Capitalism hasn't existed ANYWHERE in the world since 1913. There is no central bank or graduated income tax in a free market capitalist system. The two most important planks of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto are - 1. The establishment of a central bank. AND 2. The establishment of a graduated income tax. These things DID NOT exist in Christian America prior to the Rothschild takeover of our currency via the establishment of the Federal Reserve. In fact the Color RED is representative of communism because the Roth-schild name literally translates to RED SHIELD. They funded Karl Marx to get all the useful idiots of the world to believe that taxes should be sent to a central bank for "the good of all" . Meanwhile they steal it, expand it's value via fractional reserve banking (money printing) and hand it out to big corporations and banks that support leftist ideology. Their owned and controlled media and universities even have guys like YOU calling a communist system "capitalist"..... amazing.
Actually Shanghai is pretty amazing. Much better infrastructure for sure Too bad China has terrible civil rights violations. Maybe they will come around like the US did these last 70 years
@@helloitsmehbhe said GHETTO parts. In ghetto parts of LA, there is some crime - but in Shanghai (or any) Chinese ghettos, there’s almost no running water or electricity
If socialism is so inferior to Capitalism, why have socialist nations never been allowed to fail on their own? They’ve always been toppled from Capitalist imperialist action/pressures.
@@kewokeviii.1202the soviet union was stuck in a cold war for most of it’s existence and was also invaded by a coalition of countries for a short while in the beginning
If socialism isnt inferior to capaltilism why do they keep getting destroyed by capitalist societies? War is an inevitable part of humanity and if a system is weaker than another system you know damn well the stronger system makes sure the weaker system knows it.
What these people never mention is that capitalist nations, primarily the USA has intentionally spent decades strangling out any form of communism. All this proves is that rich people have been successful in maintaining the status quo.
literally. capitalist countries (obviously the biggest current example is the US) swoop in and "save" these places, but really they just mess things up and then leave
Middle class workers when someone criticizes the system that exploits them to the fullest and only sees them as a product: 🤬😡🤬 Middle class workers when someone criticizes the system that demands change and that wants people to be treated like people: 😇🌸🤪
Right, because the leaders of socialist paradises like Venezuela who capitalize on others labor aren't rich and strangling out any form of capitalism...
Why does it always have to be either/or? There are several different economic systems. I, personally, would just like a revision to capitalism that places a limit on monopolies, more benefits and compensation for the working class, and less tax loopholes for corporations. Buying personal use items under a company name for a tax write off should be illegal, I.E buying a yacht for "business meetings". Does anybody else agree that capitalism needs a bit of revision?
A bit?? it needs a hell amount of revision. Capitalism has become another form of dictatorship where the company owners dictate the world. actually we have to scrap capitalism and bring some completely new thing which has the best from capitalism communism and socialism.
Both of these boil down to dictatorships and democracies. I would rather live in the Communist democracy north Vietnam than the capitalist dictatorship south Vietnam. I would rather live in makhnovshchina if it were not in war than the US The same is true for rojava. I would rather live in revelutionary catalonia (again ignoring the war) than either the Republic of spain or franko's spain. The Truth is capitalist hate Socialists because they are better. This is the reason they are often less successful. Because they have a world order against them. The US refuses to back a Socialist anarchist society in Syria, even though they are the only ones who can fight, even though the alternative is religious radical terrorist dictatorship. Because who would want a free market when they could be free themselves. There is a reason the UN doesn't recognise countries that could actually create paradise. It threatens their power in every state regardless of their economic stucture, so they all either attack them or use them to help win a war before betraying them when it's convenient whether they are Socialist or capitalist, democracy or dictatorship.. Every anarchist society in the last 200 years has existed during a revelution, seen the largest development of any country in said war during its existence, and been snuffed out by the closest power. Honestly though, Rojava might be the one this time. They have a significant military and hold a significant portion of the power in the war. However they also have the most oil so they will probably get invaded by the US, hopefully that goes down the Vietnam route. So look into anarchist societies. You might find yourself having a heart for once.
Wait …so Cuba is worse than …….Guatemala ? Or better ?in terms of poverty ..? This is a meaningful comparison. Two second world countries and Cuba which is under SEVERE sanctions ..
@@dsgio7254 As we all know, capitalist countries refer to western developed countries with bloody primitive accumulation.Guatemala is a regime supported by the United States to consolidate its rule, so it has nothing to do with the name of capitalist country.
@@athusk894 soooo it should be a point to the left that the citizens of east germany were all guaranteed basic human rights of food, education, shelter, etc, only at the expense of free enterprise, while the citizens of west germany werent.
Ah yes, East Germany, famously bombed more than west Germany, because the main target of allied bombing was *Checks notes* The Ruhr! Far, far to the east that one, so far east its on the border of France.
@@Jonathan-ds6yj truee The good news is that a VERY recent poll shows people are being driven away from socialist ideology. The bad news is that they are also still being driven from the capitalist ideology. (Not too many for both, but a good portion)
@@Jonathan-ds6yj Yep, Socialists and Communists have been dominating global politics for decades now. Just by the fact the almost every Capitalist country has Social programs and nets, and welfare, is proof enough of this. Socialists always say, "If Socialism always fails, why do you always attack it, and stop it from becoming popular?" When they don't realize that it LITERALLY IS INSANELY POPULAR! Socialists have been winning over the world, they just don't realize it themselves.
Another example, China vs Taiwan pre 2000. Same people, same history. Except after 1949, one went communist and the other one went capitalist. The poverty that was in China was unspeakable.
Another example. China vs India after 1949. Different people, same history of colonization. Except after 1949, one went communist and the other one went capitalist. The poverty that is still in India is unspeakable.
@@morningstararun6278 Not sure how you come to this conclusion. If you dig deeper, India had many industries nationalized. They didn't have a functioning free market. They were pretty hostile to free market enterprise. The bureaucracy of simply getting a business license was extremely difficult. Big business had to leave India and produce their goods somewhere else. India did not have the same economic freedom as Taiwan did.
@@hanh3000 I know very well you would say this. Here is a little fact to you, which is gonna hurt you, because it would destroy your entire argument. Almost all the poorest African countries, don't have the concept of nationalization except for post office and military, and they are also the poorest on the planet. Looks like Capitalism and privatized economy utterly fails, if your country wasn't a colonizer in the past, or at least if not the Imperial peripherals. why do you think the Capitalist countries in Africa are the poorest in the whole world? And the way that you even compared a country with 1.4 billion population with a country of less than half the population of my state in India, is beyond me.
@@hanh3000 Libya during Gaddafi's leadership, had a nationalized economy that was almost on par with USSR, and it ranked number 1 in HDI in all Africa. Libya was also one of the richest in all of Africa. Women had more freedom unlike the theologically Islamic countries. And today, Libya is the poorest within the Africa, after Murica introduced Neo Liberal Capitalism in Libya. Gaddafi's green book shows that he was actually a Socialist with a little conservative ideas. And Libya went from one of the richest and most prosperous in all of Africa during Gaddafi version of Socialism, to literally the poorest in all of Africa during western Capitalism. Do you have any coping answer to this, which you learned in PragerU?
@@morningstararun6278 Jesus man, you couldn't help yourself by first propping up yourself like some knowledgeable person while belittling me. Great way to start a conversation. The economy is an enormous and complicated beast. You think in two comments by you I will feel destroyed? C'mon dude. You wrote two comments which isn't even about India any more and off you go about other countries. I don't even know where to start but let's start with the big picture. Capitalism/free market can work if you produce. Productivity is the key. The poor countries you refer to, what were they producing? Were they manufacturing goods and exporting them? Typically a poor country can fast track economic development if it has stable, relatively non corrupt government and cheap labor which can entice foreign investment. During that period, the country will also need to develop human capital. Human capital is the ultimate key to productivity. Without enough people with knowledge skills, no country can stand. Many countries are prime example of this, here are some: Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Israel. None of these countries have any natural resources. It's completely built with human capital. Many of the countries in Africa are rife with unstable and corrupt government. No one will invest there when there are much better options. I can keep going for a long time with this and I'm sure so can you. But we have completely different vision how we see the world. You see the world through the oppressor vs oppressed model and I don't. So we're basically gonna talk past each other. In order for us to even have a possible productive conversation, some parameters have to be first established. Meaning we have to first agree on very specifically what we're arguing over then we can begin. But this is impossible to do over texting like this over UA-cam. One thing I will say about Soviet since you mentioned them. Soviet economic stats were all wrong. This was pointed out by Soviet economists in Soviet Union during the late 80's. They were patriots who wanted socialism to work but had to really dissect why it's not working. A major problem was the severe secrecy during Stalin's time, nobody was able to get any accurate information. Not until in the 80's when Gorbachev came into power and initiated something called glasnost and perestroika that's when people had more access to information.
@@prikipriki30 And that's because Actual Marxist communism could never and has never stood on its own outside of maybe a small commune of like minded individuals. Marxist Communism simply does not work on a large scale and history has shown us that time and time again.
@Citius60 A lot of nations unfortunately are subjected to sabotage wether thats the CCP in Africa or the CIA in South America. That being said the USSR was one of if not the most powerful nation at a time(Thats what happens when everyones money goes to the military) and helped fund many Marxist Communist states around the world with little oversight until its system collapsed under its own weight. Communist states in the modern world are subjected to sanctions because they are ran by tyrants and the people are subjected to suffrage because of said tyrants
@@prikipriki30 Actual Marxist Communism or any form of it isn't possible on a global scale without genocide on a global scale. Not to mention that if it was somehow achieved, it would fall under its own weight and would cause more problems then it could ever solve. You should pick up a history book along with George Orwell's 1984.
China got rich by liberalizing their economy. It was really only communist in name. Now they're returning to their history of centrally controlled economy and they're faltering.
@@grantcivyt India liberalized its economy, Pakistan liberalized its economy, Sri Lanka liberalized its economy, Bangladesh liberalized its economy. But it is only China that has made a remarkable achievement. And to be more informative, all the South Asian countries that I mentioned liberalized far more than China by letting privatizing almost everything in the country, and some countries never nationalized anything since its inception. They are all dirt poor. How so? Funny how you have to show refer to a Socialist country for the success of liberalization, while every single third world country that had liberalized its economy and are still poor, doesn't cross your eyes.
@@morningstararun6278 It's important to get into specifics about liberalization. None of the countries we're discussing are actually very free in terms of their markets. They exhibit high levels of negative government impediments to development including things like rule of law and regulations. If you'd like to get a sense of what I mean, take a look at the Index of Economic Freedom rankings. They explain the elements of their evaluations. That will give you an idea of the elements of a liberalized economy. Lastly, despite being poor relative to the world, every country you mentioned is actually growing richer since liberalizing. They're much less poor today than a decade ago.
Me when people have different opinion (they consume "bad propaganda" without thinking while i learn "good propaganda" that was given to me by my good (not bad like theirs) echochamber without a cowardly doubt )
As someone that has actually lived under a communist regime I agree, capitalism is several degrees of magnitude better. There’s more opportunity to better yourself, freedom, quality of life. Most modern western communist’s only frame of reference on this topic is their imagination
Most of the modern western capitalists don't know what is life like on third world capitalist countries. Try living in a third world capitalist country which is the majority of the world, and you will instantly realize that Capitalism only works for countries that became rich practicing slavery, colonization and committed many other atrocities in the past.
"We can't expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism, until they awaken one day to find they have communism.’" Nikita Khruschev
Imagine quoting the leader of a failed nation like that's some sort of accomplishment. Let's just forget about the millions who died or were sent to Gulags in the Soviet Union. Can't wait for all the "that wasn't real Socialism/Communism." Crazy how every problem in a capitalist society is due to capitalism but problems in a socialist society are due to it "not being real socialism."
Would you rather live in brazil or cuba (cuba's literacy rate 98% 2nd in terms of healthcare in the world according to the commonwealth nations free education and somehow all that with the whole world sanctioning them)
I like how in notes that it was supposed to be regionally controversial, but it is not. It just goes to show the amount of ignorance that there is when it comes to people with a lot of wisdom I’m assuming he is in a big class full of a lot of kids ranging from ages 18 to 25 and I bet every single one of them think they know everything in the world. But wisdom is being able to ask yourself. If what you’re doing is the right thing that’s what wisdom is.
And when it comes to communism versus capitalism as an intellectual, or as a progressive, you should be constantly striving to meet a perfect ideology of the world that matches complete wisdom, and the only way to do that just to have a good system to be able to realize that communism is not for the people. It’s not for you either. It’s for the people with more wealth and power than you.
@@micheleac66communism isn’t for the powerful people thats capitalism, and if you are who you say you are you should ask these: is capitalism really as good as I think it is? or am i just falling against capitalist propaganda? in capitalism even with a good democratic system powerful people will be able to manipulate the population, communism only needs a good democratic system to eliminate the elites
I believe in a society that is a fusion of the two, while trying to aggressively mitigate any of the harms caused by overindulgence in either of the economic systems. People still need to play a role in the functioning of society without their value being exploited by a few “anointed” ones
You physically cannot do that. You can't abolish private (NOT personal) property and also have private property at the same time. It doesn't make any sense. Are you referring to social democracy?
"Would I rather live in West Germany in the 1970s or East Germany in the 1960s?" Why did he have to give West Germany 10 years of advancement? I'd still choose East Germany but wtf?
Yes, S societies are definitely better than communist ones but social capitalism is definitely better than regular capitalism where the rich pay their fair share, and everyone has a chance to start their own business and own a home
@@yaniskhemili9790 Yes there is internet in DPRK, look it up. Also there is free housing, free food and essentials, no taxes, free helthcare, free education.
@@enterchannelname5953only like 600 people have access to the Internet, and south korea also has free healthcare and education that is ALOT better. Plus you won't be killed if you even slightly hate the government in the south. Why do you think thousands of north Koreans have defected?
Subsidies does not a socialist policy make. The majority of the developing world has a universal healthcare plan, that'd be an actual example, & it works better.
@@adamkeasey655 Subsidies are a socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention, thus is a Socialist policy. It's funny to say that Government Subsidies aren't a Socialist policy. Even just looking at page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" Shows Marx literally saying, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row. Already does your ideology disagree with what you believe it is. Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market. That is what makes it a Socialist Policy.
@@adamkeasey655 Subsidies are a Socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention. On page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" alone, says, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row. Looking into the foundations of your Economic System would be a better way of learning about it. Rather than just saying you support it without learning anything about it. Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market. I'm not a Socialist yet I've read 'The Communist Manifesto'. Which was not great of a book. You should follow Engel's redefinition of Socialism, if you really want to be a productive Socialist. The main reason I have problems with 'The Communist Manifesto', is because Marx never received a full Elementary School education. In fact he spent money so lavishly his family had to cut him off from funds. After that the only thing that kept Marx afloat was selling profits from 'The Communist Manifesto'. And Engels, who happened to be in a rich family of farmers. Marx also refused to get a job, sure his reasoning of not wanting to be exploited by the system is a good reason. But when you take into account that Marx and Engels are supposed to be representing the working class. It becomes hilariously funny, because both men never worked a day in their lives. Rich people leading the poor against the rich. Kind of ironic isn't it?
@@adamkeasey655Subsidies are a Socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention. On page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" alone, says, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row. Looking into the foundations of your Economic System would be a better way of learning about it. Rather than just saying you support it without learning anything about it. Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market. I'm not a Socialist yet I've read 'The Communist Manifesto'. Which was not that great of a book. You should follow Engel's redefinition of Socialism, if you really want to be a productive Socialist. One problem with 'The Communist Manifesto,' is, that the authors' tried to represent the working class, without being in the working class. Engels was from a family of rich farmers. Marx was from a rich family, and spent his family's funds lavishly until they cut him off. Marx refused to work, thus Engels began sending him tons of his own money, along with money from 'The Communist Manifesto'. Both authors' never were a part of the working class. It's literally the rich leading the poor against the rich.
China is a pretty successful nation. Problem is their civil rights violations. However, they built great infrastructure, and Deng lifted 800M out of poverty. This is why both of them combined work best
This guy doesn't seem to understand communism very well. There haven't been any communist societies, only communist governments. Though I wouldn't call them communist governments.
Because they weren.t communist. What happened in XX century Europe was what Lenin interpreted from Marx. Which was, in my opinion, turbo oligarchy, dictatorship
This comment section in a nutshell: “Capitalism is when bad thing, CIA is when bad thing under communism, left is anti establishment yet works with the establishment”
I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (Luke 13:5) Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest. (Psalms 51:1-4)
The greatest good for the greatest number is, by definition everybody doing as they wish with what is theirs; limited only by and to the exactly equal rights of others. Anything else produces victims and attackers.
@Cheds Religion is the new religion. Nothing new under the sun. Any belief system that supercedes the individual rights of honest, peaceful people is wrong; and all for the same reason. Crusaders == Jihadis
@@tempejkl Socialism advocates for everybody doing as they wish with what they own; limited only by and to the exactly equal rights of others? Ironic; so does capitalism.
Socialism without Marxism would be better replacement for both Capitalism and Communism for example National Socialism or Gaddafi's Islamic Socialism and Saddam's version of Socialism
@@LearnLiberty It would be better because Capitalism profits of innocent soul and makes 40-50% of people poor mostly peasants, Communism/Marxism takes private property and starves peasants while having totalitarian regime for opression of Nationalism,tradition and questioning of Communism
Nazism? (National Socialism), Gaddafi was a state capitalist (whatever that shit meant, lol) Saddam was a National Socialist too by definition of his policies. needing to invade Kuwaiti for more oil and water when his economy was failing.
Depends honestly, where in south africa and where in Vietnam, also, who am I, I would rather be an upper class Indian South African living in Cape town as opposed to a Montagnard Honestly generally thise type of questions are stupid The party elite in North Korea live better than the south korean homeless
Vietnam is not a communist state. When they joined the wto they were forced to liberalize their markets, same with china. Which is why there are major privately held businesses in both of these countries and billionaires. There are no longer any true communist countries anywhere in the world, with the exception of Venezuela and north korea
@@JimStanfield-zo2pz Still doesn't make the argument better in favor of Capitalism. With the same logic you just said, 95 percent of the third countries are Capitalist, and they are dirt poor. So what made the difference with China, Vietnam and them? I guess, Socialism?
@@morningstararun6278 Corruption and bureaucracy makes third world countries poor, China would be just as poor if they hadn't historical vendettas to settle with the west.
@@thebased-capitalist9552 Vietnam's economy has been doing fine and China's best described as having state capitalism. North Korea is on a league of its own, more resembling a feudal monarchy. This capitalism vs communism duality is old news though.
@@soundscape26 The economy is doing well but the people aren’t communism starves capitalism makes people prosper Singapore, Estonia, Taiwan and New Zealand are doing extremely well countries like Cuba, China, Laos, North Korea and Vietnam are impoverished
We can put a rest to all of these minor data points. I have collected all of the data relevant to the question to establish correlative analyses between economic freedom and non-economic freedom worldwide as compared to 646 socioeconomic categories. Of 646 categories, 505 were won by capitalism and 20 were won by socialism/systems of lacking economic freedom. Consumption (the preferred welfare indicator by economists) correlated to capitalism/economic freedom by a massive .65. Wealth per adult came in correlating to capitalism by .565. The average consumption per capita of the capitalist nations of the world (more than 50/100 or 5/10 economic freedom) is $8,377. For the
@@thebased-capitalist9552 Not here to defend such countries... more than their chosen economical model what I most criticize is the fact that they are dictatorships.
@@dizzydean2767that's the goal. It's not meant to produce profits, it's meant to give the means of production to those who actually work - not the bankers or investors who don't work but get 2000x the amount a regular person gets their whole lifetime.
@@tempejkl Manual labor is replaceable, good decision making you build an economy is not. Those who are rich earned what they have by making the decisions that made profit to help others. Without the idea that people are better than others in terms of work there would be no incentive to succeed and quality of life would be awful.
@@dizzydean2767 Yes. In socialism you are paid based on your ability. That’s the whole fucking point. Those who cannot work are subsidised (is that the right word?) by the working population, those such as elderly, children, and disabled). So bankers, investors, etc. who add nothing and are leeches earn absolutely NOTHING, and actual workers get paid based on the labour value that they create. This labour value has been extensively studied and is mathematically and scientifically sound. What do you mean by decision making to create an economy? Socialism is about planned economies!!!
@@tempejkl If you are paid based on your ability wouldn’t that divide people into classes? The very thing socialism tries to avoid. Not to mention that’s what we do in capitalism we pay people based on what they can and can’t do hence my decisions comment. Also I saw you said you would’ve rather lived in East Germany. When the Berlin Wall fell, which side did most Germans go to?
North korea used to be much better than the south, who had been ruled by pratically fascist dictators with much instability. it was only really after the death of kim il sung and the fall of the ussr, due to mismanagement, tons of american aid to the south, and food shortages since their main grain imports came from the soviet union. also, during the korean war roughly 15-20% of the north korean population was killed and the us bombed nearly every building which wasnt over 2 stories. so maybe that has something to do with why north korea is so bad and the south is so much better
There are organizations looking at degree of economic freedom. Tge countries with high economic freedom like Switzerland, Singapore or New zealand have generally speaking a way higher quality of life. Its not even a contest
@@asamanthinketh1937 That index itself is wrong. Many African countries have far lesser capital control by the government, when compared with Singapore. But still, they are not called Capitalists according to you, why? Because it destroys your argument.
The thing is former Socialist experiments are not perfect examples of what socialism would be like in our times or how they would develop without interference. Such ‘useless commodities’ are part of human joy and should be produced under socialism as well 🙂
The economic freedom to buy a 1 bedroom apartment unit, fill it with 20 or so refrigerator sized pods to max capacity, way past fire hazard potential, and then rent out each individual pod for the same price you bought the unit for. The economic freedom to employ children and work as young as you want under state sanctions. The economic to freedom override another person's lease by paying the state more. The economic freedom to package and sell anything anywhere in the world (fentanyl). The economic freedom to perform unethical psychological and medical experiments on human beings under state sanctions in the name of long term research and profit.
@@lucasworktv I mean just the poverty guideline can barely afford you a car and nothing else literally so like lol. Talk to some real working people, blue collar workers and ask whether they can afford house, internet, electricity, car, food, healthcare without living paycheck to paycheck
Ronald Macdonalds or whoever you are, North Korea is under terrible sanctions from almost every country in earth yet it has better living conditions than South Korea. North Korea has free housing, free education, free helthcare, free food and essentials and no taxes, South Korea can do anything to it’s people under the national security act. East Germany also had free helthcare, free education, free housing and cheap food with very low taxes. You where garenteed a job. East Germany is so liked, the current ruling party in Germany the SDP helped lead East Germany with the Communist Party.
@@fraybart And most North Korean defectors are pure by the American government to say lies on tv. This is actually true look up how the US government will give money to any DORK immigrant to denounce DPRK.
@@enterchannelname5953 Just as a random example, 450 Czechoslovaks died while trying to escape life behind the Iron Curtain. Most were shot, some bled to death and died on electric fences, while others drowned or committed suicide for fear of getting caught. Also, people risked similar deaths, and many died trying to escape East Berlin. I wonder why communist countries, where everyone is so happy, should feel the need for armed guards and electric fences to prevent people from escaping...
@@fraybart Yes I know there where people leaving East Germany and Czechoslovakia, only during the first decade of it’s rebuilding, after that life in East Germany was so good that to ruling party in east Germany (SDP) is the current ruling party in Germany. And the majority of the people living there express that it was the best time of their lives. Here is something to think about: How come capitalist countries are always fighting and competing against each other but Socialist nation fight and help each other. For example of capitalist war: ALL WARS RIGHT NOW. Example of Socialist nations helping each other: During the Cold War a system was put in place where the big USSR gave socialistic nation money to build their country, technology, military support and other items, than socialist countries would provide other things for example Cuba would provide Sugar. Now the big Socialist country is China playing the USSR role. China invest billion in Socialist economies.
It's not capitalism or socialism, it's the worst form of socialism under a ton of sanctions or the best form of capitalism. I think that a lot of people would prefer US or EU to some African capitalism
Most African nations are socialist states that are driving economically and socially, USA is more socialist than China and Australia, China makes EU countries look like socialist shitholes. Just look up the poorest provincial capital in China Guiyang and you'll see they outperform the EU despite being the poorest Province in China.
@@EzraMerr The typical Logicless Capitalist talking points "When they are poor, they are not Capitalists, but when they become rich, they must be Capitalist" China out performing EU and US, doesn't say anything about it being a Capitalist. If you truly believe China is Capitalist, you should be okay with your government implementing the economic principles of China in your country. But then, you will be screaming "Oh my god, this is Communism" 😂😂
I guess that's one good thing about communism. The development of technology is severely slowed down and rarely has innovation which is actually good. But then there are all the other negatives.
actually communism has never been successfully completed north Korea, china, the USSR, cuba and many others are socialist not communist because communism there's no state/country controlling the people so what I think he means is capitalist nations are better than socialist nations
Yall do know that up until the fall of the soviet union and the closing off of the dprk to the rest of the world it was richer than south korea and had a higher standard of living. Putting aside the governing structure it was objectivelt a better place to live. However if your knowledge of the dprk only extends back to the late 80s early 90s you wont get that picture. THIS IS WHY DIELECTICAL MATERIALISM IS IMPORTANT.
@@rondrajaeev2957 lets put it this way why do u think Karl Marx and his social economy doesn't work, and why is it u want the government to control ur wealth and freedom
@@mrsfmilitary9356Karl Marx advocated for the abolition of the government. The government in a socialist society has the role of protecting the socialist revolution and guiding the nation towards communism. This is not totalitarian, as the country is under a "dictatorship of the proletariat". This means the government is comprised solely of regular people, with participation from regular people too. In the Soviet Union, due to Stalin's mysterious early death, reforms were not able to be passed, and career politicians such as Khruschev were able to seize power and empower other careerists.
@@parithiilamaaran.h9829 by that meaning capitalism isn't responsible for war crimes because it's Bushism and Obamism just like your Stalinism instead of communism argument?
Ugh how dare he mentioned those countries in comparison but not mention there dictatorship and what has taken place in history for them to get that way.
@Damien Wayne I identify as a "Communist", and I would rather live in a "Communist Society". Sure, this professor may be entertaining at times to listen to, but he is full of nonsense. He has too much invested in the "Capitalist System" to lose if he were to say he supports "Communism". As for me, I do not like living in the "United States (U.S.A.)", and I would love to move to a "Communist Nation".
@Damien Wayne Dear Mr. Wayne, I would love it if a "Charity" would help me immigrate successfully to a "Communist Nation". I would really like more support to help me in this goal. The U.S.A. offers no support services to help people leave the U.S.A. - you are on your own in this crappy country.
Title of the Video - Capitalist societies are better than Communist ones. Take a good look at Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and many African countries, then say the same.
@@dizzydean2767 Socialism is not perfect, but we never needed to destroy other countries to enrich ourselves, steal their resources, kill a half a billion people by colonizing them and engage in continuous war and sabotage.
@@rabidwaffles9022 communism is not about society, socialism is about ensuring the lower class has something. People act like the concept of socialism is the same a the concept of communism. Communism is about government control
@@Demonoicgamer666 either way it’s theft so in that regard I don’t see a difference. “The people” are a collection of individuals and if one can’t pull his weight he should just die
@@rabidwaffles9022Exactly. That's why i despise capitalism - Leeches such as bankers, investors, stock market people will not receive money as they don't provide anything. Those who actually work - regular people, will. The only exception is those who cannot work, like children, the elderly, single mothers, and severely disabled people*, who will be supported by the rest of society (and this is mutually beneficial - as supporting children brings joy into the world and brings forth a new generation). *severely disabled people can still serve society in some way, contributing without impossible expectations, and receiving accommodations to make their lives easier.
While those countries have some of the highest living standards of the world, they are also capitalistic... that's how they generate their wealth which in turn allows them to enact some socialist policies. Also, trust and social responsibilities run high in those countries, something you can't easily replicate elsewhere.
@@ivanildosantosterceiro3045 Socialism implies democracy, which in turn implies fairness, equity, compassion, and thinking of the greater whole (rather than thinking only of one's self). In a socialist system, prices, wages, the distribution of wealth, etc. are determined by the people through their government. A capitalist country (like the USA) is just a totalitarian corporate plutocracy. But how did the Nordic countries achieve socialism? It all starts with the education system. They teach their children the principles of democracy from the earliest age.
@@ExPwner India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc have more property rights than Singapore. So Singapore is more Socialist than the South Asian countries.
Communism isnt bad at all o Its great. Those nations who called themselves communist werent communist at all. They were thought as communist. Capitalist nations lied by saying its bad. They said it because they would lose money if they didnt lie. Because the purpose of capitalism is to make money, and it never was to care about the people. Communism shares and cares. The Ussr, North Korea, cuba and many others werent communist but rather totalitarian dictatorships, very different. Pls try to understand that communism isnt bad but just trying to make the world a better place.
well communism can be bad it's not fool proof. Imo it's an optimised society compared to capitalism. It's not some saving grace, atleast in my limited knowledge
@@ashtimbog ahh so you acknowledge how your level of knowledge about communism is not a big as mine. In terms of understanding how it could help. It is better in most terms amd it's way more fair. Has its cons af course but the biggest problems it can solve. Its so hard to make it work though.
More cruel than Mao or Stalin? It only seems cruel because you have no perspective. Poor people in the US live better than the middle class in authoritarian countries.
@@markmcgibbon7013 those communist states are basically bursting at the seams with refugees from the first-world. And those elites from the first world are oh so generous with the wealth they made in capitalist societies. Those communist countries want for nothing, all of their citizens have every need and luxury available, because of the largesse of their formerly first world refugees. Lollercaust.
It's not just communism that caused NK to fail, western embargo and sanctions on North Korea have been devastating without that sabotage who knows how NK or Cuba would be right now....give the whole picture sir..😊
The problem was those who wanted to implement Socialism were invaded, murdered and bombed back to stone age. It was hard enough to win the fight against invaders and once you have won, you have a country that is in complete ruins. This was the story of USSR, China, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Afghanistan etc
@@gustavo042 I don't understand that stupid focking point of yours. Labor is required to produce anything, while Capitalists jeerk off to g@y p0rn. why would Socialism needs Capitalism, when the labor owns the means of production and gain complete collective control over the capital?
Strong people prefer the risks associated with capitalism (private ownership of property) and weak people prefer the "safety" of socialism (shared ownership of property. Either way, the elites control the most property, but in capitalism, at least they had merit to earn their wealth. Communism and capitalism exist in a spectrum. We don't have complete capitalism. An income tax alone means we aren't capitalist.
Communism is anarchy. There is no state or regime. Capitalism is private property and freedom. This guy is doing vibes based politics. Nothing of essence here, comparing things that can't possibly be compared as these concepts don't even describe the same aspects of civilization.
Like how he simply points out authoritarian countries instead of addressing communism as a whole and not comparing it to its social counterpart. He does know that anarchist and libertarian socialists are essentially communist right?
Under capitalism there is a spectrum of the degree of economic freedom. Generally speaking, as higher the economic freedom, as higher the quality of life. I doubt the mentioned countries were near the top of economic freedom.
@@morningstararun6278 so your definition of socialism is bureaucracy? So the country is still socialist if it has a free market economy? And private ownership of production means? In fact according to the economic freedom index, Singapore has the highest degree of economic freedom in the world.
@@asamanthinketh1937 I thought this entire video and its supporters are here to prove that Socialism doesn't work. China is the 2nd largest economy in the world and it has achieved this position without exploiting any 3rd world countries, without practicing slavery, without waging wars on the basis of lies(remember still not found WMDs on Iraq?) and without intervening in internal politics of other countries. What point exactly do you have to even come here and prove to me that Socialism doesn't work?
@@morningstararun6278 china is state capitalism. I like what they are doing. Poverty got demolished after they opened their markets. I am doing business with chinese companies all the time. Open markets always work. Like I said Singapore is a prime example. China or India are also a good examples
@@Waiting664 Market economy is not something particular to Capitalism. Markets existed for several thousands of years, while Capitalism has come to become state mechanism only in the last 300 years. I wonder why North Korea isn't doing better. The fact that 20 percent of North Korean population was killed by US army and Laos was literally bombed back to stone age by US army shouldn't matter, right? Imagine a powerful country that is bombing a small country with 1 bomb as every 8 minute interval, for nine years straight. That is the "great" United Snakes of Murica for you.
Wages are not stagnant for workers. Capitalist leaning economies have lower homelessness and inequality as well as externalities like pollution. What a stupid take
@@ExPwner Aral sea is one sea. Micro plastics affect EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. All because they said “fuck it because it’s more profitable”. Capitalism is clearly a failing system
@@ExPwnerDude. You have no shame at all. I remember very well that I made a reply to you a year ago, regarding this very topic of Aral Sea. Aral Sea shrunk to 70 percent during the collapse of USSR, and from 70 percent, it shrunk to 10 percent in just the last 30 years because of Capitalist Kazakhstan. Aral Sea : During Socialism - 100 to 70 percent, in 69 years. During Capitalism - 70 to 10 percent in 32 years. Do the Math, you numbnuts. Capitalism did twice the exploitation of Socialism in half the time period.
If he had said East Germany in the 1970s or South Africa in the 1970s it would’ve somehow ended up with a different result. Cherry-picking the worst examples of a system to prove that the system is bad is insane
To compare east and west germany makes a lot of sense. Same culture of the people, same language, same history, similar starting point, same time frame. Also north and south korea would be a good example. If you compare a country in europe to africa, it gets a little bit more complex. You can obviously do it but more factors need to be taken into account.
@@the_sourcandy China has better policies in fighting homelessness. The government and the society in general acts quick and the homeless people are housed somewhere as soon as possible. Crime rates are far lesser in Socialist countries compared to capitalist ones. USSR then and China now are safe enough for a 10 year old girl to walk on the streets at midnight alone. Say the same about USA.
@@the_sourcandy India is a Socialist country? 😂😂😂😂😂😂. I live in India as well, you sucker. God! you lots have no shame in coming up with such lies. India, the rape capital of the world is as Capitalist as one can get.
@@the_sourcandy This is an age old trick among Capitalist defenders. They would refer to any country that is poor, as Socialist, and any country that is rich as Capitalist. Because that makes their argument easier. According to capitalist logic, Burkina Faso under Thomas Sankara was Socialist. But Burkina Faso after Thomas Sankara was murdered by CIA funded rebel groups are also Socialist, because the living conditions in Burkina Faso became worse after Socialism has been destroyed. But if it had gotten better, they would have said "See how great Capitalism works." Indian capitalist warriors in both BJP and Congress use the same talking points. If I ask them how do you define a country as Capitalist or Socialist, they usually run away from that argument or they say something really stupid that makes you start questioning their age. I give the stage to you dear Capitalist warrior. I call India as a full fledged Capitalist country. But you call it Socialist. Kindly enlighten me with your knowledge.
would you rather live in burkina faso in 1984 or the surrounding capitalist nations that were suffering? would you rather live in vietnam which was thriving under socialism or in poland? stop cherrypicking
@@ExPwnerAh! Jame the Shame. It's been days, right? The average of all the Capitalist countries on the planet is not Norway or Britain, but Bangladesh or may be even worse. And the average of all the Socialist countries is Vietnam.
Watch the full video here: ua-cam.com/video/kTiRnbNT5uE/v-deo.html
this is an ad
China is eg of capitalist sucess
Capitalism hasn't existed ANYWHERE in the world since 1913. There is no central bank or graduated income tax in a free market capitalist system. The two most important planks of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto are - 1. The establishment of a central bank. AND 2. The establishment of a graduated income tax. These things DID NOT exist in Christian America prior to the Rothschild takeover of our currency via the establishment of the Federal Reserve. In fact the Color RED is representative of communism because the Roth-schild name literally translates to RED SHIELD. They funded Karl Marx to get all the useful idiots of the world to believe that taxes should be sent to a central bank for "the good of all" . Meanwhile they steal it, expand it's value via fractional reserve banking (money printing) and hand it out to big corporations and banks that support leftist ideology. Their owned and controlled media and universities even have guys like YOU calling a communist system "capitalist"..... amazing.
proof
proof@@obxarms7685
I like Pinker but how does he not know what cherry-picking is. Would I rather live in a ghetto in Los Angeles or Shanghai? It's not even close.
Actually Shanghai is pretty amazing. Much better infrastructure for sure
Too bad China has terrible civil rights violations. Maybe they will come around like the US did these last 70 years
@@helloitsmehbhe said GHETTO parts. In ghetto parts of LA, there is some crime - but in Shanghai (or any) Chinese ghettos, there’s almost no running water or electricity
And how is picking an LA ghetto vs. Shanghai not cherry picking? How about Xinjiang province, particularly as a Muslim, or LA?
If socialism is so inferior to Capitalism, why have socialist nations never been allowed to fail on their own? They’ve always been toppled from Capitalist imperialist action/pressures.
Bro have you never heard of Russia Russia
@@kewokeviii.1202the soviet union was stuck in a cold war for most of it’s existence and was also invaded by a coalition of countries for a short while in the beginning
If socialism isnt inferior to capaltilism why do they keep getting destroyed by capitalist societies? War is an inevitable part of humanity and if a system is weaker than another system you know damn well the stronger system makes sure the weaker system knows it.
If your society can't deal with outside pressures then your society is garbage 😂 "communism works in a vacuum" headass 🤣
@@Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz12Everyone was poor and forced to fall in line in the soviet union. Sure it was stable but that doesn’t mean it was good
What these people never mention is that capitalist nations, primarily the USA has intentionally spent decades strangling out any form of communism.
All this proves is that rich people have been successful in maintaining the status quo.
literally. capitalist countries (obviously the biggest current example is the US) swoop in and "save" these places, but really they just mess things up and then leave
Middle class workers when someone criticizes the system that exploits them to the fullest and only sees them as a product: 🤬😡🤬
Middle class workers when someone criticizes the system that demands change and that wants people to be treated like people: 😇🌸🤪
@@keck4022 workers aren’t exploited you simpleton
Right, because the leaders of socialist paradises like Venezuela who capitalize on others labor aren't rich and strangling out any form of capitalism...
Vietnam war proves this
Why does it always have to be either/or? There are several different economic systems. I, personally, would just like a revision to capitalism that places a limit on monopolies, more benefits and compensation for the working class, and less tax loopholes for corporations. Buying personal use items under a company name for a tax write off should be illegal, I.E buying a yacht for "business meetings". Does anybody else agree that capitalism needs a bit of revision?
A bit?? it needs a hell amount of revision. Capitalism has become another form of dictatorship where the company owners dictate the world. actually we have to scrap capitalism and bring some completely new thing which has the best from capitalism communism and socialism.
My opinion exactly but I guess they want us to be involved in this never ending fight between the right and the left
Both of these boil down to dictatorships and democracies.
I would rather live in the Communist democracy north Vietnam than the capitalist dictatorship south Vietnam.
I would rather live in makhnovshchina if it were not in war than the US
The same is true for rojava.
I would rather live in revelutionary catalonia (again ignoring the war) than either the Republic of spain or franko's spain.
The Truth is capitalist hate Socialists because they are better. This is the reason they are often less successful. Because they have a world order against them. The US refuses to back a Socialist anarchist society in Syria, even though they are the only ones who can fight, even though the alternative is religious radical terrorist dictatorship. Because who would want a free market when they could be free themselves.
There is a reason the UN doesn't recognise countries that could actually create paradise. It threatens their power in every state regardless of their economic stucture, so they all either attack them or use them to help win a war before betraying them when it's convenient whether they are Socialist or capitalist, democracy or dictatorship..
Every anarchist society in the last 200 years has existed during a revelution, seen the largest development of any country in said war during its existence, and been snuffed out by the closest power.
Honestly though, Rojava might be the one this time. They have a significant military and hold a significant portion of the power in the war. However they also have the most oil so they will probably get invaded by the US, hopefully that goes down the Vietnam route.
So look into anarchist societies. You might find yourself having a heart for once.
Wait …so Cuba is worse than …….Guatemala ? Or better ?in terms of poverty ..?
This is a meaningful comparison. Two second world countries and Cuba which is under SEVERE sanctions ..
The hell does that have to do with anything?
@@ExPwner I thought he said that capitalist countries are better …Is Guatemala better than Cuba ?
@@dsgio7254 As we all know, capitalist countries refer to western developed countries with bloody primitive accumulation.Guatemala is a regime supported by the United States to consolidate its rule, so it has nothing to do with the name of capitalist country.
@@dsgio7254 how does that have literally any relevance? Guatemala is not a bastion of capitalism.
@@talyer3125 Guatemala is not a capitalist country ?
lets ignore how much more north korea and east germany were bombed than south korea and west germany.
That's irrelevant.
@@Euro.Patriotis that irony?
@@athusk894 what does Nazi Germany have to do with anything?
@@athusk894 soooo it should be a point to the left that the citizens of east germany were all guaranteed basic human rights of food, education, shelter, etc, only at the expense of free enterprise, while the citizens of west germany werent.
Ah yes, East Germany, famously bombed more than west Germany, because the main target of allied bombing was *Checks notes* The Ruhr! Far, far to the east that one, so far east its on the border of France.
Rather live in Capitalist Nigeria or socialist Cuba with free healthcare
It’s crazy he has to preface it that way.
What an insane time we live in.
We pretended the Communists went away when the Berlin wall fell. They didn't, they regrouped in academia and here we are.
@@Jonathan-ds6yj truee
The good news is that a VERY recent poll shows people are being driven away from socialist ideology.
The bad news is that they are also still being driven from the capitalist ideology.
(Not too many for both, but a good portion)
@@Jonathan-ds6yj Yep, Socialists and Communists have been dominating global politics for decades now. Just by the fact the almost every Capitalist country has Social programs and nets, and welfare, is proof enough of this.
Socialists always say, "If Socialism always fails, why do you always attack it, and stop it from becoming popular?" When they don't realize that it LITERALLY IS INSANELY POPULAR! Socialists have been winning over the world, they just don't realize it themselves.
A bunch of broke bums are communists nowadays.
@@Milton_FriedmaniteAmericans are my favourite 🤣🤣🤣
Another example, China vs Taiwan pre 2000. Same people, same history. Except after 1949, one went communist and the other one went capitalist. The poverty that was in China was unspeakable.
Another example. China vs India after 1949. Different people, same history of colonization. Except after 1949, one went communist and the other one went capitalist. The poverty that is still in India is unspeakable.
@@morningstararun6278 Not sure how you come to this conclusion. If you dig deeper, India had many industries nationalized. They didn't have a functioning free market. They were pretty hostile to free market enterprise. The bureaucracy of simply getting a business license was extremely difficult. Big business had to leave India and produce their goods somewhere else. India did not have the same economic freedom as Taiwan did.
@@hanh3000 I know very well you would say this. Here is a little fact to you, which is gonna hurt you, because it would destroy your entire argument.
Almost all the poorest African countries, don't have the concept of nationalization except for post office and military, and they are also the poorest on the planet. Looks like Capitalism and privatized economy utterly fails, if your country wasn't a colonizer in the past, or at least if not the Imperial peripherals. why do you think the Capitalist countries in Africa are the poorest in the whole world?
And the way that you even compared a country with 1.4 billion population with a country of less than half the population of my state in India, is beyond me.
@@hanh3000 Libya during Gaddafi's leadership, had a nationalized economy that was almost on par with USSR, and it ranked number 1 in HDI in all Africa. Libya was also one of the richest in all of Africa. Women had more freedom unlike the theologically Islamic countries.
And today, Libya is the poorest within the Africa, after Murica introduced Neo Liberal Capitalism in Libya. Gaddafi's green book shows that he was actually a Socialist with a little conservative ideas. And Libya went from one of the richest and most prosperous in all of Africa during Gaddafi version of Socialism, to literally the poorest in all of Africa during western Capitalism. Do you have any coping answer to this, which you learned in PragerU?
@@morningstararun6278 Jesus man, you couldn't help yourself by first propping up yourself like some knowledgeable person while belittling me. Great way to start a conversation. The economy is an enormous and complicated beast. You think in two comments by you I will feel destroyed? C'mon dude. You wrote two comments which isn't even about India any more and off you go about other countries. I don't even know where to start but let's start with the big picture. Capitalism/free market can work if you produce. Productivity is the key. The poor countries you refer to, what were they producing? Were they manufacturing goods and exporting them? Typically a poor country can fast track economic development if it has stable, relatively non corrupt government and cheap labor which can entice foreign investment. During that period, the country will also need to develop human capital. Human capital is the ultimate key to productivity. Without enough people with knowledge skills, no country can stand. Many countries are prime example of this, here are some: Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Israel. None of these countries have any natural resources. It's completely built with human capital. Many of the countries in Africa are rife with unstable and corrupt government. No one will invest there when there are much better options. I can keep going for a long time with this and I'm sure so can you. But we have completely different vision how we see the world. You see the world through the oppressor vs oppressed model and I don't. So we're basically gonna talk past each other. In order for us to even have a possible productive conversation, some parameters have to be first established. Meaning we have to first agree on very specifically what we're arguing over then we can begin. But this is impossible to do over texting like this over UA-cam. One thing I will say about Soviet since you mentioned them. Soviet economic stats were all wrong. This was pointed out by Soviet economists in Soviet Union during the late 80's. They were patriots who wanted socialism to work but had to really dissect why it's not working. A major problem was the severe secrecy during Stalin's time, nobody was able to get any accurate information. Not until in the 80's when Gorbachev came into power and initiated something called glasnost and perestroika that's when people had more access to information.
"bUt ThAtS nOt ReAl COMMUNISM"
@@prikipriki30 And that's because Actual Marxist communism could never and has never stood on its own outside of maybe a small commune of like minded individuals. Marxist Communism simply does not work on a large scale and history has shown us that time and time again.
@Citius60 A lot of nations unfortunately are subjected to sabotage wether thats the CCP in Africa or the CIA in South America. That being said the USSR was one of if not the most powerful nation at a time(Thats what happens when everyones money goes to the military) and helped fund many Marxist Communist states around the world with little oversight until its system collapsed under its own weight. Communist states in the modern world are subjected to sanctions because they are ran by tyrants and the people are subjected to suffrage because of said tyrants
@Citius60 Straight to the insults I see lmao
also liberals: (」ﾟﾛﾟ)｣ᴺᴼᴼᴼ~ Bangladesh or Africa is not real capitalism! It's cronyism!
@@prikipriki30 Actual Marxist Communism or any form of it isn't possible on a global scale without genocide on a global scale. Not to mention that if it was somehow achieved, it would fall under its own weight and would cause more problems then it could ever solve. You should pick up a history book along with George Orwell's 1984.
Quick question why don't you live in th3 capitalist slums of Brazil or would you rather live in th3 "communist" city of Beijing in China. Exactly
Brazil got fucked into socialism 30 years ago mate
literally zero traces of socialism in Brazil since ever@@EzraMerr
China got rich by liberalizing their economy. It was really only communist in name. Now they're returning to their history of centrally controlled economy and they're faltering.
@@grantcivyt India liberalized its economy, Pakistan liberalized its economy, Sri Lanka liberalized its economy, Bangladesh liberalized its economy. But it is only China that has made a remarkable achievement. And to be more informative, all the South Asian countries that I mentioned liberalized far more than China by letting privatizing almost everything in the country, and some countries never nationalized anything since its inception. They are all dirt poor. How so? Funny how you have to show refer to a Socialist country for the success of liberalization, while every single third world country that had liberalized its economy and are still poor, doesn't cross your eyes.
@@morningstararun6278 It's important to get into specifics about liberalization. None of the countries we're discussing are actually very free in terms of their markets. They exhibit high levels of negative government impediments to development including things like rule of law and regulations.
If you'd like to get a sense of what I mean, take a look at the Index of Economic Freedom rankings. They explain the elements of their evaluations. That will give you an idea of the elements of a liberalized economy.
Lastly, despite being poor relative to the world, every country you mentioned is actually growing richer since liberalizing. They're much less poor today than a decade ago.
That this is in any way a controversial statement in the western world in the 21st century is an indictment of our institutions and education systems.
Oh pa leez
Me when people have different opinion (they consume "bad propaganda" without thinking while i learn "good propaganda" that was given to me by my good (not bad like theirs) echochamber without a cowardly doubt )
@Aut0psy shut up you filthy commie
@@ИмьФамилевич respect your realness
welp,you guys will see soon in this century that opinion will become a reality,one way or another🤠
As someone that has actually lived under a communist regime I agree, capitalism is several degrees of magnitude better. There’s more opportunity to better yourself, freedom, quality of life. Most modern western communist’s only frame of reference on this topic is their imagination
Most of the modern western capitalists don't know what is life like on third world capitalist countries. Try living in a third world capitalist country which is the majority of the world, and you will instantly realize that Capitalism only works for countries that became rich practicing slavery, colonization and committed many other atrocities in the past.
"We can't expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism, until they awaken one day to find they have communism.’" Nikita Khruschev
Only to realize socialism and communism doesn't work as human nature isn't compatible with it
Imagine quoting the leader of a failed nation like that's some sort of accomplishment. Let's just forget about the millions who died or were sent to Gulags in the Soviet Union.
Can't wait for all the "that wasn't real Socialism/Communism."
Crazy how every problem in a capitalist society is due to capitalism but problems in a socialist society are due to it "not being real socialism."
And…? Is that a bad thing?
@@RiverWychulis communism is bad mate
@@RiverWychulis for years the communist had been anti Christian and Anti Jewish.
Would you rather live in brazil or cuba (cuba's literacy rate 98% 2nd in terms of healthcare in the world according to the commonwealth nations free education and somehow all that with the whole world sanctioning them)
I like how in notes that it was supposed to be regionally controversial, but it is not. It just goes to show the amount of ignorance that there is when it comes to people with a lot of wisdom I’m assuming he is in a big class full of a lot of kids ranging from ages 18 to 25 and I bet every single one of them think they know everything in the world. But wisdom is being able to ask yourself. If what you’re doing is the right thing that’s what wisdom is.
And when it comes to communism versus capitalism as an intellectual, or as a progressive, you should be constantly striving to meet a perfect ideology of the world that matches complete wisdom, and the only way to do that just to have a good system to be able to realize that communism is not for the people. It’s not for you either. It’s for the people with more wealth and power than you.
Well said Guardian.
@@micheleac66communism isn’t for the powerful people thats capitalism, and if you are who you say you are you should ask these: is capitalism really as good as I think it is? or am i just falling against capitalist propaganda? in capitalism even with a good democratic system powerful people will be able to manipulate the population, communism only needs a good democratic system to eliminate the elites
I believe in a society that is a fusion of the two, while trying to aggressively mitigate any of the harms caused by overindulgence in either of the economic systems. People still need to play a role in the functioning of society without their value being exploited by a few “anointed” ones
You physically cannot do that. You can't abolish private (NOT personal) property and also have private property at the same time. It doesn't make any sense. Are you referring to social democracy?
Would i rather live in red states or blue states?
Both are capitalist.
Not everhthing is about the us mate
@@steferos5601one is worse so there has to be something
@@ND-lx1xrCapitalism teaches you to be like that.
@@AntiFurry927Yeah that something is to get involved locally and takeover a party.
"Would I rather live in West Germany in the 1970s or East Germany in the 1960s?"
Why did he have to give West Germany 10 years of advancement? I'd still choose East Germany but wtf?
Well we can compare east and west germany in 1989….
Marxs is destroyin the west
@@asamanthinketh1937ooh fun, my answer then would be “neither” I think.
@@unyu-cyberstorm64 if you have to choose it is clear which one, or not?
West germany is far superior. But you would be fine with suffering in East Germany I guess
Meanwhile the tankies in the comment section: "uUUHhhhhH AEKSTCHUllaLLy!!!1111!!11"
Meanwhile capitalists be like:"NoOooO communism bad because some rich people told us its bad"
@@Madlad4917nope it’s bad because of economics and the historical record
@@ExPwnerall communist countries so far have been corrupt dictatorships, whenever a capitalist country has a dictator, that nation also fails
@@goldenpolka communism always leads to dictatorship so again not some grand argument
@@ExPwner no, all the communist countries so far have started as tolitarian regimes.
Lower the taxes, and all of a sudden the people who work can afford private sector goods and services.
That’s what capitalism is about
I will take door number three
Yes, S societies are definitely better than communist ones but social capitalism is definitely better than regular capitalism where the rich pay their fair share, and everyone has a chance to start their own business and own a home
I like tacos
DPRK
@@yaniskhemili9790 Why?
@@yaniskhemili9790 Yes there is internet in DPRK, look it up. Also there is free housing, free food and essentials, no taxes, free helthcare, free education.
@@enterchannelname5953only like 600 people have access to the Internet, and south korea also has free healthcare and education that is ALOT better. Plus you won't be killed if you even slightly hate the government in the south. Why do you think thousands of north Koreans have defected?
@@enterchannelname5953there’s also a lot more negatives than those positives
Noted Epstein associate Pinker wants to maintain the class structure that produced all those wonderful parties he so enjoyed.
Capitalism with some socialist policies seems to be the best
@@hospitalsgivingpatientsdan8894 Until you look at the US medical industry. Which is heavily subsidized by the government.
Subsidies does not a socialist policy make. The majority of the developing world has a universal healthcare plan, that'd be an actual example, & it works better.
@@adamkeasey655 Subsidies are a socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention, thus is a Socialist policy. It's funny to say that Government Subsidies aren't a Socialist policy.
Even just looking at page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" Shows Marx literally saying, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row.
Already does your ideology disagree with what you believe it is.
Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market. That is what makes it a Socialist Policy.
@@adamkeasey655 Subsidies are a Socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention.
On page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" alone, says, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row.
Looking into the foundations of your Economic System would be a better way of learning about it. Rather than just saying you support it without learning anything about it.
Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market.
I'm not a Socialist yet I've read 'The Communist Manifesto'. Which was not great of a book. You should follow Engel's redefinition of Socialism, if you really want to be a productive Socialist.
The main reason I have problems with 'The Communist Manifesto', is because Marx never received a full Elementary School education. In fact he spent money so lavishly his family had to cut him off from funds.
After that the only thing that kept Marx afloat was selling profits from 'The Communist Manifesto'. And Engels, who happened to be in a rich family of farmers.
Marx also refused to get a job, sure his reasoning of not wanting to be exploited by the system is a good reason. But when you take into account that Marx and Engels are supposed to be representing the working class. It becomes hilariously funny, because both men never worked a day in their lives.
Rich people leading the poor against the rich. Kind of ironic isn't it?
@@adamkeasey655Subsidies are a Socialist policy. Subsidies are a form of government intervention. Socialism calls for government intervention.
On page 30 of "The Communist Manifesto" alone, says, "Centralization of the (insert random industry) in the hands of the state" 4 times in a row.
Looking into the foundations of your Economic System would be a better way of learning about it. Rather than just saying you support it without learning anything about it.
Universal Healthcare would be a great example, as it is government intervention in the Free Market.
I'm not a Socialist yet I've read 'The Communist Manifesto'. Which was not that great of a book. You should follow Engel's redefinition of Socialism, if you really want to be a productive Socialist.
One problem with 'The Communist Manifesto,' is, that the authors' tried to represent the working class, without being in the working class. Engels was from a family of rich farmers. Marx was from a rich family, and spent his family's funds lavishly until they cut him off. Marx refused to work, thus Engels began sending him tons of his own money, along with money from 'The Communist Manifesto'. Both authors' never were a part of the working class.
It's literally the rich leading the poor against the rich.
China is a pretty successful nation. Problem is their civil rights violations. However, they built great infrastructure, and Deng lifted 800M out of poverty. This is why both of them combined work best
This guy doesn't seem to understand communism very well. There haven't been any communist societies, only communist governments. Though I wouldn't call them communist governments.
Because they weren.t communist. What happened in XX century Europe was what Lenin interpreted from Marx. Which was, in my opinion, turbo oligarchy, dictatorship
If every time somebody who tries to implement your ideology fails, should the ideology not to be considered failed!?
@@asamanthinketh1937The ideology physically cannot be implemented unless the entire world is socialist and working towards the same goal of communism.
@@asamanthinketh1937it didnt fail every time
@@HansPeter-w8u I am curious where it has been implemented successfully?
I'd rather live in heaven. But the fact that I have free will ........
This comment section in a nutshell: “Capitalism is when bad thing, CIA is when bad thing under communism, left is anti establishment yet works with the establishment”
Wtf are you talking about
@@HansPeter-w8u
Just read the comment section.
@@justindavis8223 and wtf are you talking about
@@HansPeter-w8u
Do you have issues with reading comprehension?
@@justindavis8223 no it just doesnt make any sense
You know communism is the best system because no country can ever transition to it and always fall back into a mixed economy 😂
@nickcasale2767 youre delusional
@@antepapic9107 no delusions here, just look at your irl commies and see how they failed to make the utopia you so desperately cling to.
Or perhaps it is to good for us 🤔
They always prosper when they tilt towards capitalism
China is dictator by capitalist economy communism was to eradicate capatilist class system
Pinker likes the status quo because it serves HIM
He's tired
No he has NPD
@Minneolaos well yeah, he also clearly has that.
I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (Luke 13:5)
Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest. (Psalms 51:1-4)
The greatest good for the greatest number is, by definition everybody doing as they wish with what is theirs; limited only by and to the exactly equal rights of others.
Anything else produces victims and attackers.
@COMMIE
And they have trouble with other countries, too.
@Cheds
Voluntary transactions is.
Iow; we can't dictate to others what is and is not in their interest.
@Cheds
Religion is the new religion.
Nothing new under the sun.
Any belief system that supercedes the individual rights of honest, peaceful people is wrong; and all for the same reason.
Crusaders == Jihadis
Oh... that's literally what socialism advocates for. Hell yeah mate!
@@tempejkl
Socialism advocates for everybody doing as they wish with what they own; limited only by and to the exactly equal rights of others?
Ironic; so does capitalism.
This guy is obviously one of the Blue Aliens from They Live
How about we ask the real question: do we want to live under capitalism or TOTALITARIANISM?
it’s the same
Those aren't mutually exclusive, nor is totalitarianism exclusive to any political ideology except absolute monarchism, facism, and nazism.
Its not one or the other ut which blend of both suits your country best ....neither are good alone
Socialism without Marxism would be better replacement for both Capitalism and Communism for example National Socialism or Gaddafi's Islamic Socialism and Saddam's version of Socialism
Why would it be better?
@@LearnLiberty It would be better because Capitalism profits of innocent soul and makes 40-50% of people poor mostly peasants, Communism/Marxism takes private property and starves peasants while having totalitarian regime for opression of Nationalism,tradition and questioning of Communism
@@LearnLiberty because Libya had best system. Super based
@@NaziBosniakDeist Alll of these regimes resulted in the deaths of millions. Are you mentally ill?
Nazism? (National Socialism), Gaddafi was a state capitalist (whatever that shit meant, lol) Saddam was a National Socialist too by definition of his policies. needing to invade Kuwaiti for more oil and water when his economy was failing.
Would rather live in South Africa or Vietnam?
Depends honestly, where in south africa and where in Vietnam, also, who am I, I would rather be an upper class Indian South African living in Cape town as opposed to a Montagnard
Honestly generally thise type of questions are stupid
The party elite in North Korea live better than the south korean homeless
Vietnam anyday tbh, it seems pretty nice
Vietnam is not a communist state. When they joined the wto they were forced to liberalize their markets, same with china. Which is why there are major privately held businesses in both of these countries and billionaires. There are no longer any true communist countries anywhere in the world, with the exception of Venezuela and north korea
@@JimStanfield-zo2pz Still doesn't make the argument better in favor of Capitalism. With the same logic you just said, 95 percent of the third countries are Capitalist, and they are dirt poor. So what made the difference with China, Vietnam and them? I guess, Socialism?
@@morningstararun6278 Corruption and bureaucracy makes third world countries poor, China would be just as poor if they hadn't historical vendettas to settle with the west.
North Korea? The bar couldn't be lower.
Vietnam gdp per capita $2,785
China gdp per capta $10,500
Those are the best you got
@@thebased-capitalist9552 Vietnam's economy has been doing fine and China's best described as having state capitalism.
North Korea is on a league of its own, more resembling a feudal monarchy.
This capitalism vs communism duality is old news though.
@@soundscape26 The economy is doing well but the people aren’t communism starves capitalism makes people prosper Singapore, Estonia, Taiwan and New Zealand are doing extremely well countries like Cuba, China, Laos, North Korea and Vietnam are impoverished
We can put a rest to all of these minor data points. I have collected all of the data relevant to the question to establish correlative analyses between economic freedom and non-economic freedom worldwide as compared to 646 socioeconomic categories.
Of 646 categories, 505 were won by capitalism and 20 were won by socialism/systems of lacking economic freedom.
Consumption (the preferred welfare indicator by economists) correlated to capitalism/economic freedom by a massive .65.
Wealth per adult came in correlating to capitalism by .565.
The average consumption per capita of the capitalist nations of the world (more than 50/100 or 5/10 economic freedom) is $8,377. For the
@@thebased-capitalist9552 Not here to defend such countries... more than their chosen economical model what I most criticize is the fact that they are dictatorships.
So what you’re saying is would you rather live in a market capitalist economy or a state capitalist economy
Communism just doesn't last as long.
Because it’s inefficient.
@@dizzydean2767that's the goal. It's not meant to produce profits, it's meant to give the means of production to those who actually work - not the bankers or investors who don't work but get 2000x the amount a regular person gets their whole lifetime.
@@tempejkl Manual labor is replaceable, good decision making you build an economy is not. Those who are rich earned what they have by making the decisions that made profit to help others. Without the idea that people are better than others in terms of work there would be no incentive to succeed and quality of life would be awful.
@@dizzydean2767 Yes. In socialism you are paid based on your ability. That’s the whole fucking point. Those who cannot work are subsidised (is that the right word?) by the working population, those such as elderly, children, and disabled).
So bankers, investors, etc. who add nothing and are leeches earn absolutely NOTHING, and actual workers get paid based on the labour value that they create. This labour value has been extensively studied and is mathematically and scientifically sound.
What do you mean by decision making to create an economy? Socialism is about planned economies!!!
@@tempejkl If you are paid based on your ability wouldn’t that divide people into classes? The very thing socialism tries to avoid. Not to mention that’s what we do in capitalism we pay people based on what they can and can’t do hence my decisions comment. Also I saw you said you would’ve rather lived in East Germany. When the Berlin Wall fell, which side did most Germans go to?
What is my personal incentive under Communism to do more work if we all earn the same living?
Communists and socialists are going to get triggered. And I like it.
Cope the west is becoming red
actually not 😂, specially not for his fallacies
im laughing not triggered.
Cause that's how commies are, they want the government and 1 ideology to control ur shit the moment we speak out bout it they wanna cut u out of life
@@juehjustay mad. The U.S doesn’t want socialism. Oh and you’re laughing because you’re mad.
North korea used to be much better than the south, who had been ruled by pratically fascist dictators with much instability. it was only really after the death of kim il sung and the fall of the ussr, due to mismanagement, tons of american aid to the south, and food shortages since their main grain imports came from the soviet union. also, during the korean war roughly 15-20% of the north korean population was killed and the us bombed nearly every building which wasnt over 2 stories. so maybe that has something to do with why north korea is so bad and the south is so much better
Would you rather live in Cuba or Haiti?
Do you think socialism is better than capitalism for economic growth?
@@LearnLiberty Yes, I do
In which country was socialism successful?
@@LearnLibertyyou really think a commie is going to give an example? It’s all talk no action
Haiti isn’t capitalist
would you rather live in the drc 🇨🇩.
capitalist
or cuba 🇨🇺
communist
????
The one that does'nt pretend their healthcare is great when half the population is sick and trying to escape to America.
DRC, but they're not even Capitalist either. Rwanda , Zambia, Kenya, Ghana, and Mauritius are better examples of a free market capitalist economy.
There are organizations looking at degree of economic freedom. Tge countries with high economic freedom like Switzerland, Singapore or New zealand have generally speaking a way higher quality of life. Its not even a contest
@@EzraMerr They become "Not Capitalist" when they are poor. Logic of the century 😂😂
@@asamanthinketh1937 That index itself is wrong. Many African countries have far lesser capital control by the government, when compared with Singapore. But still, they are not called Capitalists according to you, why? Because it destroys your argument.
I'd love to live in east Germany, if I could remove my addiction to useless commodities
Good for you
Its just germany now
Yeah I don't think that's the only thing that country would remove from you
🤡
The thing is former Socialist experiments are not perfect examples of what socialism would be like in our times or how they would develop without interference. Such ‘useless commodities’ are part of human joy and should be produced under socialism as well 🙂
Pretty fuckn objective sir
west or east germany? 100 fucking percent east
better housing
healthcare
better schooling
gay rights
sounds fucking great to me
are you still a kanyeist?
Bro, the Soviets killed the gays idiot.
gays shouldnt have rights
3 of those are valid points
freedom?
According to economic freedom index... Hong Kong and Singapore are..... freer ? Really ?
The economic freedom to buy a 1 bedroom apartment unit, fill it with 20 or so refrigerator sized pods to max capacity, way past fire hazard potential, and then rent out each individual pod for the same price you bought the unit for.
The economic freedom to employ children and work as young as you want under state sanctions.
The economic to freedom override another person's lease by paying the state more.
The economic freedom to package and sell anything anywhere in the world (fentanyl).
The economic freedom to perform unethical psychological and medical experiments on human beings under state sanctions in the name of long term research and profit.
☭ I stand we Lenin ☭
But Lenin wouldnt stand with u
My grandpa was a KGB agent
@@xd_the1-playz61 Shameful
@@nazortubeWhy you bullying him about his grandpa
@@randomr2865 do you know what KGB was?
usa biggest gdp, 60% of people in poverty amazing
Sources?
@@lucasworktv just look at proper poverty metrics, not the ones capitalist made up which say: if you arent starving you are well off
@@eutiger4789 cap
@@lucasworktv I mean just the poverty guideline can barely afford you a car and nothing else literally so like lol. Talk to some real working people, blue collar workers and ask whether they can afford house, internet, electricity, car, food, healthcare without living paycheck to paycheck
@@eutiger4789 commie
Ronald Macdonalds or whoever you are,
North Korea is under terrible sanctions from almost every country in earth yet it has better living conditions than South Korea. North Korea has free housing, free education, free helthcare, free food and essentials and no taxes, South Korea can do anything to it’s people under the national security act.
East Germany also had free helthcare, free education, free housing and cheap food with very low taxes. You where garenteed a job. East Germany is so liked, the current ruling party in Germany the SDP helped lead East Germany with the Communist Party.
Strange how people risked their lives to escape...
@@fraybart And most North Korean defectors are pure by the American government to say lies on tv. This is actually true look up how the US government will give money to any DORK immigrant to denounce DPRK.
@@enterchannelname5953 Just as a random example, 450 Czechoslovaks died while trying to escape life behind the Iron Curtain. Most were shot, some bled to death and died on electric fences, while others drowned or committed suicide for fear of getting caught. Also, people risked similar deaths, and many died trying to escape East Berlin. I wonder why communist countries, where everyone is so happy, should feel the need for armed guards and electric fences to prevent people from escaping...
@@fraybart Yes I know there where people leaving East Germany and Czechoslovakia, only during the first decade of it’s rebuilding, after that life in East Germany was so good that to ruling party in east Germany (SDP) is the current ruling party in Germany. And the majority of the people living there express that it was the best time of their lives.
Here is something to think about: How come capitalist countries are always fighting and competing against each other but Socialist nation fight and help each other. For example of capitalist war: ALL WARS RIGHT NOW. Example of Socialist nations helping each other:
During the Cold War a system was put in place where the big USSR gave socialistic nation money to build their country, technology, military support and other items, than socialist countries would provide other things for example Cuba would provide Sugar. Now the big Socialist country is China playing the USSR role. China invest billion in Socialist economies.
@@enterchannelname5953 you can go and live in North Korea, why don't you?
The short format really makes this clip irritating. Obviously it's an incredibly loaded statement that is both true and false.
It's not capitalism or socialism, it's the worst form of socialism under a ton of sanctions or the best form of capitalism.
I think that a lot of people would prefer US or EU to some African capitalism
Most African nations are socialist states that are driving economically and socially, USA is more socialist than China and Australia, China makes EU countries look like socialist shitholes. Just look up the poorest provincial capital in China Guiyang and you'll see they outperform the EU despite being the poorest Province in China.
@@EzraMerr The typical Logicless Capitalist talking points "When they are poor, they are not Capitalists, but when they become rich, they must be Capitalist"
China out performing EU and US, doesn't say anything about it being a Capitalist. If you truly believe China is Capitalist, you should be okay with your government implementing the economic principles of China in your country. But then, you will be screaming "Oh my god, this is Communism" 😂😂
@@morningstararun6278Imagine believing in equality
@@Br.soldier99 Imagine believing in free market.
It's referred to as "socialism under siege".
Ask this self proclaimed expert which social class take your course in university you taught
Amen.
I guess that's one good thing about communism. The development of technology is severely slowed down and rarely has innovation which is actually good. But then there are all the other negatives.
@TheEarthStoodStillwho put the first man on the moon
actually communism has never been successfully completed north Korea, china, the USSR, cuba and many others are socialist not communist because communism there's no state/country controlling the people so what I think he means is capitalist nations are better than socialist nations
you just directly admitted that communism is controlling the people
Americans don't usually make the distinction. I usually just assume they're talking about socialism.
Yall do know that up until the fall of the soviet union and the closing off of the dprk to the rest of the world it was richer than south korea and had a higher standard of living. Putting aside the governing structure it was objectivelt a better place to live. However if your knowledge of the dprk only extends back to the late 80s early 90s you wont get that picture. THIS IS WHY DIELECTICAL MATERIALISM IS IMPORTANT.
Materialism is more flawed than anything
@mrsfmilitary9356 ah yes thinking about things through a socio-economic lense is flawed. Please explain this to me.
@@rondrajaeev2957 lets put it this way why do u think Karl Marx and his social economy doesn't work, and why is it u want the government to control ur wealth and freedom
Also ur just gonna keep reincarnating into this world if u keep being materialistic instead of actually moving up in the existing worlds
@@mrsfmilitary9356Karl Marx advocated for the abolition of the government. The government in a socialist society has the role of protecting the socialist revolution and guiding the nation towards communism. This is not totalitarian, as the country is under a "dictatorship of the proletariat". This means the government is comprised solely of regular people, with participation from regular people too. In the Soviet Union, due to Stalin's mysterious early death, reforms were not able to be passed, and career politicians such as Khruschev were able to seize power and empower other careerists.
Says it's a fact yet states no facts on his point
first of all north korea is not communist.
Then what is it?
@@pamplemoo its just a dynastic dictatorshiip
@@parithiilamaaran.h9829 it's economic system is communist
"BuT iT's NoT rEaL sOcIaLiSm"
@@parithiilamaaran.h9829 by that meaning capitalism isn't responsible for war crimes because it's Bushism and Obamism just like your Stalinism instead of communism argument?
Ugh how dare he mentioned those countries in comparison but not mention there dictatorship and what has taken place in history for them to get that way.
I disagree. I believe "Communist Societies" are much better than "Capitalist Societies".
OPerative term "believe"
@Damien Wayne I identify as a "Communist", and I would rather live in a "Communist Society". Sure, this professor may be entertaining at times to listen to, but he is full of nonsense. He has too much invested in the "Capitalist System" to lose if he were to say he supports "Communism". As for me, I do not like living in the "United States (U.S.A.)", and I would love to move to a "Communist Nation".
@Damien Wayne Dear Mr. Wayne, I would love it if a "Charity" would help me immigrate successfully to a "Communist Nation". I would really like more support to help me in this goal. The U.S.A. offers no support services to help people leave the U.S.A. - you are on your own in this crappy country.
Your belief is not based on sound evidence.
Ok, then tell me of a communist society that is better than a culturally similar capitalist society
Title of the Video - Capitalist societies are better than Communist ones.
Take a good look at Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and many African countries, then say the same.
Capitalism is not perfect but we’ve never needed to put a wall up to keep our people in.
@@dizzydean2767 Socialism is not perfect, but we never needed to destroy other countries to enrich ourselves, steal their resources, kill a half a billion people by colonizing them and engage in continuous war and sabotage.
Agreed
Posed in a very simple manner by a simple person.
Saying socialism and communism are the same thing is straw man
Leeches will leech
@@rabidwaffles9022 communism is not about society, socialism is about ensuring the lower class has something. People act like the concept of socialism is the same a the concept of communism. Communism is about government control
@@Demonoicgamer666 either way it’s theft so in that regard I don’t see a difference. “The people” are a collection of individuals and if one can’t pull his weight he should just die
@@Demonoicgamer666 I don’t care about people who can’t provide anything
@@rabidwaffles9022Exactly. That's why i despise capitalism - Leeches such as bankers, investors, stock market people will not receive money as they don't provide anything. Those who actually work - regular people, will. The only exception is those who cannot work, like children, the elderly, single mothers, and severely disabled people*, who will be supported by the rest of society (and this is mutually beneficial - as supporting children brings joy into the world and brings forth a new generation).
*severely disabled people can still serve society in some way, contributing without impossible expectations, and receiving accommodations to make their lives easier.
But democratic socialist countries (eg, Nordic countries) are the BEST: no crime, equal incomes, healthcare is a right, a home is a right, etc.
While those countries have some of the highest living standards of the world, they are also capitalistic... that's how they generate their wealth which in turn allows them to enact some socialist policies. Also, trust and social responsibilities run high in those countries, something you can't easily replicate elsewhere.
Those countries aren't socialists. Socialism implies the State owning the means of production. Those countries are literally market economies.
The myth of the Nordic countries being socialists, it's always the same propaganda traps.
@@ivanildosantosterceiro3045 Socialism implies democracy, which in turn implies fairness, equity, compassion, and thinking of the greater whole (rather than thinking only of one's self). In a socialist system, prices, wages, the distribution of wealth, etc. are determined by the people through their government. A capitalist country (like the USA) is just a totalitarian corporate plutocracy.
But how did the Nordic countries achieve socialism? It all starts with the education system. They teach their children the principles of democracy from the earliest age.
No crime?
Sweeden since 2020: Im i a joke to you?
He forgot about the rest of the world. Why doesn't he make comparison with the 3rd world countries, which are capitalistic?
He would choose not to call them Capitalist, because it makes his pro-capitalist arguments to fail.
Third world countries largely aren’t capitalist as demonstrated by lack of private property rights.
@@ExPwner India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc have more property rights than Singapore. So Singapore is more Socialist than the South Asian countries.
Communism isnt bad at all o
Its great. Those nations who called themselves communist werent communist at all. They were thought as communist. Capitalist nations lied by saying its bad. They said it because they would lose money if they didnt lie. Because the purpose of capitalism is to make money, and it never was to care about the people. Communism shares and cares. The Ussr, North Korea, cuba and many others werent communist but rather totalitarian dictatorships, very different. Pls try to understand that communism isnt bad but just trying to make the world a better place.
its right but in case of cuba and ussr the pre revoultionary times were actual communism
well communism can be bad it's not fool proof. Imo it's an optimised society compared to capitalism. It's not some saving grace, atleast in my limited knowledge
@@ashtimbog ahh so you acknowledge how your level of knowledge about communism is not a big as mine. In terms of understanding how it could help. It is better in most terms amd it's way more fair. Has its cons af course but the biggest problems it can solve. Its so hard to make it work though.
@@ashtimbog as you yourself said your knowledge is limited so learn more
@@introboy1 learn the definition of communism
Id rather live in North Korea and East Germany
West germany or east germany :)))))))
Bro nailed it
Yep, east Germany ftw!!!!
Who listens to this pseudointellectual?
You apparently
tf you doing here then
a lot of people apparently
@@giselhernandez8 I listened and reached my conclusion and now my job here is done.
Bill gates, no joke 😂
Would rather be in the room that laughs at the statement or a room that doesn’t ??
Lol.
Yes it is true but capitalist societies can be cruel.
More cruel than Mao or Stalin? It only seems cruel because you have no perspective. Poor people in the US live better than the middle class in authoritarian countries.
To paraphrase Churchill, Capitalism is the worst possible economic system possible, except for all the others that have been tried.
Ah yes communist societies no cruelty there
@@markmcgibbon7013 those communist states are basically bursting at the seams with refugees from the first-world. And those elites from the first world are oh so generous with the wealth they made in capitalist societies. Those communist countries want for nothing, all of their citizens have every need and luxury available, because of the largesse of their formerly first world refugees. Lollercaust.
@@markmcgibbon7013 Indeed. Socialism murdering hundreds of millions of people is worse than the occasion on which capitalism "leaves behind" someone.
I am against both.
Nothing but cap
Forgot the r mate
It's not just communism that caused NK to fail, western embargo and sanctions on North Korea have been devastating without that sabotage who knows how NK or Cuba would be right now....give the whole picture sir..😊
Exactly and cuba for example still has an excellent health care system
@@HansPeter-w8uexcellent???????
@@lucasworktv in relation to their development yes
@@lucasworktv its still a third world country yet it has better healtcare than the us
@@lucasworktv so no its not excellent but in relation to its economical development its good
Dude has no clue what he's talking about
He sure does
@seany8900 and no one is listening to you go cry to lenin or castro or whoever
@@MTSpearsEleborate
@@cultuschoco Considering Karl Marx calls for dictatorship, I'd say it's basically commonsense.
@@Swagnificient I don’t think you know what The dictatorship of the proletariat means
These examples are not communist countries. In fact there has never been a true communist country. We've seen socialism but never communism.
Communism is not a radical ideology the problem is with those who did not implement it properly as the Karl Marx was want😢😢
The problem was those who wanted to implement Socialism were invaded, murdered and bombed back to stone age. It was hard enough to win the fight against invaders and once you have won, you have a country that is in complete ruins. This was the story of USSR, China, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Afghanistan etc
@@morningstararun6278Funny, socialism needs capitalism to exist
@@gustavo042No it doesn't, it cannot properly exist with capitalism.
@@gustavo042 I don't understand that stupid focking point of yours. Labor is required to produce anything, while Capitalists jeerk off to g@y p0rn.
why would Socialism needs Capitalism, when the labor owns the means of production and gain complete collective control over the capital?
Strong people prefer the risks associated with capitalism (private ownership of property) and weak people prefer the "safety" of socialism (shared ownership of property.
Either way, the elites control the most property, but in capitalism, at least they had merit to earn their wealth.
Communism and capitalism exist in a spectrum. We don't have complete capitalism. An income tax alone means we aren't capitalist.
would I rather live in the Bay Area or Ho Chih Minh City
sorry? since when economic methods become political views? we all moved from total monarchy which is total capitalism aren't we?
That is not True anymore. You might have a chance to meet a doctor or dentist in socialist country, Even If you are poor.
Communism is anarchy.
There is no state or regime.
Capitalism is private property and freedom.
This guy is doing vibes based politics.
Nothing of essence here, comparing things that can't possibly be compared as these concepts don't even describe the same aspects of civilization.
This is an ahistorical and painfully liberal take, & is simply not a fact.
Like how he simply points out authoritarian countries instead of addressing communism as a whole and not comparing it to its social counterpart. He does know that anarchist and libertarian socialists are essentially communist right?
Okay, then name other examples which have not turned authoritarian?
Theres a bunch of times capitalism didnt work out. Greece, Zimbabwe, possibly Argentina soon.
Under capitalism there is a spectrum of the degree of economic freedom. Generally speaking, as higher the economic freedom, as higher the quality of life. I doubt the mentioned countries were near the top of economic freedom.
@@asamanthinketh1937 😂😂 But that's not Capitalism. Singapore has one of the strongest bureaucracies in the world. So it is a Socialist.
@@morningstararun6278 so your definition of socialism is bureaucracy? So the country is still socialist if it has a free market economy? And private ownership of production means?
In fact according to the economic freedom index, Singapore has the highest degree of economic freedom in the world.
@@asamanthinketh1937 I thought this entire video and its supporters are here to prove that Socialism doesn't work. China is the 2nd largest economy in the world and it has achieved this position without exploiting any 3rd world countries, without practicing slavery, without waging wars on the basis of lies(remember still not found WMDs on Iraq?) and without intervening in internal politics of other countries. What point exactly do you have to even come here and prove to me that Socialism doesn't work?
@@morningstararun6278 china is state capitalism. I like what they are doing. Poverty got demolished after they opened their markets. I am doing business with chinese companies all the time. Open markets always work. Like I said Singapore is a prime example. China or India are also a good examples
What about Vietnam?
Vietnam is market economy doing better then cuba northkorea laos
@@Waiting664 Market economy is not something particular to Capitalism. Markets existed for several thousands of years, while Capitalism has come to become state mechanism only in the last 300 years.
I wonder why North Korea isn't doing better. The fact that 20 percent of North Korean population was killed by US army and Laos was literally bombed back to stone age by US army shouldn't matter, right?
Imagine a powerful country that is bombing a small country with 1 bomb as every 8 minute interval, for nine years straight. That is the "great" United Snakes of Murica for you.
@@Waiting664it's a socialist economy
Better at homelessness, inequality, externalities, profiteering, stagnant wages for workers and a whole host of things yes
Wages are not stagnant for workers. Capitalist leaning economies have lower homelessness and inequality as well as externalities like pollution. What a stupid take
@@ExPwner Better at externalities? Is that why we are all flooded with PFAs and micro plastics in our tissues? Please sit down 🪑 sir
@@onlyscams socialist countries are awful at pollution to the point of nearly destroying the Aral Sea so sit down yourself
@@ExPwner Aral sea is one sea. Micro plastics affect EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. All because they said “fuck it because it’s more profitable”. Capitalism is clearly a failing system
@@ExPwnerDude. You have no shame at all. I remember very well that I made a reply to you a year ago, regarding this very topic of Aral Sea. Aral Sea shrunk to 70 percent during the collapse of USSR, and from 70 percent, it shrunk to 10 percent in just the last 30 years because of Capitalist Kazakhstan.
Aral Sea :
During Socialism - 100 to 70 percent, in 69 years.
During Capitalism - 70 to 10 percent in 32 years.
Do the Math, you numbnuts. Capitalism did twice the exploitation of Socialism in half the time period.
If he had said East Germany in the 1970s or South Africa in the 1970s it would’ve somehow ended up with a different result. Cherry-picking the worst examples of a system to prove that the system is bad is insane
To compare east and west germany makes a lot of sense. Same culture of the people, same language, same history, similar starting point, same time frame. Also north and south korea would be a good example. If you compare a country in europe to africa, it gets a little bit more complex. You can obviously do it but more factors need to be taken into account.
Sure, i would like to live in China more than the USA, as China is far better than the US
Like how??
@@the_sourcandy China has better policies in fighting homelessness. The government and the society in general acts quick and the homeless people are housed somewhere as soon as possible.
Crime rates are far lesser in Socialist countries compared to capitalist ones. USSR then and China now are safe enough for a 10 year old girl to walk on the streets at midnight alone. Say the same about USA.
@@morningstararun6278 bro I live in socialist country India and trust me crime rates are very high
@@the_sourcandy India is a Socialist country? 😂😂😂😂😂😂. I live in India as well, you sucker. God! you lots have no shame in coming up with such lies. India, the rape capital of the world is as Capitalist as one can get.
@@the_sourcandy This is an age old trick among Capitalist defenders. They would refer to any country that is poor, as Socialist, and any country that is rich as Capitalist. Because that makes their argument easier.
According to capitalist logic, Burkina Faso under Thomas Sankara was Socialist. But Burkina Faso after Thomas Sankara was murdered by CIA funded rebel groups are also Socialist, because the living conditions in Burkina Faso became worse after Socialism has been destroyed. But if it had gotten better, they would have said "See how great Capitalism works."
Indian capitalist warriors in both BJP and Congress use the same talking points. If I ask them how do you define a country as Capitalist or Socialist, they usually run away from that argument or they say something really stupid that makes you start questioning their age.
I give the stage to you dear Capitalist warrior. I call India as a full fledged Capitalist country. But you call it Socialist. Kindly enlighten me with your knowledge.
Would you rather want west Germany aka graffiti crime drugs unemployment and homelessness or not???
THE DDR FOREVER
compare gdps
what ur saying is bullshit propaganda
Do you know why the Berlin Wall was built?
I don't see what North Korea and East Germany has to do with communism tho
would you rather live in burkina faso in 1984 or the surrounding capitalist nations that were suffering? would you rather live in vietnam which was thriving under socialism or in poland? stop cherrypicking
You yourself literally went cherry picking. Capitalism is still better with the totality of the evidence.
@@ExPwnerAh! Jame the Shame. It's been days, right?
The average of all the Capitalist countries on the planet is not Norway or Britain, but Bangladesh or may be even worse. And the average of all the Socialist countries is Vietnam.
North Korea is Juche, not Communist or Socialist.
Juche is Marxism-Leninism with adaptation to Korean Nationalism.