A leftist got me badly when I used this argument once (that we don't live under real capitalism) He goes "now you understand what we mean when we say USSR wasn't real communism" Almost as if any system you try eventually gets corrupted

It’s a bad faith argument, not inherently a real checkmate, just one that maybe you weren’t prepared to counter. Instead, you could try a checkmate focusing on why any intervention into free markets is inherently destructive, such as: Socialism is not flawed because of incentives, but because of calculation. The reason why socialism fails, despite how much computing power or information the State has, is that without property, there’s no cost. No cost, no economic calculation. No calculation, no production.

it's about reducing state overreach. Obvisoulsy communism is the worse, capitalism is essentially corruption of the state by the private sector, then bitcoin offer to split monetary policy from the state. Nothing's perfect, but bitcoin certainly offer the biggest improvement right now

It is two times a fair argument. We need to ask ourself the following: Is my goal when discussing to win the upper hand with the argument I enter? Or is it my goal to exchange ideas and leave the discussion smarter?

No, it’s not a fair argument.

Ok, I'll bite. What would real communism look like? Best case scenario.

The difference is capitalism is an emergent economic reality that occurs organically. Yes, it gets co-opted and handicapped by grifters and warlords every time, but it’s real. It has objective properties and leads to demonstrably better outcomes for its participants despite being parasitized to varying levels where it happens. “Communism” as Marx wrote about it was purely philosophical theory that has no basis in reality. It’s a total fiction, has never arisen organically, and cannot be created in the thresher of reality. No matter how hard any group tries, it’s never going to exist. So pointing to something that is real and tangible and saying it could be better if it wasn’t so parasitized (demonstrable) is not even close to a leftist saying something totally made up never happened. Of course the USSR wasn’t “real” communism”, real communism is as real as JRR Tolkien’s fantasy world in the Lord of the Rings or any other fiction scrawled on papyrus.

A community small enough that everyone trusts everyone. As soon as a "State" is introduced to the community, communism needs to yield...to...something 🤷‍♂️

AI makes everything and everything is free

So capitalism is real but always corrupted. Communism is ideology. Does that mean socialism is not real and never been tried? Also, what’s your top 4 tenets of capitalism and from whom do you derive your answer from? I’ve read all the books, just need a basic understanding of your education on the matter.

Maby to be clear right away. I would not consider myself a Marxist. But defnitly progressiv, pro human rights, libertarian, antifascist, anarchist, individual freedom advocate. But I read and listen information of all kind. So I did start reading "das Kapital" of Karl Marx. And I think he has seen and written about problems that came up with the industrialisation. He has seen workers, that worked in insecure facilities for many hours in order to get their pay. And since those jobs were so easy to replace, fabric owners did care little about workers savety. And it does not help much, when the worker gains much, but when he gets into an accident the whole family falls into poverty. So Marx urged for the need of institutions, that ensure workers security, fair pay, so they can sustain themselfs and their families. Therefore he could see, that syndicates of united workers will may have the power to meaningfully negiciate about fair pay, lower working hours, insurance for risky work and so on. Since alo poor labor workers have human dignity. They have a right to work in environments they feel save too. And they are participants in the way towards profits of those companies. So they should get their fair share of those profits too. In the Book I have read Marx wrote mostly about the evaluation of the value of work. I hope this text of mine can be of value to you. Otherwise Might can be a good thing to read a book of Marx or whatever medium you like to learn about his work. Best regards

“I’ve read all the books”. Lmao. I have zero interest in conversation with you. My mute list got nuked but I’m glad you responded here so I can put you back in timeout.

Cogent rebuttal.

What exactly offended you from this comment? Are you only intrested in offending and not at all in exchanging ideas?

Are you familiar with the 'there's not enough turkey for everybody' concept? Tldr resources are scarce.

So, are you talking about an extended family? I don't think this could scale up. What do you have in mind?

I've studied it in order to understand why communism is so appealing to some. Over the years I've tried to reason with communists but with little luck on my behalf. What can I say, thank God bitcoin exists. It made my life much better and the debate it's pretty much settled as far as I'm concerned. Do you think you can have something for nothing?

Raise more turkey. Funnel all the world's resources to make turkeys because that's the central planners desire. That's kinda like communism. But I don't even know what the word means anymore. Euphemism for despotism but there's only one and the rest of the world bows to him I guess.

I had this in mind. Thanks for reminding me to read it once more. 'These days the difficulty of feeding yourself in Albany has nothing to do with you being able to kill a turkey with a gun and a limited supply of bullets, nor is it you being able to find dry wood or start a fire because there's no turkey, there's no dry wood and it's not even legal for you to try and live off the land in Albany. These days the difficulty of feeding yourself has everything to do with you finding a restaurant and then finding a seat and then their having some food to serve you. The resources are so scarce that you need to have everything imported from miles and miles away. The burden you've put on your immediate environment is so great that there's not even a shadow of a hope of survival on your own. Should these supply lines fail for as much as a couple of days you are doomed.'

Let's dig a little deeper into this entire deflation "problem" on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu.

Planet Earth

I tried to read that article but I got a headache. Might try again later. But the no turkeys in Albany example sounds like classic communism.

My brain ded rn

Have you wronged a gypsy recently? Sorry to hear about your headache. Prepare a glasses water and a box of matches. We're going to fuck back that gypsy bitch in no time. 🤭

Maybe? I dunno sometimes I make a shitpost that wrongs people. Just lemme know what we need and we'll get this mf back.

Water and matches to verify if they've casted a spell on you. Photo, hair sample or underwear of the target to strike back. Leave no whiteness behind! 😈

Hmm I dunno if I still have any matches. I use a refillable lighter.

Paperclip optimizer but its for turkeys

I hate communism as much as the next guy, but one thing I will concede to them is that it at a local level it can emerge naturally, I just think it doesn’t “scale” naturally like capitalism and it’s emergent properties do. For example, it actually might be a better system for a small group of people (indigenous group, small business coop, a group of musicians) depending on their financial needs. But that doesn’t mean that it can’t be done 100x better in a capitalistic mindset, just that it works for them and seems like a natural way to do things for some. To cooperate and share at a local level is natural. It’s just a problem (and a very serious one) when people think that we can scale that model up to infinity and run extremely complex systems like a country while tinkering with all the parameters ourselves. That is where we need emergent phenomena like prices etc. Anyways, a bit of a pedantic interjection and happy to be proven wrong. The only reason I bring it up is although I really despise socialism, but never want criticise sharing, working together, generosity and cooperating together eye to eye at a very small social level because we actually really need that to connect as humans.

All economic systems are “fake” in that line of reasoning. Any system created necessitates a set of ethics everyone agrees with to work. All systems work until the ethics aren’t agreed or aligned with the majority. I would argue the most “natural“ system is the one where everyone uses force and violence to get what they want in all circumstances. The strongest rule. Sometimes natural sucks. There’s nothing natural about glasses, but being blind sucks.

Didi you never got things offered without something from your side? When you have an accident on the street, people only help you up for a bonus? When your mom was caring you as a baby, did she put you in dept for every kindness? Do people ask for money after they smiled at you? Althruistic action is something so deeply human, I would be surprised, when you pass a complete day without seeing an altruistic action. But I do not expect altruism. I receive it happily and try to practice myself in thankfullness. So I remember to do altruistic actions more often myself.

The key word is 'voluntary'. I draw the line at confiscation. Do you think people should own property in your scenario?

I totally agree with the idea of property rights and voluntary action. Meanwhile I am in favor of everyone having access to minimal standards like food, drink and a house to live. Clearly with consent. But I am quiet strongly suggesting that we as a society support those in need with shelter, food and education, when they do not have the energy to acchiev all of those things by themself. Since when those basics are offered, people get the opportunity to grow and eventually gain independence. When those basic needs are not met, criminals are produced by society. No coincidential, but it is part of a society that does not care about those without property.

Those basic needs cost resources. Somebody has to pay/provide them. At small scale it can be done by local communities. Scaling is a big issue tho. The welfare state had a century to show results and it hasn't. It's just another way to steal resources by a handful of people. This is my main beef with communism. Everything the state has is due to confiscation and theft.

Actually Denmark, Norway or Finland accomplish high education level throughout society. And there are good studies showing that a overall better educated society with eaqual opportunities deliver a resilient strong economy. I would count those countries good example on how countries that deliver good opportunities to all people living in the country can deliver persistant growth. Meanwhile there is a good record on that an economy where rich people accumulate all the wealth while the middleclass is empoverished, the over all economic power shrinks. And this is happening in countries, which almost do not tax very rich people and companies.

Fair point. I'll have to see for myself. I haven't visited Scandinavia yet. What about Sweden? Do they make the cut?

Maybe something to do with climate and culture

Maby could be. I have nlt yet investigated, what caused those countries to get to the current state.

I really don’t know. I was going to say harsh cold climates might incentivize a more cooperative culture, but I am sure there are many exceptions.

Walker and Allen go over this exact exchange and how to respond to it here, starting 55:20.

Fountain: Podcasts & Music

THE Bitcoin Podcast • NUMBER GO DOWN: Deflation, Bitcoin, and Communist Lies | Allen Farrington • Watch on Fountain

Allen Farrington returns to THE Bitcoin Podcast to discuss his latest essay “Number Go Down,” the myths surrounding deflation, why fiat economi...