Most Pathetic Anti-Communist Arguments
It isn't communism itself that killed the people. Take this for example, assume that Ghengis Kahn ran a communist empire. Kahn killed millions of people, but would you blame him or communism for the murders? Exactly, communism didn't make the decision to kill the people, the one leader did. Nowhere does communism state that murdering people is part of the ideology.
Most of numbers (possibly excluding people like Kim Jong-il and Mao Zedong) are often exaggerated by propaganda (do your homework). What system hasn't caused the deaths of many?
What about the atrocities that were made in the name of bourgeois democracy and Capitalism (The British East India Company, Vietnam War, War on Terror, etc.)?
What about the ones that were made in the name of fascism (Holocaust)?
This is getting tedious. Since you keep going off about the same unoriginal arguments you right-wingers give and since actually reading up on Marxist works (instead of relying on Fox News and "The Godless Communism" only) seems to be far beyond your mental capacity, I may as well stop trying to argue with you. I'm not the greatest arguer, but you can discuss Communism on Soviet Empire. The website mostly has Marxists, but some Conservatives and Anarchists come over as well, unless you're afraid of having the life debunked out of you... Also, don't forget to check out Marxists Internet Archive when you do want to actually know what you're fighting against. That is all and have a good day.
If this is true, then why was Yugoslavia a successful country? Josip Tito made communism work in his country, and had other countries done the same as him, The would also have been just as successful. Communism can work if you have the right leader, and no one was quite as effective as Tito.
Note: I know that Yugoslavia fell apart into a war that broke it apart, but that has nothing to do with their communist government. The states hated each other, enough to start up a war to be separate from each other. In fact, some of the hatred may originate from as far back as the 11th century, well before communism even existed.
Since when is " having " an religion ( which are all organised ) a must to have good morals and ethics? Atheism have ethics ( if not more ) and good morals too. Communism is against organised religion ( " Religion is the opium of the people " - Marx ) but it doesn't say to do evil just because you don't follow ethic laws and moral laws of religion. Plus, if you don't believe in god it doesn't mean that you can't have spiritual valors. You believe in god = you're good. You don't believe in god = you're bad. We all know that the truth about humanity isn't like that. There are more religious wars ( terrorism included ) and deads in name of a god in history than every other war. In fact religious wars and religious terrorism never stopped. It's still going on! So, don't tell me that because you don't believe in god you're automatically bad.
Lol, I live in post-communist country (Czechia) - and large part (if not the most) of people who lived during the communist period says the EXACT OPPOSITE - that communism is for WORK-LOVING people and anti-communism for LAZY people.
Typical conservative argument. Actually, a communistic society (in accordance to the Marxist theory) demands that everyone must work for society by doing what they do best. For example, if you thrive as a doctor, you're a doctor and if being a janitor is what you do best, then you're a janitor.
Socialism is not communism. Marx's theories are not the same as Lenin's theories. They are related but the saying of Lenin " The end justifies the means " isn't a socialist idea that was written by Marx to reach the ideal state. The theory of Marx is more complex but also more reasonable to reach the political program in practice.
While the USSR and other countries were/are ruled by communist parties, none of them even saw themselves as being Communist. Instead, they saw themselves as being Socialist as the Marxist theory states that countries must first become s Socialist before they reach Communism.
Please learn the difference between private property and personal property!
The marxist definition of private property is "the means of production" or any sort of factory, land etc used to generate income. Personal property is just things you own that don't make you money, like a bed. If you have a garden for fun, that's personal property. If you sell the flowers and make a profit, that's private property. See the difference? Communism is against private property, NOT personal property. You can keep "everything you have" as long as you aren't making money from it.
Objective studies proved that Stalin was directly responsible for death of at most 10 million people per 25 years, whereas Hitler was directly responsible for deaths of at least 12 million people per 12 years.
I've already mentioned a similar statement earlier, but one thing that has always made me cringe is when people say things like "Stalin killed 20 million of his own people." How the hell do people come up with such large numbers, anyway?
The Most of these deaths must have supposedly come from the "Holodomor" and the gulags, but the number that died in the supposed "genocide" was about 3.9 million Ukranians and the population grew anyway. The Great Purge really happened, but it is heavily exaggerated.
What is this doing here. Donald Trump is a greedy capitalist pig. Neo-liberalism at his worst. And by liberalism I mean the political term and not the pejoratif sense of the word liberal from " free " which democratic-(American) politicians and followers call themselves.
No, he's a capitalist authoritarian whatever he is.
People say this? How does that make any sense?
There is nothing wrong with race mixing. The problem is the different culture mixing and different religious mixing that comes with it. Many so-called alt-left organisations who called themselves socialists, Marxists, communists or anarchists like Antifa are defending immigrants and their rights of liberties of religion and culture. This are in fact no real or true leftists. Communism will never accept foreigners in a communist state to promote their culture and religion since communism is against every organised religion or culture that confronts the values of communism. Why defending the right of an islamic immigrant to practice his religion when religion is not part of the communist polity? Alt-left organisations like Antifa are giving Marxists, communists, anarchists or socialists ideas a wrong notion of what left really is. They should focus on fighting capitalism, poltical right-wing parties and not focusing on rights of immigrants. Immigration and rights of immigrants are two different things which left groups often forget.
This is mostly an attempt to discuss Communism in a semi-serious way. This obviously false as people were/are actually paide differently in 'Communist' countries. Also, a communist society would have no currency.
While there certainly was a famine in 1932, there is absolutely no evidence that indicates that it was man-made. Many people often compare this to the Holocaust, but there are dozens of witnesses on all sides of the Holocaust as well as camps that tell you that it actually happened while survivors of the famine can only mention that a famine occured. Also, the famine spread to Central Asia so it wasn't in the Ukraine only. Anyways, it is pretty much a way for the west to assimilate movements they find "too extreme" like Communism and Fascism.
Originally spreaded by White Army, later used by Nazi propaganda to justify persecution of Jews and later "the Final Solution".
Allegation propagated for example by Holocaust denier Walter Sanning.