow be extricated from the philosophy. Politics and economics are two studies of the same phenomenon: political economy. All economics is secured by policy. Most policy secures economics. This is why liberal democracy embraces capitalism and why Karl Marx was so opposed to liberal democracy and personal freedoms.
    1
  32. @Once upon a time The math in their theory and in their works, guy. This has nothing to do with communist education. This is about communist - marxist - economic philosophy. The economic bullshit this philosophy is laid on. The bullshit in Kapital 3 and Value Price and Profit of Marx. These make it clear that there is inept math behind the inept economics. You have read it and I presume you have better maths than a high schooler. You have sampled real economics as I have advised. Do you have any observation of communist philosophy with a basis in sound math? Provide page numbers, or cut the bullshit about any quest for the maths underpinning communism. What maths?
    1
  33. @Once upon a time It is not economic philosophy, that is, there is no usable analysis of economies in any work of Marx. Instead, the economics proposed in these works could only mislead complete idiots on either topic of math or economics. I mean bullshit like Marxian Law of Value, marxist equilibrium price, NNP, etc. Bollocks. It is clear that these were put forward as a hoax by someone without any more math than basic operations. No algebra 1 up there in Marx's head.
    1
  34.  @datpusilanime1  It's the economics. There's zero altruism in fucking up people's economy because it kills them. Imagine a fake physician poisoning everyone with a cocktail of cleaning supplies because he claimed altruistic intent. Moreover, please reference for me any evidence that altruism is the nature of marxism. I claim it is driven by envy and jealousy as the core emotions, not altruism. Marx rails against the altruism vs altruist Lassalle, dismissing it as distributism and vulgar socialism. It's capitalism and social democracy and better, period. Tyranny is also inextricable from socialism or collectivism of any kind. This is because socialism is not only economics, but political economy. It is impossible to have preconceptions - idealism - like that presented by marx/ists and also leave this determination to the public or anything resembling democracy at the same time. Socialism requires authoritarianism because all socialism has always been a proposal to take collective control of the economy. Collective must be government and cannot be free, individual-choice or autonomous. A government is a monopoly on force and is required by collectivism to act as the overarching management body capable of commanding a national economy/means of production. I suggest State and Revolution of Lenin and Critique of the Gotha Programme of Marx (ditto Engel's Erfurt critique) to realize that tyranny followed marxism because marx prescribed it and Lenin accurately interpreted and implemented Marx's tyrannical vision. In S&R Lenin fleshes out marx's claim that any sincere socialism must be nothing short of dictatorship.
    1
  35.  @kimobrien.  The issue with communist approaces is that they are immoral. For example, your consternation with property violates United State bill of rights and UNCHR charter on human rights. Communism must alo be anauthoritarian scheme. This is a violation of modern suffrage rights. Do you understand why all communism has been authoritarian politburo states and always will be? It's the socialist property injustice for one. All communism is incompetent economics. There hasn't been a lick of effort to develop marxian philosophy and marx was an inept and unethical economic analyst who intentionally got it wrong in an effort to stir people's jealousy. No evidence exists that marx could do math operations sufficient to graduate from a modern high school; he didn't understand the many brilliant economists of his time and could not effectively criticize and evolve their work or his own in the tradition which supplies us the confidence to hear out academics on any topic. MIT is a fancy school and all but you should be aware it takes a complete imbecile to support communism in 2022, considering it took an imbecile by 19th century standards to support it then.
    1
  36. Marx was a totalitarian statist who designed Lenin and Stalin's dictatorship in writing. He called for strict central authoritarianism in his Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League. Marx detailed politburo as a dictatorial institution which limited the public's democratic franchise to their soviets - worker's clubs - just like Lenin and Stalin's and Mao's and Kim's politburos. That was done in his work titled The Civil War in France. He avoided all doubt about liberal democracy or free countries in his Critique of the Gotha Program, calling for dictatorship and claiming freedoms in Switzerland and United States were wrong.
    1
  37. Kapital - in none of the 3 volumes - ever broaches communist political economy. It's no reference as to whathe advocated versus what Lenin et al executed.
    1
  38. Colonialism and imperialism are mercantilist policies and not capitalist policies. Socialism is a mercantilist approach to economics due to autarky and state balance sheet approaches both in theory and praxis. Capitalism is the only approach which transcended mercantilism, elevating individuals above the state in the economic realm. Socialist theories all subordinate individuals to the collective, which has always had a state or government running collective affairs
    1
  39. Realistically socialism is European racism. Authoritarianism is required to override autonomy with democracy. Democracy is government and authoritarianism is abrogation of personal freedoms by government. Personal freedoms in the realm of economics are freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of contract and personal autonomy over private property.
    1
  40. @Confluencism101  No. The worth of a worker is negotiated with them when they are hired. They should only get paid what they negotiated, but bonuses are dandy. You may not have much career experience, much like Marx and others who propose this inane work relations. Employment is an exceptional convenience afforded workers by the concept of division of labor (marxian alienation). The company's revenue is not the worth of the productive work used to manufacture a service or product. The company's revenue - the rate paid for service or a product - is the value perceived in that good. That value is not even close to anything input by productive workers if these services are viable in the first place. That profit - gross profit - is not just due owners, but all the overhead and capital entailed in making the company deliver. Marx's theory is guilty on this and other topics of oversimplifying concepts so that they may be used in populist propaganda for the purpose of workers suiciding themselves in open combat with the government. This low quality philosophy - sophistry by manipulative "intellectuals", really - should not be mistaken as actual economics nor business administration insight. It is propaganda for inexperienced and marginally literate audiences.
    1
  41. @Confluencism101  I can't tell if my response actually worked. No. The worth of a worker is negotiated with them when they are hired. They should only get paid what they negotiated, but bonuses are dandy. You may not have much career experience, much like Marx and others who propose this inane worker takes all labor relations. It's incredibly ignorant - misinformed. For working people, employment is an exceptional convenience afforded workers by the concept of division of labor (marxian alienation). Alienated exploitation under wage labor (aka employment) is the most coveted labor relations in the history of mankind. Cooperative/democratic ideas from the left are the most hated. Politics on the job and having your expertise used without a promotion and raise - widespread hatred for these. The company's revenue is not the worth of the productive work used to manufacture a service or product, anyhow. It"s not all the capital invested, either. The company's revenue - the rate paid for service or a product times the quantity of units that rate is paid - is the value perceived in that good as measured by actual purchases. That value is not even close to anything input by productive workers if these services are viable in the first place. That profit - gross profit - is not just due owners, but all the overhead (mainly other workers) and capital entailed in making the company deliver.
    1
  42. @Confluencism101  Marx's theory is guilty on this and other topics of oversimplifying concepts so that they may be used in populist propaganda for the purpose of revolution by non soldiers. ☠️💀. See how it worked out for the communists in March and November Revolution. This low quality philosophy - sophistry by manipulative "intellectuals", really - should not be mistaken as actual economics nor business administration insight. It is propaganda for inexperienced and marginally literate audiences like those of line workers in mid 19th century Germany. For example, trade/guild workers (aka marxian reactionary workers or marxian sectarian workers) were experienced enough to reject marxism as nonsense - fight it as a menace in street battles in Germany/Austria c 1849. This marxist perspective on work career and business is hated by career workers and businesses - that's everybody who it applies to.
    1
  43.  @Confluencism101  I only find the aspects of personal freedoms described by Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 to be credible, homeboy. All of this about true worth and workers contributing all this value is nonsense. Workers are individuals which don't individually contribute any substantial value. Back to personal freedoms and UDHR 1948, we have individual labor rights. We aren't grouped against our will.
    1
  44.  @ubuntuposix  You have to be a marxist to be a communist. There's no room to be communist and not a society based on the collective ownership of MoP, so commies will always be within marx's ideology. You've presented numerous excuses for why USSR was problematic as if it was not the collectivist "economics". Whether international opposition, starvation, racial segregation, economic malaise or state bankruptcy, all of these issues stemmed directly from the attempt and authority by the soviet state to allocate without open markets.
    1
  45. It did not work out because Russians were offered human rights in 1991, the first enfranchisement offered them in their government. Basic human rights ban socialism from existence and this will also be the end of it in China.
    1
  46.  @carloschacal9334  Yes. It did. Russian government made healthcare a right only after capitalism. That was before any country west of them declared this and free to use HC was never offered by the communists.
    1
  47.  @carloschacal9334  What are you claiming is wrong with Russian access to human rights since the communists were banished? Are you trying to say Russia is still communist? 🙄
    1
  48. @carloschacal9334  Communism is specifically collectivization of individual (human) rights into collective power. The reason why you have to misrepresent the Russian human rights regime following the 1991 referrendum is because communism and socialist political economy was banned in Russia by guaranteed human rights. If there are guarantees of free expression, free assembly, private property and free contract - basic human rights - capitalism is the only political economic system possible. That debunks you completely unsupported conjecture tha human rights are not the specific difference between capitalism and socialism or that socialism in theory or practice has ever guaranteed human rights.
    1
  49.  @carloschacal9334  Communism is specifically collective power in exchange for human rights. The 1991 referrendum proves this as does the absence of human rights guarantees in communist theory or praxis, ever.
    1
  50.  @carloschacal9334  If there are guarantees of private property, free assembly, free contract and free expression, communism is outlawed and only capitalist economics can be played out.
    1