What is Communism? Communism Explained | Property Vs Personal Property | Communism Vs Capitalism

In this video, we’re going to look at a simple explanation of Communism as well as an explanation for private property, examples of Communism, and lastly the pros and cons of communism.
Communism is a political and economic ideology that advocates for the establishment of a classless society in which all resources and wealth are owned and controlled by the community as a whole. The goal of communism is to create a society in which the means of production are owned by the people, and goods and services are distributed according to the needs of the community. In this system, there is no private property and all individuals work together to create a society that is free from economic and social inequality.
Sources:
Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. 1848.
Lenin, Vladimir. State and Revolution. 1917.
Service, Robert. Stalin: A Biography. 2004.
MacFarquhar, Roderick and Michael Schoenhals. Mao's Last Revolution. 2006.
Guevara, Ernesto "Che". Socialism and Man in Cuba. 1965.
#communism #marx #communist #politicalideologies

[@reneetownsend3911]

I’m not sure how I came across your channel but GRATEFUL I did! Thank you for breaking down complex subjects in an easy to understand manner without even a hint of condensation!! Thanks 😊

[@IllustratetoEducate]

You are so welcome!

[@enterchannelname5953]

@@IllustratetoEducate So the USSR is not innovative, the country that invented mobile phones, laptops, space exploration is just not innovative, look at capitalism, the invention of the light bulb by Nicolas tesla had no money to sell it and instead the rich got the money and credit. And the USSR and the PRC is way more democratic then the capitalist 2 party dictatorship that have the same policies.

[@MoPar7055]

@@IllustratetoEducate I agree about the no condensation! I HATE HATE HATE it when I'm trying to learn politics and the surrounding vaporized air starts condensing into water droplets around me! Darn condensation!

[@KarlSnarks]

It should be noted that Marx idea of higher-stage communism is one of not only a classless society, but also stateless and moneyless. He did believe that the transitional period, right following the initial revolution would have a state, and that that state would eventually 'wither away'. As I understand it, in his earlier works he advocated for state seizure of many industries, but in his later revised ideas (particularly after the Paris Commune) he believed in a more decentralized network of communes with a more limited state (a bit like what Council Communist would later advocate for too).

[@gc2696]

Karl Marx was a lifelong scumbag parasite.

[@ubik5453]

Correct. Communism is supposed to be a classless,moneyless, and stateless society. But also a society of leisure and work would be reduced.

[@LocalLibertarian]

Fun fact people easily corrupt and therefore the state would be unlikely to wither away as it brings a lot of profit to those at the top

[@KarlSnarks]

@@LocalLibertarian Agree, that's why I'm not Marxist-Leninist (or the ideologies that grew out of it). I'm also not in favor of capitalism though, because it has the same type of power imbalances and coercion, and leads to accumulation of power into oligarchies.

[@LocalLibertarian]

@@KarlSnarks Keynesian capitalism has a high probability of corruption due to the power of the government However Hayek’s economic theory is one in which the government is as small as possible therefore limiting government corruption however I don’t currently know of any countries using Hayek’s method

[@Bexchoklad]

ehh, a communist society isn't just classless, it's stateless and moneyless aswell. the Soviet Union was, though led by a communist party, a socialist society (as referenced to in the name "Union of Soviet *Socialist* Republics" or USSR for short.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

It always amuses me to no end when communists claim to strive for a stateless society, while also claiming they’ll have the ability to try and distribute mass resources on a net scale to various people “fairly.” Definitely no government necessary there, regardless of the name it’s given. Of course, communist thought never had any actual practical logic to any of it regardless.

[@ubik5453]

Agreed, there is no such thing as a communist country only a socialist country. In order for a country to be communist, the whole civilization on earth must be communist.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

@-Jubulus I am well aware of the self-proclaimed differences. You seem to be under the delusion that communism doesn't calm that the state will eventually melt away once everyone is so consumed by communist ideology that all will get along splendidly, and things will simply work.

[@ecnalms851]

That just sounds impossible to me? Classless, stateless, moneyless - huh?

[@ubik5453]

@ecnalms851 Agree, socialism is possible but not communism.

[@zoemarie9778]

Your videos are really great. Succinctly and simply explain the basics of things. Thank you :)

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Glad you like them! Thank you for the compliment! Hope you continue to enjoy the channel as new content comes out!

[@georgemx4136]

very good explanation of communism, short infographics like this one usually are not too good at really understanding what communism is all about but you did a great job at it!

[@PauI24]

Communism is suppose to be a moneyless and stateless society in its truest form. Aside from having those two incorrections I mentioned before, it is a extremely good video that is able to explain Communism in a more simple term! Thanks for the video! ☭😃

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Well said! Thanks for the clarification. :)

[@marbleWRKS]

☭︎

[@kicapanmanis1060]

The final form of communism is supposed to be stateless. You're supposed to use the power of the state to get there first. Usually that's the part where it falters cos the state doesn't wanna go away...

[@paulallen2680]

How cute, the commies got their own emoji

[@joseastiz1775]

Great video! But another point that is important to bring are the people who inspired marx and Engels like saint Simon, charles furhe(howwver you spell that name) robert owen, and Rousseau

[@alvisalbert9222]

Give this man a million subs the illustration he is giving is par excellence. Well done❤

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Thank you so much 😊

[@maximilianogarciachirinos3663]

Excellent video. I 100% agree with the dissenting opinion with regards communism.

[@vondoromal7016]

Another outstanding research and analysis. Thank you for what you.

[@ShaneCragun]

cool explanation

[@user-sc3wu9dm2t]

This was wonderful

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Thanks! I’m glad you enjoyed it 😊

[@leehayes4019]

That was solid. How does your research for videos affect your ideas? I wonder if and how people will argue in the comments, lol

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Thank you so much for watching. Which ideas were you referring to? Like my opinions on it?

[@leehayes4019]

@Illustrate to Educate yes, exactly that! Would you say your personal ideas change from the research you put into making the illustrate videos?

[@kingo8914]

That’s a good question

[@dashboardkid21]

does reading Marx and Engles make you more leftist in other words lol. @@IllustratetoEducate

[@_icey]

@@dashboardkid21 No, but advocating for changes by those writers does.

[@roracle]

I'm already confused: how is it controlled by "the people" if "the people" don't control anything?

[@_icey]

This is how communism works on paper, it's just that type of system was never achieved. The places that it was implemented were largely agricultural and uneducated societies so authoritarian measures were necessary which led to the problems seen in those countries.

[@MaxStirner123]

Through workers' councils (the term "soviet" means that), direct democracy and a decentralized government in an already industrialized country

[@MaxStirner123]

​@@_iceyIt is no coincidence that Marx believed that the revolution should be born in already developed countries...France, England, Germany etc. furthermore the revolution had to expand rapidly into neighboring great powers to be successful. Hard but not impossibile

[@_icey]

@@MaxStirner123 True, too bad it started in RUSSIA of all places.

[@devinbutler3271]

Socialism, Communism, and Capitalism should always be mixed. I feel this is the best economic system type along with a democratic republic.

[@_icey]

Ehh, I used to think that way but after seeing how mixed economies tend to undo themselves by companies pressuring the government into reversing social change by moving to other countries, I think pushing away from capitalism would be best.

[@user-su9ri2zo2u]

Thank you very much for this video, I am doing a histori project with it

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Best of luck! 🤞🏼

[@chonky9586]

holly cow thank you for that basic explanation I have a hard time understanding these definitions and now I understand why Communism is close to Totalitarianism, again thank you

[@youtubesucks1499]

Whats the INCENTIVE to produce? It won't get me a better life. So why would I produce the absolute bare minimum? Quiet quitting goes both ways.

[@MaxStirner123]

Wait you get paid extra if you produce more than you need? But which company do you work for? Ahahaha Among other things, Stakhanovism exists, do you know?

[@youtubesucks1499]

@@MaxStirner123 Yes, I absolutely get paid more when I expand my businesses. I own 3 construction companies and if I expanded, yes I get paid more... it's called streamlining my income. So why would I grow my businesses under your economic ideology? Why would any entrepreneur take all the financial risk and expand businesses under your economic ideology? Yes, when I produce more, I get paid more. Are you paid hourly? If you are I wouldn't expect you to understand terms like streamlining my income and leverage. With that being said, you really think people will start and grow businesses into corporations?

[@MagichourManila]

I generally concur with the points made in the video, up until approximately 2:10. Beyond that point, however, I find several flaws in the explanation presented. Expressing my viewpoint from an anarcho-Christian communist perspective, I believe that this video can serve as a good starting point for individuals seeking to dive deeper into the study of communism. Thank you and I encourage you to continue your commendable efforts.

[@daviddave7769]

This is why I have a means to defend myself

[@randydisher1153]

"however, it is important to mention" ...was the script written by chatgpt?

[@tanmoynath2688]

Thank you so much 😊😊😊😊😊

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Most welcome 😊

[@maroonblood151]

I still can’t wrap my head around the means of production being controlled by the community? As in all business decisions would be made by the employees of a business? What would that look like in practice? Like all 500 employees of a business would have to agree on every business strategy? Is that logistically possible?

[@edisonchin2463]

Probably by electing some sort of representative ig?

[@kathrynnoel1724]

It’s through elected delegates

[@steffenfriedle3254]

@@kathrynnoel1724 And the delegates are elected because they do the best for the customers ? If not it will fail. And this is the simple cause - communism and socialism will always fail. It only works if everyone is poor. But what is the advantage in everyone being poor?

[@menonalevi6984]

That can work under democratic control of the means of production and wealth. Therefore, it is necessary to create workers' assemblies where decisions are made democratically. It is obvious that there will always be a minority that does not agree with the decisions of the majority, but in communism the decisions have social goals, and the common people can work in a united and cooperative manner under common interests.

[@Goofball6trillion]

@@menonalevi6984still a bad life to live as just a normal person.

[@dudenamedchris3325]

I wouldn't say that the USSR had a "lack of innovation". Consider they were competing with the USA, and have contributed lots to science, medicine and of course, art, literature and music. The notion that innovation only exists because of competition is false. Ask any person who actually wants to help the world instead of capitalising on new technology

[@_icey]

This is true, innovation can happen anywhere at anytime, we just need to give the innovators resources and allow ideas to be freely shared. Surely this can't be halted due to IP and dwindling wages in our capitalist society!

[@vericbasilio]

Can you compare the American Republic to the Roman Republic.

[@someguy6369]

This is great, ay comrade ?

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Glad you enjoyed it! :)

[@estelasantos8184]

really good vid for a non-communist

[@rid9]

If you want to see an implementation of communism that works, look at the Free Software community (free as in freedom, Open Source, etc.).

[@liaznaniecki5566]

cool

[@moorthytalks6156]

Good video , easy to understand and communism will be work out....

[@Gewrgiou02]

Never associated my interests into such topics but truthful opinion and question, would ever such a system work? Some people in their nature want more than others. Personally I believe that since selfishness exists and will always do so, a system built in such way would still get manipulated enough by ruthless individuals to harm our world. Just as harmed it is now by the rules of capitalism

[@dashboardkid21]

Sure but that's because people under capitalism are encouraged to be selfish cause most of the wealth is hoarded by selfish people. In a Socialist society where sharing and mutual benefit and collective progress are encouraged that "selfishness" within people will eventually wither away. its like Pavlov's dog. If everything in Society reinforces your selfish desire then people come off as inherently selfish. Change that negative "selfishness" to a positive "Sharing" and before you know it people will know that its inherently within us to share.

[@Gewrgiou02]

A very nice opinion you have my friend. Truly the system of communism would make people share more and decrease the selfishness that is used in between. Unfortunately something like this could never happen so i will keep considering my self a socialist, a system were equalization should be more and more achieved.@@dashboardkid21

[@honorablewordsx]

How can communism provide equality to all and have the society share all i.e. property, food and things needed to survive as described in the video if the things equally shared are being held and distributed by a government who has the enormous wealth of goods to distribute. Would that not make it flop on its head because the basic principles are destroyed by one government having the power over the people and deciding when enough is enough for the people? If not the government then would a council of people decide who distributes the goods? What I'm not getting in this video is who is in charge of the distribution of common wealth in a communist society?

[@Goofball6trillion]

@@dashboardkid21go live in Cuba and in that time rethink your beliefs please. The thing with capitalism is that as the world develops so will the jobs, huge companies incomes will become obsolete and new ideas come into fruition therefore you always have the opportunity to work hard and earn lots of money. Who would work hard if your work is shared with the person who doesn’t contribute to the economy and sits on benefits whilst pretending to be a social crusader.

[@dashboardkid21]

@@Goofball6trillion40% of the working class in America makes less than $50k annually. So are all those people not working hard enough? 50% of people making $100k annually or less live check to check... I wish what you were saying were true, that meritocracy was actually the way to get ahead. Sadly hard work leading to a decent living is no longer the case. I know plenty of people over 40 years of age, some even with multiple degrees in precarious situations when it comes to finances. Also if you fund my flight to Cuba, I'd gladly take a vacation. Venezuela, Vietnam, or China please.. lol. in all those countries over 90% of the populations owns their homes... American cant say that. hope youre prepared for the fall of Western Hegemony.

[@seaneustace9838]

It is also noteworthy that Socialism has always worked best in capitalist societies. If you look at Norwegian, Albertan or Alaskan resource funds for Oil in lumber, it will see that the capital of space is what funds the little Socialist schemes with your obviously a lot better in Europe than in North America. Well, the Chinese communist even though they have adopted many capitalist aspects to their economy have no Socialism or safety nets to actually help their people other than a few things that are only good on paper the only real beneficiaries of which are those connected to the state. This will loom large and coming years as stale, democratic problems at the babymaking end of the pyramid, drag China’s economy down, mostly based on the one child policy, and the disaster that they caused for China. The one child policy was a top down, authoritarian move by the state this is common under communism.

[@michaeldenoia3069]

Can you clarify this part for me? -> (2:46) "create a system in which the means of production are owned by the people" followed by "In a communist society, the government controls all aspects of the economy" Do the people own the means of production, or does the government own the means of production?

[@kingo8914]

That depends on the type of communism/socialism.

[@Raizoally]

In theory the government is meant to present the interests of the peoples, so "the government is people" . Though in reality the goverment is just a group of people who looks after their own interests. Thats why among the cons of communism is corruption

[@DPD1]

A more modern Democratic socialist approach would be to have the means of production owned equally by all members of a company through a co-operative, who then report to a descaled government of democratically elected representatives.

[@menonalevi6984]

In a socialists system, the people owns the state's power to control the means of production, in communism, the people owns the means of production directly.

[@CooperTheGoosebumpsGuy]

Amen❤😊🎉

[@allstyle_2875]

Crazy how in my way of thinking on how we as a society could become fair to everyone I ended up a like what the founders of communism did; but like always money and power will always corrupt the people, which just makes me sad

[@rullychristian356]

Communism seems impossible in reality

[@phatchoocie]

capitalism isn’t working either..

[@Anti_Racist696]

​@@phatchoociebut it's atleast better.

[@kaviarnciggarettes]

@@Anti_Racist696 It really isnt. In theory or practice

[@ZackGisme]

@@kaviarnciggarettesyou’ve got all of your work cut out for you arguing communism has worked as well as capitalism in reality.

[@kaviarnciggarettes]

@@ZackGisme Communism has improved QOL even in times of war (USSR never had peace times since its conception). Also, you posit that capitalism has done well? Read a 📕

[@williamtay741]

It looks good on paper. The ideology make sense. So why in reality it doesn't work? And can humans make it work?

[@user-fj4fg4lj7j]

"Somewhere in the distance, you feel a hammer and sickle flying towards you"

[@markworden9169]

Read Alexander Solzenitsyn

[@SoCoolScience]

one who busts their @$$ should not be paid the same as someone who sits on their @$$ and do nothing.

[@PeterG-xb3zo]

I seen this happen to people on the USA 🇺🇸

[@FishermanKyle]

Listen, it's one of these things where if it worked like it was supposed to, itd be the ideal way to run a country. But again, people just don't work this way.

[@estheffanie4649]

isn't it this is the system where a jobless person have similar income/payment with a teacher, or a policeman or etc?

[@Enriyes20]

No, in a communist society you are not paid the same as everyone else, you just control the means of production, basically meaning you don’t have a boss cutting your paychecks and laying you off

[@ozzie_theotter]

Not really, value given to people's labor depends on how long and hard they work Yes, everyone would have basic necessities like food, water, shelter, but if you don't work, you may not be in possession of luxury goods

[@Not_A_French_Frie]

I think that communism in theory sounds way better than in reality. But... because of everything that happened in the communist period i think people take that as a stereotype of 'Communism' which is not the whole deal & in my opinion the community owning everything thought hasnt been put to work in the eastern block because it was not 'ruled' by the people, it was ruled by dictators that just wanted to spread propaganda and take use of the system for their own good.

[@DFHartman]

The fundamental flaw in communism and indeed socialism is that the “capital” or "means of production”, is not under control of the people but rather those who sit on top the power hierarchy. It is they who will determine what peoples “abilities” and what their “needs” will be. Thus in practice, it invariably ends up looking like feudalism, or slavery to the state.

[@arulmuruganmohan1378]

If communism is Slavery to the State, then capitalism is Slavery to the corporate isn't ? ... Next time be honest

[@DFHartman]

​ @Be Honest : What is Capitalism ? All systems have capital, even if there are no corporations. A caveman’s capital, might be a flint knife, a bear skin, and a smoldering ember. The issue is who is allowed to own and or control the capital. Historically those with the most political power, can seize and or control the most capital. Our countries founding represents an attempt to separate the control of capital from political power, and create a bargained for relationship between our leaders and those they governor. So too is a relationship between the employer and the employee, granted not all parties have the same bargaining power, but it's much easier to get a new contract or new employer, or even become an employer, than it is to get a new government, unless the government is the sole employer, which is the case and communism. The corporate world and the communist world have one thing in common; the leaders in these worlds know how fiendishly they cherish their position of power, and they project that same lust for power on all others.

[@Bexchoklad]

I'm new to this so fellow Marxists, please correct me if I'm wrong but, in a communist society, capital (that being wealth that serves to create more wealth) is abolished, class (and thereby also societal hierarchies) is abolished and the state withers away due to the lack of need for it.

[@RedCaribbean]

@@DFHartman it does indeed separate the control of capital from the state but in doing so it places the working class in total competition with one another, undermining any semblance of democracy. and of course in competition there are winners which leads to new centralizations of capital which are no longer under any form of democratic control.

[@DFHartman]

@@RedCaribbean Democracy is a word that can not be found in any of our founding documents. We are a Constitutional republics, which is very different. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jKDKq3iuhZiknqs

[@RedPlayz_YT]

Can I have an example of a private property

[@Dontexxr]

Factories

[@MaxStirner123]

Something you own without actually using and generates profit. You have two houses: you live in the first one so it is your "possession" The second one you rent to someone as "private property". So you are generating profit on an asset you don't use and you get rich without having to produce

[@Rawdistrict202]

So if somebody lazy they they still get the same amount as the hard worker? If so thank god for america

[@blueciffer1653]

No. That's not what Socialism is nor had that happened in any socialist state.

[@Angel_559_]

That's not what it means

[@kingo8914]

This is not what socialism means. Are you guys just coming to this video to leave comments without watching the video?

[@DPD1]

You just described capitalist inequality.

[@kingo8914]

@@DPD1 quite literally

[@cherrybane]

This just sounds like a ChatGPT generated script, to be honest. No offense

[@IllustratetoEducate]

No offense taken. I’m also not seeing the problem with that… all my scripts, because of their objective nature sound like ChatGPT scripts.

[@RobinGarnett-bb9ct]

Harry Whaton - A program for the nose people. Published by the Committee for the preservation of the chosenites. New York - 1939 p.143. "The Communist Soul is the Soul of Judaism".

[@EscaledRaven]

You yield

[@Eurasiapeoplearmy]

Is good btw is alot like Communist manifesto write Karl mark and Engels

[@Thor4Mayor]

Did anyone else think the machine at 0:34 was a man being hanged?

[@IllustratetoEducate]

😂 that’s funny, I can see it now.

[@faithlov7400]

Without free thinkers.. there’s no inventions

[@prasathviswanathan4145]

there are

[@Anthony-hh2gk]

lack of free thinkers also comes with capitalism depending on how corrupt it gets.

[@faithlov7400]

@@Anthony-hh2gk I respect your opinion, but still for me, id rather have a government that “can” get corrupt verses one that “is” corrupt

[@faithlov7400]

@@prasathviswanathan4145 you sound like Joe Biden… “Don’t”

[@_icey]

"Without free thinkers.. there’s no inventions" Says the one who reuploaded nearly an hour of stolen clips from yoga and meditation channels.

[@Misserbi]

As a language and substitute teacher who has been employed in Russia post-1991 and in the US it is safe to say the US is trying to catch up with needs while my experiences in Russia have resulted to little to no pay and no incentive. It is ridiculous to go from $125 a day for 6.5 hours with lessons written out to $50 a month for 3 or so lessons a week. I do it for the students but I refuse to pay money to teach and have to prepare lessons when I would happily do prepared lessons simply for a letter of recommendation in the end. This system reminds me of the community construct and poor management that is being forced on me mentioned here as an end result for a failed system whose goal is to embarrass me in the most pathetic manner.

[@mutexin]

How can a teacher write such a word salad?

[@CafeLu]

This seems a little biased. Out of control capitalism also leads to violation of individual freedom. Also economic inefficiency is not necessarily a bad thing.

[@MissStateFan]

China is not communist. They still have working class and owner class.

[@IllustratetoEducate]

True, China is not communist. However, the Chinese Communist Party has implemented some communist policies.

[@user-qp4eq1oj5r]

China is socialism with distinctive characteristics, which is actually a combination of communism and capitalism.

[@user-qp4eq1oj5r]

@@IllustratetoEducate China is socialism with distinctive characteristics, which is actually a combination of communism and capitalism.

[@0157matt]

China is doing well because it's leaders president Xi or his predecessor are not corrupted.

[@nmeissner5150]

I don't need an explanation I lived it.

[@daviddave7769]

The only pros in the communist countries I visited were: no advertising, and the 5 year plans were good. Other than that….. party functionaries ran both countries…. People that had no business running anything. It was bleak, impoverished, and SUPER DEPRESSING.

[@Bodhitree7]

☭

[@laurenwalker9881]

honestly tho if you really wanna understand communism summarize the Communist Manifesto. this whole video is biased and is just the narrative pushed about communism. it makes it sound super impossible but the idea is we just all support each other rather than have some people hold 90% of the wealth and exploit the rest who literally do all the work/labour/production to make the wealth. society hasn’t always lived in capitalism… it’s dialectical and is proved over and over unsustainable and creates war, famine, poverty, exploitation, low wages, expensive healthcare, food, housing, etc. capitalism is fr killing us all we should definitely try something new

[@seaneustace9838]

It is communists that are into forcing work, which you have not had an America since the end of slavery. It seems to be glossed over in the video that the society decides what people will do for a living. This literally means the state gets to choose what you do for a job whether you like it or not, this is quite draconian for most Americans. That was a situation here in America is not desirable a jump out of the frying pan of capitalism into the fire of communism doesn’t seem a wise move to me. And neither of the Marxist or the capitalist right ever discuss tariffs, or Fees for foreigners, dumping their goods in American markets. These are all easy solutions that economist have deemed as bad for no other reason in the south interest of industries or ideology. The very idea of trying to get someone to live in the binary world between capitalism and communism, I find is an error , communism is nothing more than dictator ship. Historically capitalism runs the gamut between socialist Europe as they call it in the United States and the United States, as well as some banana republic‘s who oppressed their workers and control the means of production. Well, they have little communist movements that occasionally come to power, as in places, like Venezuela, and end up ruining the country. other versions of authoritarian Socialism, like fascism has taken route in places like Argentina under patron ism, and this leads to the same Ella fact as overtime those that are in power enrich their own families and friends at the expense of the general population for a limited from participating as the state controls off, or at least, as a veto against those would do things they do not like.

[@aguandaranapu8118]

One of the main features of communism is the lack of a central goverment. What we call today communist countries are in reality socialist or mix economies. Communist economy is a utopia. It probably was the first form of economic system used by people thousends of years ago. Today there is not such a thing as a COMMUNIST society all over the world. This term , communist, is utilize today for capitalist countries as a propaganda against countries with a human perpective for the society which is the opposite of capitalism where profit maximization is the goal and not the well being of the community. Excuse my writing I am not an English speaking native. Good day.

[@dougspray7160]

The biggest problem of Capitalism is wealth and power is falling into the hands of a small number of people who generally have little concern for the welfare of the mass of the people on the planet. Capitalism will solve world poverty does sound ridiculous. The Economist magazine ranks American democracy always in the late twenties of efficient world democratic governments. Consumerism, a vital aspect of Capitalism, has ruined the eco system of the planet. Making things that dont last and constantly want replacing. By advertising and marketing creating a need for a product that is not really needed, eg fashion; making unhealthy products attractive like smoking, sugar filled drinks etc; creating false and untrue and unfair criticisms of societies, say China, with a modified form of Capitalism which has been so successful for them. American style Capitalism has created an unhealthy obese violent poorly educated society which specialises in overthrowing governments not in favour of their style of Capitalism and similarly fighting wars on an enormous scale to try and totally inappropriately install their version of Capitalism on them.

[@quatele]

Even though contradictions abound, unfortunately people still believe in the utopian fairytale, and every time it turns into an economic and humanitarian disaster. 😢

[@blueciffer1653]

Yea. one day people will stop believing in capitalism

[@kingo8914]

What contradictions. Communism IS utopian. That’s the whole point. But socialism is the system between communism and capitalism that has been tried and seen great success in many countries. The economy of the Soviet Union grew incredibly in its 70 years. It went from a feudal society to space in like 40 years. Until 1991 when the USSR was undemocratically dissolved through shock therapy. The economy was horrible and there was no food on the shelves and people lost their jobs etc. Where has it turned into an economic disaster, how was this the fault of communism, and why is it inevitable for every “communist” society

[@MCDreng]

If socialism always fails why does the US have to destabilize socialist countries? We should just let it fail if it always does.

[@mutexin]

@@kingo8914China’s economic wonder is even more impressive since China had access to the capital of the 1st world.

[@Nanofuture87]

A bit of a nitpick, but the USSR was socialist with a ruling communist party ostensibly attempting to achieve communism. As for my thoughts on communism, it's fundamentally flawed in theory. While he didn't explicitly call it that, Marx was working off of the labor theory of value. That's understandable considering the state of economic knowledge at the time, but he actually lived to see the development of marginal utility and the subjective theory of value which rendered the labor theory of value obsolete.

[@atra7812]

Marginalism didn't debunk LTV. Marginalism was created as a reactionary movement to justify the prevaling system at the time. The Austrian school of economic came up with the subjective theory of value and then marginal utility not as a organic development but out of desesperated to find some an alternative that didn't jeopardize the position of the ruling class of the time. The subversive and revolutionary nature of the implications of LTV put alot of wealthy capitalist on the defensive and they stated to finance intelectuals that could come up with a conter. Marginalism is not a theory of value since it is a floating abstraction, it fails to quantify value and just delegates to subjective and imposible to measurable preference scales that are 100% arbitrary. Also, it asumes that all participants are completely well informed and rational so clearly you can can see that this is disconnected from reality and doesn't work well with real life scenarios. True is that the biggest corporations in the world do economic planning with stolen algorithms and equations used by the soviets. During the 2008 crisis the mayor asset managers of the financial world found out that the models created using marginalist axioms didn't correlate to reality at all.

[@richierich8245]

@@atra7812Imagine thinking the LTV has not been used by the the ruling class to impose their will, orthodox LTV supporters are the true reactionaries that hinders the progress of economic thought.

[@gc2696]

Did I miss you mentioning " famine " ?

[@pathowogenempire9968]

Famine is more of a capitalist thing

[@ramiere1412]

because famine is something unique only to communism

[@pathowogenempire9968]

@@ramiere1412 nonono famine is not "unique" only to communism Have you heard of India and etopia before?

[@LocalLibertarian]

@@ramiere1412it isn’t unique to socialism but is very heavily correlated and caused by it (however it does happen in places with drought or with terrible economic conditions)

[@kingo8914]

@@pathowogenempire9968it was sarcastic

[@calummacdonald1300]

Pretty good, but I'll kick off the arguments in the comment section... You mix up communism and socialism ... or over simplify using americanised definitions. You can't have a communist state by definition - it is a classless and stateless society - at least going by its true definition used by Marxists & Anarchists - who in theory want the same end goal (communism). Communist regimes claim to be trying to get from a dictatorship of the proletariat (as opposed to a dictatorship of the bourgeois in capitalism) [or often a bonapartist dictatorship] to socialism (implementation of workers control of the means of production etc.) to the first stage(s) of communism (where money starts to be abolished in replace of labour tokens or something else in a planned economy, and other socialising concepts like communal living, shared cooking/child-care - from each according to his work to each according to his needs) to the final stage of communism where their is no need for any bureaucracy and the state has withered away as it is not needed (from each according to his ability to each according to his needs). I have also way over simplified this too, and many people may likely argue on the definition of dictatorship of the proletariat/socialism/1st stage(s) of communism. The common argument of 'oh well that bad thing wasn't communism' is pretty fair actually. Authoritarian regimes have come about in the aftermath of dictatorships of the proletariat/bonapartists for various historical reasons. Just because regimes they call themselves 'Communist Party' doesn't mean they are communist - most don't - the USSR was explicitly Socialist Republics - they were probably the closest to ever get to the 1st stage of communism but never really made it. Still, I liked your style and video concept!

[@enterchannelname5953]

Okay then, the USSR is communist, and their Ideas where, like the DPRK, PRC, Vietnam and others. They give their people free food, free housing, free education, free healthcare and low to no taxes, they are democratic because the people elect their leaders and pick the direction of their country and al land in publicly owned. Communism can have buisneses, just not to large that you are exploiting the labor of workers. They claim the be communist and they are.

[@seaneustace9838]

Not a fan of capitalism, but communism is responsible for 100 million people being murdered and started in the last hundred years. Theoretically in my mind I can think of scenarios where communism works. The problem is I have a good understanding of history and would never want to attempt it again, as it has been trade in different countries from the subarctic to the subtropics with different cultures, and it has always ended in the same negative way. I think what we need to tweak our system as a limit on how much wealth the individual can have, as well as a limit on the amount of wealth and power that the state is able to have. You have to have both though, or you’ll have problems when in doubt, don’t tinker with anything.

[@AmusedChild]

You didn't mention how many people starved to death in the Soviet Union and in China due to their "just, equal" collective farming.

[@mutexin]

No, they starved because they SABOTAGED collectivisation and also due to adoption of Lysenkoism propagated by the Ukrainian pseudo scientist Trofim Lysenko.

[@llywelynyllevyn1176]

Communism. I've read Marx, that was the most boring dry book of economic vocabulary words, The Communist Manifesto. Das Capital was the other book, the fact of the matter is that both capitalism and communism are both destructive Marxist teachings from the spirits, two extremes, two sides of the world. The rich capitalist with money, capitalizing on commodities and banking and investment with the federal reserve bank of 1913. And the communist side in Russia where the state owns everything along with the community with no bank and no money, in 1917. Communism Commodities. Industry and agriculture. The hammer and sickle. The blacksmith and farmer. They stole everything from the landowner farmers and sold it to raise money in order to industrialize and then they starved millions. Lennon came from outside and was put into Russia. It did not develop from within. The capitalist of banking funded Lennon and put him into Russia to start the revolution from outside of russia. Marx wrote from London, not Moscow. They did this from the bank of England. The bank of England has 650 billion in Russian foreign reserves. The bank of England holds all of the foreign reserves from all the countries of the earth. Guess, what they did with it. China. They stole all of the world's foreign reserves and invested it in china so they could own half of China. These capitalist boljewviks who control commodities. They have filled the world with weapons from both the United states and the soviet union. They will not make loans while buying up all the commodities and resale them at huge profits. They've got over 500 trillion tied up in the stock markets. None of these banks are American. None, there is no such thing as an American bank. There are none. These Europeans own them all. Switzerland England Italy. Those New York banks, none of them are American, there are none. These foreign bankers have done this to the world. Extremely poor and full of weapons. LLXIIX77

[@JohnSmith-ef2rn]

Communism is the ideal ideology for an organism far better than humanity. Human progress is possible - human perfectibility is not, and communism requires something close to perfect humans who always do the right thing all the time and are utterly selfless and human and incorruptible. The soviets had their “homo sovieticus” - The soviet man, who would be conditioned by society to be this perfect person. I thought it was a bunch of nonsense.

[@DPD1]

I think that this is just not true. When people are raised and taught how to behave in a game theory capitalist society where the only thing that matters is your own personal success and the accrual of material wealth then sure, people are going to turn out selfish and cruel - but that isn't human nature, it's learned behaviour.

[@thetinker398]

​@@DPD1it seems like this is always the default response which I don't quite get. People are always going to be more kind hearted or not. There's accounts of "evil" and other acts that are considered bad all throughout history and not in this society we live in today. Sure maybe worse today but to say humans are naturally perfect is wrong.

[@DPD1]

@thetinker398 It's the fatalism that gets me. There has never been a society in history that treated all people equally, that didn't subjugate one group to the benefit of another, and that didn't strive to create equal conditions and facilitate human freedom and happiness on a grand scale. That's part of rhe current theory of communism, that it would enable everyone to be free from labour and wealth inequality, and thusly remove the impetus for us to do much of the evil we see in the world. It's theoretical, but the logic follows and is certainly worth the effort of striving towards instead of wallowing in an outdated hierarchy.

[@GlassICE]

Well, none of them has worked well so far :(

[@adhamadel9475]

i dont understand.. then wahts the problem with communism? as far as i understopd it makes ppl equal isnt that a good thing?

[@dan4091]

Are people equal in Russia and China, is the average Joe in Russia and China equal to Putin and Xi...

[@homelantern4408]

corruption

[@Cara-JeanLopez]

I've lived through communism hence I'm speaking based on my experience. This theoretical presentation is quite different from the reality of communism, which I would not wish upon my worst enemy. When you experience communism, any existing ideological love affair will cease. However the video presentation, its layout, quality and compilation was okay. The hypocrisy of communism is that it has no problem making money and acquiring wealth in Capitalist Societies, and removing those gains....but capitalist people are subject to the rules and regulations within communism and its State. Advocating for a classless society literally means one person (the State), or a group of people appointed by one person, in charge of subservients. Your freedom and everything that you do, is what is allowed, or portioned to you by the State...and can be revoked without notice/justice. All resources tangible and intangible, wealth, means of production i.e. factories / corporations / land / machinery, private property, institutions, goods and services, are owned and controlled by the State which is run autocratically. You may possess the deed to your home, but that too belongs to the State. Their is stark inequality wherein society is subservient to the needs and demands of the State and its appointees without objection. There must be complete obedience, or face harsh labour camps, imprisonment, and death by whatever means. For the subservients, food, housing and healthcare are woefully unaffordable/inadequate and people are oftentimes undernourished and die as a result. Subservients are allowed to own clothes and other menial items and wages are set by the State. Information, technology, entertainment, everything is run by the State. And that is why people escape communism for capitalist regimes. Anything which you think you may own, is what the State allows you to utilize or possess, always with the awareness that everything belongs to the State.

[@gerrylk9]

You will own nothing and you'll be happy

[@ecnalms851]

Communism sounds just a bit utopian to me and unrealistic. I also don't really like the whole collectivised nature of it. Personally, I like a sense of individualism and independence. Also, if I wanted to open a business such as a pub and make a profit from it, why is it inherently bad that I do so? I understand some of the criticism for big corporations but not for SMEs which are 99% of businesses.

[@blueciffer1653]

you owning a business just by yourself and making money from it isn't what's inherently bad it's the hiring workers and then exploiting them is the bad part. also collectivization An individualism has nothing to do with each other. Not sure why you're Equating personal things to economic things

[@ecnalms851]

@@blueciffer1653 But what is "exploitation", people use that word subjectively. If I have a worker who asks for a pay rise, but I either don't think they deserve one or can't even afford it, is that now worker exploitation? Or is too long working hours? Overall, I don't really see any examples of 'exploitation' prevalent in EU countries for example. US though is slightly different and I could see how you can argue for that, but it still is not really 'exploitation' compared to other countries. Also, by individualism, I meant in the way that I have control of my own money and I get to spend it on what I want and also at the same time, start a personal business to make more money if I want. I can buy/pick my own property, pick what job I want etc.

[@DPD1]

@@ecnalms851 The exploitation comes from time. They're giving up their time, a resource they can never recover, for the sake of your business. If you cannot operate without them then why shouldn't they get a fair and representative share of the business?

[@ecnalms851]

​@@DPD1 Everyone is giving up time whatever you do. Also, you receive a wage if you get employed. So, the owner benefits as if you are a productive worker you will help them make the business stay afloat/make more money. You then benefit as you get a wage. This wage depends on if you have min wage in your country/trade union/if you are highly skilled/tight labour market. For workers to get a fair and representative share of the business depends on the business model of the owners. Cooperative/stock ownership schemes etc.

[@atra7812]

Owning a business is ok. Nothing wrong with working for yourself. It's profiting from others labor that is considered theft. The only reason a capitalist can make profit is because he is under paying the workers, stealing from them by paying them way less that what they produce. Profit=theft.

[@TheSehroyal]

Funny how these critics against communism and the Soviet Union + China comments pretty much ignore that the same can be said about what could be called the "most successful" capitalist countries. Like the US may pretend it's the land of dreams but just pray you never have to go to the hospital or you'll join the many people living in the streets in no time. Is there no better example of lack of incentive then a society where you can't hope to own your own house, afford healthy nonplastic food, healthcare and no horizon where things can go better? The Soviets revolutionalized these countries stuck in the middle ages where mostof the people didn't have access to electricity or three meals a day and in 50 years not only made things a lot better but sent a man around the world BEFORE the US. I do call that innovation, yes haha

[@dan4091]

As you saying having the top 1% own 90%, and the bottom 90% owning 1% is bad?

[@JazzyGinger1]

Hello, God the Father loves you so much that He sent Holy, Sinless Jesus (His Holy Son) to earth to be born of a virgin. Then He grew up and died on a cross for our sins. He was in the tomb for 3 days, then Father God raised Holy and Sinless Jesus Christ (Y'shua) to life! He appeared to people and went back to Heaven. We must receive Sinless Jesus sincerely to be God's child. John 1:12 says, "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." Will you receive Christ sincerely?

[@A_Lego_Shoe]

KZbin more like OurTube

[@tabiripetrovich517]

I was living in the Soviet Union for 15 years and in the USA for 14 years and i dont see the difference.

[@reeper1210]

are they good or bad?

[@dan4091]

Yep, in both systems the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

[@Ston247]

*"There is always some thing to envy. a smile, the friendship, something you don't have to appropriate. There will always be rich and poor."* - Enemy at the Gates

[@A_Lego_Shoe]

Communists 😽👌 👇

[@defenstrator4660]

You left out that since in a communist society no one is entitled to their own labour since it is all expropriated to the state, all citizens are effectively serfs who do what the their lords in the party tell them to do or they will be cut off from the resources needed to survive. The serfs take the jobs they are told to do, and live where they are told to live, and are given what they are told they need. That’s a pretty big thing to leave out.

[@potyyyh]

bruhh in comunism is literally stateless

[@simonk700]

After evaluation i am for capitalism in comparison with communism

[@kingo8914]

What evaluation did you do?

[@simonk700]

I did a research and weighed capitalism as compared to communism ..and came to a conclusion that capitalism with few aspects of socialism is the best

[@simonk700]

Communism advocated for classless system hindering inovation as compared to the latter

[@kingo8914]

@@simonk700 What aspects of socialism is the deal breaker to where you wouldn’t want a fully socialist society?

[@DPD1]

@@simonk700 It's easy to think that way in a system that doesn't reward your labour and only punishes you for trying to rise above your station - lazy people are the direct result of a demotivating capitalist system. People have hobbies and dreams and aspirations that are beaten out of them by the necessity of working half their waking hours in a meaningless job they hate. In a communist system they're free to explore their interests for their own sake and innovate without the burden of financial return.

[@romeojan7]

Great ideology for humanity

[@shailong3254]

Well we need something because capitalism isn’t working out.

[@dave7830]

Claims to be a classless society, but that is in reference to those not in control, NOT the ruling politicians. Bottom line with true communism, there is no incentive to do better than the minimum required to get the job done.

[@johnrafail6424]

Marx never thought a "middle class" would emerge in Britain. The middle class is what thwarted his utopian dream.

[@generalgrievous2580]

Marx believed in two classes the Proletariat (workers) and Bourgeoisie (people like Jeffrey bezels and Elon musk) and many communist do hold these beliefs a KZbinr called second though made a good video on this and as for the utopian dream that is wrong communist do not want to create a utopia

[@LocalLibertarian]

Thanks to the free market, which sadly followed Keynes but still improved their lives

[@Norgra69]

I strongly disagree. As the contradictions within the capitalist system come to a head more and more people will be forced out of the so called "middle class" and in to the ranks of the proletariat.

[@Illstatefishing]

Viva Communism!! 🚩

[@Sean-mr8lz]

Communists murdered many times more people than did fascists, yet your video on fascism focused on the violence, whereas in this video you treat the subject as if there were only minimal problems with communist violence. Why the discrepancy?

[@cutdh5512]

The video merely illustrates the state of the communist world at its conclusion, without delving into the reasons behind its sustainability - namely, why individuals continue to work in a society where resources are abundant and easily accessible. If people are content with their lives, what drives the constant supply of goods? The answer lies in envisioning a scenario where basic necessities such as food, clothing, education, and healthcare are provided free of charge from birth. In such a system, there would be no room for greed or competition for societal wealth since it is boundless. Consequently, individuals would only engage in activities they genuinely enjoy. Some may choose scientific research while others might prefer project development and recruitment to experience a sense of accomplishment. Thus, society naturally organizes itself through division of labor wherein each individual contributes spontaneously towards material production. However, certain challenges arise when considering jobs that do not align proportionally with people's preferences or demand within society; farming serves as an example here. Perhaps only 0.1% of the population enjoys farming while meeting societal needs requires 10% participation from the population. To address this issue effectively and reduce labor requirements in agriculture, modern techniques must be employed to enable one worker to accomplish tasks equivalent to those previously requiring ten or even a hundred workers with assistance from machinery. Therefore, communism necessitates a highly developed scientific and technological foundation or economic base which many countries have yet to achieve on such scale. However, with advancements in artificial intelligence emerging on the horizon,the realization of true communism may become conceivable.

[@anjkovo2138]

When you say owned by the people you mean the state and it's cronies

[@kingo8914]

Communism is a stateless, moneyless classless society. State owned MOP is not communism.

[@mister_r447]

"economic inefficiency" oh no! prioritazing the well being of people over profic! Thats absord!

[@kingo8914]

Inconceivable!

[@richierich8245]

Which all ended up being a small minority holding all the profits and the rest of the working class starving to death, that is the consequence of Marxian implementations.

[@tylerthompson5828]

What we saw in maoist China or soviet union, wasn't communism as defined in the manifesto. It was authoritarian state capitalism.

[@zawlatt5202]

အ​မေရိကန် က ကွန်မြူနစ်ဝါဒ သမားလား

[@IllustratetoEducate]

No they are not.

[@vladislavovich100]

You always need to add that the interpretation of Communism. It is not what Marx and Engels suggested in their books. It was what poor educated folks in different countries decided to do on their own volition with their poor interpretation and understanding of those books.

[@dominicklpz]

0:30 "goods and services are distributed according to the needs of a community" Somebody explain to me how this would not incentivize a community/individual to slack off. I can see the thought process "Why should we work hard or least of all pull our weight? We're still going to get what we need."

[@coreypersaud]

Otherwise an individual who "slacks off" is no longer classed as Contributing towards society and therefore will have their rights removed

[@hunter_69_69]

Wow. Communism seems borderline tyrannical to me.

[@jasondashney]

100,000,000 dead in the 20th century agree with you. It's as brutal as it gets.

[@enterchannelname5953]

Okay, I will explain communism, under communism you get free housing, free education, free food, little to no taxes, free healthcare. All land is owned publicly and the people pick the direction of the country. Communism works, and it has been proven to work under the worst circumstances. In Cuba the country is sanctioned, invaded, and attacked all the time and still has one of the best growing economies in the world, free housing, free education, free healthcare, free food, free elections, 2% tax rate, something the USA cannot provide. Same for the DPRK but they are literally threatened to get nuked and have been cut off from the world. That does not seem like tyranny to me.

[@blueciffer1653]

fam you literally watched him say that communism as Stateless???? How on earth is it tyrannical

[@blueciffer1653]

@@jasondashney Communism killed 1 trillion people actually

[@ellisstacey8469]

@@blueciffer1653when hasn’t it been tyranical

[@nickyn4076]

This video should be called - "What is Communism? Cambodia in the 1970s"

[@malcolmfreeman7802]

Why would you put a picture of a USA govt building in a documentary about communism that as ideology includes getting rid of govt ? he then says resources and wealth owned by the community as a whole he then says means of production owned by the people - none of those are in Karl Marx definition of communism - thats more like socialism Marx was abut the workers getting rid of the private ownership of production by taking it over so i would say workers owning the means of production , include resources and banks. not the same thing as society although could be but who knows , not marx and he originated the definition He then goes backwards to explain communist manifesto explain it reasonable then goes wrong again by saying Russia and China are communist when they never were. Theres never been a communist country to my knowledge

[@IllustratetoEducate]

Sorry you didn’t like the video. The reason for the icons used, like the government building looking American is because the majority of my audience that watches these videos is from the U.S. so whenever I refer to government or politics, I use picture associations they’re familiar with. You are right that there has never been a truly communist country. If you listen carefully I say the USSR was a communist state, meaning it was governed by a political party that implements communist policies. Same with the China example. The Chinese Communist party has implemented communist policies, not necessarily that China is fully communist, because we know they’re not.

[@mutexin]

@@IllustratetoEducateplease don’t call any state communist, especially if you pretend to know what communism means.

[@darkgardener9577]

Communism: You don't own your labor or have any property, those belong to the collective. Get to work comrade. Capitalism: You have a right to your own labor and property.

[@kingo8914]

I think you have them switched up. Communism’s goal is for money, class, and the state to not exist, so you’re talking about socialism. In socialism the worker is entitled to the fruits of their labor. Instead of capitalists extracting the surplus value of their labor, it goes back to them and their fellow workers to democratically decide what to do with it. You can absolutely own property in socialism and communism. I think you’re failing to distinguish between private and personal property. In socialism, you cant just buy a factory and take money from people working their. You CAN buy a house, and a cool car, and an xbox, etc. In capitalism, you can only keep part of the money you produce, and the rest goes to the owners, shareholders, your manager, etc.

[@darkgardener9577]

@@kingo8914 So you think private, individual ownership of the means of production is socialism? LMFAO!!! You need to get a basic dictionary/encyclopedia and look up the words socialism and capitalism. I'm not the one who's confused and switching things up here. All communist are socialist, it is the communist primary economic model and tool to promote equity, equal outcomes. There is no real difference between personal and private property. That's just the BS screen lefties use when they entitle themselves to others labor and property. If you can use it to make money, the left entitles themselves to it..... and then promptly destroys it. Nope, cars and computers are used to make money. Powerful tools of capitalism ....those belong to the collective (state) can't have an individual making more that would lead to inequity. Clearly the work of the capitalism boogieman. LOL

[@kingo8914]

@@darkgardener9577 I have no idea why you think that I said socialism is when private ownership of MOP. I literally said the opposite. And if you think there’s no difference between personal and private property, the most fundamental idea of communism, you need to read Marx, or Engels, or ask any communist, or look up the definition. Private property isn’t anything you can possibly used to make money. “Well technically I can sell pencils therefore pencils are private property.” No. What’s the purpose of a car? To transport someone between places quicker than walking. Even if you own 100 cars, that’s not private property. What’s the purpose of a computer? To research information, or find entertainment. Anyone can get these things because they’re not used for exploiting workers. There is not one communist on this planet who wants to take away your personal belongings. That’s never even been done in any communist nation

[@darkgardener9577]

@@kingo8914 You said that "In socialism the worker is entitled to the fruits of their labor. " Labor is the CORE means of production. Under socialism the worker is not entitled to the fruits of their labor... the collective is. The idea that the individual is entitled to the fruits of their labor is capitalist, individualist. I've read them, and the theory goes out the door every time it's been applied, in the real world what is an isn't private property is what the state says it is. A car can easily be used to make money, capitalist love it...leftist despise it and do all they can to kill it in the US. It's called Uber/Lyft, taxis. A computer is arguably the most powerful means of production in the 21st century and without a doubt the most insane market access machine humanity has ever seen. It's more than just a porn machine. Your failure to recognize what computers and the internet even are explains why you're a socialist. My father is from N. Korea LOL lie to someone else who's totally ignorant of the reality of communism. All communist talk about is eating the rich and sticking it to anyone who's got more than they deem necessary. No communist is ok with Trump owning 17 jets.

[@kingo8914]

@@darkgardener9577 you just spit out so many of the same regurgitated anti-socialist arguments socialists hear on a daily basis. It’s impossible to argue with someone who has no understanding of socialism and can’t differentiate between fundamental concepts of it. You should really read marx