LOL

Always did.

Don't forget India!

Most of Asia, really

More like laughs in being a shameful ignoramus helping spread literal fascist propaganda.

During the 1932 Holodomor Famine, the USSR sent aid to affected regions in an attempt to alleviate the famine. According to Mark Tauger in his article, The 1932 Harvest and the Famine of 1933:

While the leadership did not stop exports, they did try to alleviate the famine. A 25 February 1933 Central Committee decree allotted seed loans of 320,000 tons to Ukraine and 240,000 tons to the northern Caucasus. Seed loans were also made to the Lower Volga and may have been made to other regions as well. Kul'chyts'kyy cites Ukrainian party archives showing that total aid to Ukraine by April 1933 actually exceeded 560,000 tons, including more than 80,000 tons of food

Some bring up massive grain exports during the famine to show that the Soviet Union exported food while Ukraine starved. This is fallacious for a number of reasons, but most importantly of all the amount of aid that was sent to Ukraine alone actually exceeded the amount that was exported at the time.

Aid to Ukraine alone was 60 percent greater than the amount exported during the same period. Total aid to famine regions was more than double exports for the first half of 1933.

According to Tauger, the reason why more aid was not provided was because of the low harvest

It appears to have been another consequence of the low 1932 harvest that more aid was not provided: After the low 1931, 1934, and 1936 harvests procured grain was transferred back to peasants at the expense of exports.

Tauger is not a communist, and ultimately this specific article takes the view that the low harvest was caused by collectivization (he factors in the natural causes of the famine in later articles, based on how he completely neglects to mention weather in this article at all its clear that his position shifted over the years). However, its interesting to see that the Soviets really did try to alleviate the famine as best as they could.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2500600

kulaks slaughtered livestock
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169438

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/589297.Fraud_Famine_and_Fascism

#historyMatters

Yeah it's literally killing people right now.

Can't pay for shelter, food, water or medicine? Go into debt, jail or the morgue, we don't give a fuck.

Libs are always so grateful to cling to fascist double genocide theory as a comforting mythology.

i did some calculations a few years back with some friends on a whim during a sidetracked DnD campaign. we came to the conclusion that capitalism is directly and indirectly responsible for over 20+ million recorded deaths annually all over the world, as a conservative estimate

main contributers were poverty, disease, war, lack of quality healthcare, and state violence.

we also found that the existence of 1 billionaire has an annual death count, purely by subtracting that money from the economic cycle and direct aid. i cant remember now, but it was in the thousands of deaths per billion denied to those in need by hoarding wealth.

billionaires are violent, purely through their existence. and we shouldnt tolerate any form of violence against us.

we should sincerely be dragging these fuckers into the street and ripping them to pieces.

Guess they both suck.

enlightened centrism at its finest

Lead killed more is still killing and nobody even talks about it.

If you’re gonna use violence to enforce your will I’m gonna call you an asshole.

Western liberals will cheer for the brave people risking their lives against state violence in some far away country. But the moment it touches their own country and their own skin, suddenly they only support state violence being closeted fascists that they are.

Good thing I’m not a fucking liberal. Assholes fighting for oil are still assholes.

Capitalism continues to kill vastly more people than the inflated claims about communism. Every year 10 million people die from starvation and preventable disease simply because it isn’t profitable to save them. That means that every 10 years capitalism kills as many as claimed in the Black Book of Communism, the source with the highest number of fatalities attributed to communism.

US sanctions alone have killed 38 million people in the last 50 years.

The term “Holodomor” was coined by a literal Nazi in an attempt to both downplay Nazi crimes and promote anti-communist propaganda.

Yes there was a terrible famine, no there isn’t any evidence that it was a genocide.

if it quacks like a duck...

I should add that the Black Book includes ridiculous things like Nazi soldier deaths in WW2, and the hypothetical children that possibly could have been born if things like the 1933 famine or WW2 didn’t happen. I shouldn’t have even called it a source, but anti-communists love treating it like gospel.

If you’re gonna use violence to enforce your will I’m gonna call you an asshole.

You're calling everyone who ever fought for their liberation assholes. Could it be you're the asshole?

Good thing I’m not a fucking liberal

Remember you used this logic next time we have to listen to you stump for literally Hitler in a blue necktie

So do you hate all governments or politics that have cops or jails?

lead is banned almost everywhere and the cost of replacing it is too high in e.g. pipes

It makes sense. There are way more people in capitalistic countries than in communist ones

India wasn't a capitalist country when they colonised us and killed millions of us.

Hmm yes, very nice. Now let's hear your take on Ukraine

Which country reached communism and then how did it suck equally as bad as 10 million poor people dying every year under capitalism?

Braindead lib take.

'Everything I dislike is capitalism and the more I dislike it the more capitalismer it is'- Karl Marx

^ how to say you're an ignoramus who's never read a book

And are people being exposed to lead because they’re huffing it for fun or because they work within a capitalist system that doesn’t care enough about exposing people to lead?

cringe

You gotta put the * * if you want it to emote

Not knowing what words mean doesn't make you immune to being named by them

War is peace.

Freedom is slavery.

Ignorance is strength.

Violence & Greed go hand & hand

They didn't have to recede to survive, they were fucking killed that's why they're not socialist anymore. Because they were all overthrown or sanctioned to hell or invaded.

Capitalism has instability built into its model because it generates inevitable class conflict that has to be resolved through violence. There is no such thing as a stable capitalist state.

Capitalism hasn't even survived with stability in the short term: it's yet to manage even a century without a catastrophic crisis.

Person who has never read a word of Marx but has an opinion anyway

You are arguing like a liberal for Liberal ideas, this makes you a liberal, no matter what dumbass tendency you would ascribe to yourself.

Capitalism is dominant because it is the only model known to survive with stability long term over massive populations.

Gee I wonder why socialist countries you are thinking of just up and failed?! Just spontaneously happened, no external interference whatsoever, no siree!

I am fearful about the extreme ignorance, simple mindedness and gullibility of some of the electorate. They are completely blind to the effects of neoliberalism, which is the main guiding force behind the bumptious, odious and fascist/racist Reform party who believe that competition is the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning. Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulation should be minimised; public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve.
We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages – such as education, inheritance, and class – that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances.

*Kills.
Still does.

Sure yes but I don't see a workable alternative.

China would like to disagree.