Why do peeps want socialism/communism? - Zoomer Delusions

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

Comrades, it is a great fact that the misery of the working masses has not diminished from 1836 to 2020, and yet this period is unrivaled in the development of its industry and the growth of its commerce. Capital is dead labour, that, vampire-like, only lives by sucking living labour, and live the more, the more labour it sucks. The time during which the labourer works, is the time during which the capitalist consumes the labour-power he has purchased of him.

As time passes, all social rules and all relations between individuals are eroded by a crash economy, avarice drags Pluto himself out of the bowels of the earth. In light of this, we want, no, we NEED a free society, where no one is considered to be superior, no one is left behind and where mankind is free from oppression and scarcity. We need a society without a government, without class divisions and where the workers control the means of production.

The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. Let the ruling classes tremble at the Communist revolution.

 

[Violent Ken Apologist]

Not this shit again. You guys are brainwashed. No significant amount of people want it, the media just censor anyone who doesn't and it's like playing a 9-1 matchup in a game with the 1 being the dude piloting capitalism. The second all the conditional shackles on dissenters come off or start to loosen even one bit we'd overrun the world and we more or less have at least controlled politics using just the limited freedom we have left: literally just to vote. Free healthcare is a good idea and possible but beyond that no one except mad people agree with the concept of losing our privacy or rights and being killed as collateral or for being simply related to people they dislike.

Fact is, 'bigotry' is marketable, if you could popularise a lot of those views without governmental blowback corporations would lean into and happily bank from it.

edit: What I'm trying to say is, and please let this double post sit as a pleading exception, (I just decided to add it.) you'll never beat us. Freedom will win every time because we know humans are naturally kind and can work things out without hating each other in the end. And you can't force them to be better without letting them figure it out first. You have everyone up to their eyeballs in propaganda and lies and it's working about as well as saying Kim Jong can make wine out of water would to his disenfranchised and famine laden population. If they don't believe any of his bullshit under threat of death what makes you think we'll believe your lies ever, period? Like, whatever you do?

 

[Bum Driller]

A healthy dose of socialism can make the general living conditions of peoples way better.

Rather a healthy dose of social democracy, to be precise. This is undoubtedly so, and you can see the effects in any Scandinavian country. Sure, this is not a paradise, but I'm quite ready to claim that nowhere else and in no other period of time has there existed as equal, in terms of living conditions between the poor and the rich, societies as currently are in Scandinavian countries.

 

[Lou’s Biggest Fan]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing nor is one a slippery slope to the other, just as Capitalism and Corporatocracy is not the same thing nor is on a slippery slope to the other.

Socialism, more specifically Democratic Socialism, is simply the government being force to do its job: use it’s tax funds and other income to care for the citizens that allow it to exist by providing free services to all citizens as a perk of being a tax paying citizen of that country, such as universal healthcare, nationalized transportation systems, national postal services, a government funded ISP that provides basic internet access to all, and in more extreme cases a basic universal income that covers simple living expenses for those who can’t work for whatever reason. As well as any other systems like that.

People want systems like that because it’s better use of the tax money the government already steals from us that the dumb shit they do with it for other crap, and raises the standard of living across the board for all residents, which means the population is happier, healthier, and more able to spend money on luxuries and benefit the economy by having more people able to spend more money on more things.

As for why people want communism, because Counter Culture.

That’s it. Because it’s trendy to hate capitalism and communism is the opposite of capitalism. So people declare themselves to be communists to seem edgy and woke.

 

[Driftwood]

Why is communism given such a pass for atrocities committed in the name of may be the real question. So many people either do not know what Communists did or say well yeah but Nazis and you have to admit Commies are more desirable over them. Um, no, not really. Not after you spent more than five minutes reading about it. Shit is easily just as bad as what the Nazis did. But this is part of why people feel more comfortable with far leftist extremism running riot today. They really do believe it is not as oppressive or dangerous as far right ideologies despite the fact it absolutely is.

 

[murgatroid]

I think a large number think it will somehow correct social "injustices" that go on in capitalist countries. While in reality it will be more corrupt and unjust. Economic systems won't correct human nature.

Also, as @Lou’s Biggest Fan posted above, socialism and communism are not the same things despite seemingly being used interchangeably by people on all sides of the political spectrum.

 

[Gun Safety]

People are communists/socialists because its easier to get laid when you ID as one of them because its fashionable

 

[Unyielding Stupidity]

a basic universal income that covers simple living expenses for those who can’t work for whatever reason.

A universal basic income is a terrible idea - in pretty much every scenario where it's been trialed, it's led to the majority of people just refusing to work. If you're already getting enough money to live without having to work, there's a lot of jobs that a lot of people just wouldn't want to work. You wouldn't have issues getting high-paid/high-skill workers or workers that are really passionate about the field they're entering. You'd have issues getting workers for the shitty wagie jobs.

Working in Amazon to pay the bills is something many people would do. If you need to do it to put a roof over your head and food in your mouth, people will just sigh and bear it.
Now, working in Amazon to get more money than you currently do? That's something a lot less people would do. Most people would rather have the hours that they'd use working a shit job to do something they're more passionate about.
This applies to the vast majority of low-skill, low-pay jobs. Would many people really want to be retail workers, janitors (not the internet kind), baristas, or labourers if they didn't need to do so to pay the bills?

The only way to really solve this would be to have people pay higher wages to these low-skill jobs to make them much more tempting to people and outweigh the negative of, you know, having to work a job you don't like when you don't need to. This is a cost that many smaller businesses couldn't afford, larger businesses wouldn't want to pay (and would lobby against), and would make high-skill workers demand higher pay themselves.

 

[Mr. Bung]

The Jews ready have control. Reminder 60% of the original Pulitburo were Jews.

I always thought it weird that Jews frequently support communism when they also love money and making money so much. Unless it's that under communism they wouldn't expect the rules to apply to them as well.

 

[A Cardboard Box]

A universal basic income is a terrible idea - in pretty much every scenario where it's been trialed, it's led to the majority of people just refusing to work. If you're already getting enough money to live without having to work, there's a lot of jobs that a lot of people just wouldn't want to work. You wouldn't have issues getting high-paid/high-skill workers or workers that are really passionate about the field they're entering. You'd have issues getting workers for the shitty wagie jobs.

Working in Amazon to pay the bills is something many people would do. If you need to do it to put a roof over your head and food in your mouth, people will just sigh and bear it.
Now, working in Amazon to get more money than you currently do? That's something a lot less people would do. Most people would rather have the hours that they'd use working a shit job to do something they're more passionate about.
This applies to the vast majority of low-skill, low-pay jobs. Would many people really want to be retail workers, janitors (not the internet kind), baristas, or labourers if they didn't need to do so to pay the bills?

The only way to really solve this would be to have people pay higher wages to these low-skill jobs to make them much more tempting to people and outweigh the negative of, you know, having to work a job you don't like when you don't need to. This is a cost that many smaller businesses couldn't afford, larger businesses wouldn't want to pay (and would lobby against), and would make high-skill workers demand higher pay themselves.

Companies should just pay living wages. Easy fix.

 

[Mr. Bung]

Companies should just pay living wages. Easy fix.

Do not underestimate the incredible power of greed. I'm sure CEOs and other higher ups have a visceral reaction to thoughts of sacrificing some of their money to give their employees better wages. If they didn't they would have already been doing it a long time ago.

 

[A Cardboard Box]

Do not underestimate the incredible power of greed. I'm sure CEOs and other higher ups have a visceral reaction to thoughts of sacrificing some of their money to give their employees better wages. If they didn't they would have already been doing it a long time ago.

Yes, which requires government intervention.

 

[The best and greatest]

It's not that I "Want" socialism, its that capitalism (An economic system predicated on the relationship between labor and capital) has a finite shelf-life in a world where human labor is growing increasingly redundant. A world where the generation of material wealth is near-totally divorced from human labor inputs is a world that doesn't need capitalism (Or more correctly, a world where the capitalist doesn't need YOU.) From then on its either socialism or feudalism, probably a mix of both. Not a huge fan of either, but if I had to pick...

 

[House Rules]

It seems to be more globalism and hyper-consumerism.

Like the corperations don't want open borders because they are pro equality, they just want cheap labour.

Yes the right wing are actually very very very keen on mass excessive immigration from the third world to first world countries and people who vote for right wing parties are really fooling themselves a lot that the right doesn't want all that cheap labour for corporations and so they can pay bottom dollar for govt jobs too. The left have been sold the lie that it's for diversity and equality. And that's not me being anti immigrants from anywhere at all it's just the excessiveness of it and how the mass flooding in of people to keep wages and salaries low either way sucks.
As for communism it's a different thing from socialism. And mostly capitalist but social democrat countries such as Norway have nothing in common with communism. Americans have been sold a ridiculous lie that getting anything at all for their tax dollars other than a military and some roads is best because anything else is the bogeyman of socialism/communism. That's why the USA only comes in at 15 in quality of life index ranking compared to countries with social democracy like Denmark, Switzerland and Finland. The idea that people getting anything for their tax dollars means the government has total control over you is a handy myth so the US government can give you very little back for your tax dollars in the USA.

 

[LinkinParkxNaruto[AMV]]

Comrades, it is a great fact that the misery of the working masses has not diminished from 1836 to 2020, and yet this period is unrivaled in the development of its industry and the growth of its commerce. Capital is dead labour, that, vampire-like, only lives by sucking living labour, and live the more, the more labour it sucks. The time during which the labourer works, is the time during which the capitalist consumes the labour-power he has purchased of him.

As time passes, all social rules and all relations between individuals are eroded by a crash economy, avarice drags Pluto himself out of the bowels of the earth. In light of this, we want, no, we NEED a free society, where no one is considered to be superior, no one is left behind and where mankind is free from oppression and scarcity. We need a society without a government, without class divisions and where the workers control the means of production.

The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. Let the ruling classes tremble at the Communist revolution.

The proletariat have all to loose, like food, medicine, the value of their work, etc as proven by everytime "not true socialism " has been tried

 

[Cedric_Eff]

Rather a healthy dose of social democracy, to be precise. This is undoubtedly so, and you can see the effects in any Scandinavian country. Sure, this is not a paradise, but I'm quite ready to claim that nowhere else and in no other period of time has there existed as equal, in terms of living conditions between the poor and the rich, societies as currently are in Scandinavian countries.

Or Japan.

 

[PaleTay]

A universal basic income is a terrible idea - in pretty much every scenario where it's been trialed, it's led to the majority of people just refusing to work. If you're already getting enough money to live without having to work, there's a lot of jobs that a lot of people just wouldn't want to work. You wouldn't have issues getting high-paid/high-skill workers or workers that are really passionate about the field they're entering. You'd have issues getting workers for the shitty wagie jobs.

Working in Amazon to pay the bills is something many people would do. If you need to do it to put a roof over your head and food in your mouth, people will just sigh and bear it.
Now, working in Amazon to get more money than you currently do? That's something a lot less people would do. Most people would rather have the hours that they'd use working a shit job to do something they're more passionate about.
This applies to the vast majority of low-skill, low-pay jobs. Would many people really want to be retail workers, janitors (not the internet kind), baristas, or labourers if they didn't need to do so to pay the bills?

The only way to really solve this would be to have people pay higher wages to these low-skill jobs to make them much more tempting to people and outweigh the negative of, you know, having to work a job you don't like when you don't need to. This is a cost that many smaller businesses couldn't afford, larger businesses wouldn't want to pay (and would lobby against), and would make high-skill workers demand higher pay themselves.

But why though?

Shitty wagie jobs (largely) shouldn't exist as they can be replaced with technology relatively quickly. Most people don't enjoy them, they don't do a good job, and they don't provide a benefit to their clients/customers. It's the same problem that slavery had, the need to employ massive amounts of people led to technology stagnating and resentment of the elite.

I don't think we need a million restaurants, and coffee shops on every block. It's also trivial for me to mow my own lawn and shovel my own driveway, yet it's extremely difficult to live somewhere where I'm able to do those things myself. There's a major lack of high-skill workers and some people would get an opportunity to either improve themselves or chase a high skill job that they otherwise wouldn't.

I don't think their passions would have to be that fulfilling or they'd have to be that talented for it to be an overall benefit. If you replace a cashier with a self-checkout and they decide to make a shitty Youtube channel, that's still a positive outcome.

 

[Fromtheblackdepths]

But why though?

Shitty wagie jobs (largely) shouldn't exist as they can be replaced with technology relatively quickly. Most people don't enjoy them, they don't do a good job, and they don't provide a benefit to their clients/customers. It's the same problem that slavery had, the need to employ massive amounts of people led to technology stagnating and resentment of the elite.

I don't think we need a million restaurants, and coffee shops on every block. It's also trivial for me to mow my own lawn and shovel my own driveway, yet it's extremely difficult to live somewhere where I'm able to do those things myself. There's a major lack of high-skill workers and some people would get an opportunity to either improve themselves or chase a high skill job that they otherwise wouldn't.

I don't think their passions would have to be that fulfilling or they'd have to be that talented for it to be an overall benefit. If you replace a cashier with a self-checkout and they decide to make a shitty Youtube channel, that's still a positive outcome.

Okay few things.
1. What if people wanted to own their own restaurants or coffee shops and they needed their own workers? Go spend on expensive machines to help with that?
2. Besides school,how else will you give people job experience?
3.So then whose going to fix all that automation if everything is automated.
4. God,are literally saying shitty Youtube channels are a positive? For who?

 

[PaleTay]

Okay few things.
1. What if people wanted to own their own restaurants or coffee shops and they needed their own workers? Go spend on expensive machines to help with that?
2. Besides school,how else will you give people job experience?
3.So then whose going to fix all that automation if everything is automated.
4. God,are literally saying shitty Youtube channels are a positive? For who?

1. They'd have to pool or save money the same as they do now. Ideally, they'd have to offer something special in uniqueness or extremely high quality to survive as everyone would learn how to cook.

Things like gaming cafes would probably do really well as passion projects where people would work there because they enjoyed it, and the high quality restaurants would still be able to profit.

2. Ideally, you'd judge based on talent and not experience. You'd expand school, have independent projects, and have further development of high skill industries throughout the world.

3. Some of it will be self-sustaining, some of it will be low-maintenance. An ever-shrinking workforce of medium-high skill workers would handle the rest.

4. For their 3 fans. They're relatively harmless, whereas in the real world they could be harmful and/or annoying. Even with the people who do horrible things, like Onision, there's a level of containment and consequences you rarely see in the real world which makes it harder for them to continue their actions.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

This isn't purely a zoomer delusion. It's a delusion that's been around for decades in America, we're just seeing a flare-up of the old infection. Case in point: these songs are from the 1960's.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpetD9Cp6b0w1-vU0f2HDg