Communism works...yeah, NOT!

[Seth]

It's not surprising a small co-operative can't exist in an uber-capitalist society. That says absolutely nothing about communism.

What it shows you is how incompetent these modern day commie want a bees are. Lots of small co-ops and non-profits exist and are run well in an under-capitalist society.

It's got nothing to do with communism. These people were probably simply incompetent. Either generally, or in terms of running a cooperative in an uber-capitalist framework.

No, they were Marxist useful idiots who thought (incorrectly) that the rest of society owes them something, and they found out that the rest of society is comfortable telling them to go fuck themselves.

[Seth]

Rather than point to a communist cafe, you could point to a communist country.

Isn't China still communist?

Less and less so every day, thanks to the power of capitalism on the human psyche. North Korea is completely communist and look how well it's doing economically.

Ain't it on course to overtake the USA economically?

Doesn't it own the American national debt?

Is that how capitalism ''works''? Borrow from the communists to keep going?

You do understand the difference between debt and wealth, right?

China can own 100 percent of US debt, but if it can't collect it, where's the wealth? Not in China.

The US can tell China to go fuck itself in re it's debt any time it needs to and all the wealth generated by Chinese investment stays right here in the US.

[Seth]

co-operatives aren't communism, nor are they representative of communism.

True, but the one in the OP seemed to be trying to cling on to a romantic communist image from the past...

The OP has come through a game of Chinese whispers by several right wing blogs and opinion news sites. A building on the university campus needs renovation, which is the responsibility of the university administration. The building in question happens to have been used for several decades for a student run co-operative cafe and social space. The university administration may decided not to continue funding it. As the cafe happens to be named after "mass-murdering dictator" Che Guevara, we get an article from Seth talking about the failure of communism and a million dollar grab for cash by commie-loving students.

Ahu. So after 34 years the university's administrators finally worked out a way to pull the rug out from underneath an organisation run by volunteers. Conclusive proof that communism does not work indeed.

I wonder what subsidies the coop would have received if it had named itself the Ayn Rand Cafe. I can see arsewipes like the Koch brothers making generous contributions because then it would have served as a shining example of lolbertarian voluntarism.

So what? If the Koch brothers want to voluntarily donate to such a cause that's entirely consistent with Libertarianism because nobody is either demanding that they do so nor is anyone wielding the mace of state as a weapon to coerce others into paying for it, which is the difference between Libertarianism and Communism.

It's about fucking time that the administration pulled the rug out from under anything named after Guevara, one of the most unrepentant and evil murderous cocksuckers in history.

[Beatsong]

There's a local business near me that has just gone out of business, laying off 150 people and looking to sell its premises for some other use.

That proves that capitalism doesn't work.

[Seth]

There's a local business near me that has just gone out of business, laying off 150 people and looking to sell its premises for some other use.

That proves that capitalism doesn't work.

No, it proves capitalism DOES work.

In a communist society that business would have been supported by the state (like the automobile industry) for the benefit of the workers no matter how capitalistically uncompetitive or useless the product (like GM automobiles) and that support would have been coerced by threat of, or actual application of force against everyone else in society (like the GM bailout), and a non-competitive business would have become a publicly-funded sinecure for Marxist dupes and idiots...like GM.

[Beatsong]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

[Seth]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

Exactly. First, there is no such thing as a communist enterprise because enterprise is forbidden under communism. Second, any activity undertaken under the mantle of communism cannot (according to communists) fail because it will be supported by the proletariat, whether the proletariat wants to support it or not. This is exactly why the Soviet Union failed. It had inefficient, unwieldly, costly, poor-quality, unnecessary industries that cost the country huge amounts to keep running even when it was obvious that there was no demand for the products produced. The OPM of the USSR was frittered away keeping useless non-competitive businesses and industries running in order to keep the proletariat employed and barely not starving. When the OPM ran out (thanks to Reagan) the USSR collapsed into economic ruin.

The whole point of capitalism is that the free market ruthlessly culls inefficiency and waste from business by supporting ONLY those businesses which stay competitive and thereby preserve their market share. Businesses that don't operate efficiently and serve an actual societal need or demand die off regularly...some 90 percent of small businesses fail in the first 5 years...and no wealth is wasted trying to keep them alive for political reasons.

That's exactly why capitalism works as an economic model and communism doesn't.

[cronus]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

Exactly. First, there is no such thing as a communist enterprise because enterprise is forbidden under communism. Second, any activity undertaken under the mantle of communism cannot (according to communists) fail because it will be supported by the proletariat, whether the proletariat wants to support it or not. This is exactly why the Soviet Union failed. It had inefficient, unwieldly, costly, poor-quality, unnecessary industries that cost the country huge amounts to keep running even when it was obvious that there was no demand for the products produced. The OPM of the USSR was frittered away keeping useless non-competitive businesses and industries running in order to keep the proletariat employed and barely not starving. When the OPM ran out (thanks to Reagan) the USSR collapsed into economic ruin.

The whole point of capitalism is that the free market ruthlessly culls inefficiency and waste from business by supporting ONLY those businesses which stay competitive and thereby preserve their market share. Businesses that don't operate efficiently and serve an actual societal need or demand die off regularly...some 90 percent of small businesses fail in the first 5 years...and no wealth is wasted trying to keep them alive for political reasons.

That's exactly why capitalism works as an economic model and communism doesn't.

America is only capitalist in theory. UK is a nation of shop keepers and car boot sale addicts. We have the real thing at multi-scales. America is full of toxic banks and zombie mega businesses running on bailout money. That's communism with denial about what America has now become.

[pErvinalia]

co-operatives aren't communism, nor are they representative of communism.

True, but the one in the OP seemed to be trying to cling on to a romantic communist image from the past...

But as I said, attempts at real communistic enterprises will struggle in a capitalist framework. Particularly one so uber-capitalist as the US.

Well, yeah. Duh.

Well, yeah, duh, your premise in your OP is idiotic. Thanks for agreeing with me.

[Seth]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

Exactly. First, there is no such thing as a communist enterprise because enterprise is forbidden under communism. Second, any activity undertaken under the mantle of communism cannot (according to communists) fail because it will be supported by the proletariat, whether the proletariat wants to support it or not. This is exactly why the Soviet Union failed. It had inefficient, unwieldly, costly, poor-quality, unnecessary industries that cost the country huge amounts to keep running even when it was obvious that there was no demand for the products produced. The OPM of the USSR was frittered away keeping useless non-competitive businesses and industries running in order to keep the proletariat employed and barely not starving. When the OPM ran out (thanks to Reagan) the USSR collapsed into economic ruin.

The whole point of capitalism is that the free market ruthlessly culls inefficiency and waste from business by supporting ONLY those businesses which stay competitive and thereby preserve their market share. Businesses that don't operate efficiently and serve an actual societal need or demand die off regularly...some 90 percent of small businesses fail in the first 5 years...and no wealth is wasted trying to keep them alive for political reasons.

That's exactly why capitalism works as an economic model and communism doesn't.

America is only capitalist in theory. UK is a nation of shop keepers and car boot sale addicts. We have the real thing at multi-scales. America is full of toxic banks and zombie mega businesses running on bailout money. That's communism with denial about what America has now become.

Can't say I really disagree with you, although dealing with oligarchs is easier than dealing with communists because there are fewer of them, they tend to concentrate in particular areas and are thus easier to kill than communists, who are like fleas or cancer...they are everywhere infesting everything and infecting people with silly ideas that they are going to actually get something for nothing.

Where's the Orkin man when you really need him.

[rainbow]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

Exactly. First, there is no such thing as a communist enterprise because enterprise is forbidden under communism.

Wrong. An elementary error, but still quite wrong.

[Seth]

Oh right. So when a communist enterprise fails it shows that communism doesn't work; when a capitalist enterprise fails it shows that capitalism works just great.

Gotcha.

Exactly. First, there is no such thing as a communist enterprise because enterprise is forbidden under communism.

Wrong. An elementary error, but still quite wrong.

No, it's not, not in the reality of communism, as opposed to the utopian nonsense Marx thought would come to pass.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The whole central theme of communism is that nobody owns anything, everything is owned by the state, and thus no enterprise is permitted because it's misappropriation of public property for personal benefit, which is forbidden.

[rainbow]

The whole central theme of communism is that nobody owns anything, everything is owned by the state, and thus no enterprise is permitted because it's misappropriation of public property for personal benefit, which is forbidden.

Drivel. You are confusing State Capitalism with Communism.

You should only talk about things you actually understand. Can't think of anything at this point, but I'm sure there is something.

[Seth]

The whole central theme of communism is that nobody owns anything, everything is owned by the state, and thus no enterprise is permitted because it's misappropriation of public property for personal benefit, which is forbidden.

Drivel. You are confusing State Capitalism with Communism.

No, I'm not. Socialism is, as Marx said, merely a waypoint on the path to the true classless communist society. The problem is that state socialism (not state capitalism) is the end of the line in every single case without exception, and the utopian ideal of communism can never actually be achieved (and has never actually been achieved) because it defies fundamental human behavior. Thus "communism" and "state socialism" are factually synonymous and historically interchangeable terms because to separate "communism," which is the label applied to the entire process Marx describes, from socialism is intellectually bankrupt, and to try to point to communism while ignoring the actual end-state of the journey, state socialism, is just an evasion of the obvious failings of the entire philosophy.

In utopian communism there is no enterprise because everything is communally owned and distributed and therefore nothing can be diverted to individual enterprise without taking it from the commune, which defies the fundamental principle of communism.

You should only talk about things you actually understand. Can't think of anything at this point, but I'm sure there is something.

You should stick your head back up your ass and shut the fuck up because you know less than you think you know. So there.

[rainbow]

The Utopian idea of Libertarianism can't be achieved either, which is why they are the same.

Pipe dreams.