-Sets up problematic hypothetical that people are not in fact advocating for

-Destroy strawman

Wow, you’re so good at arguing and abstraction!

Sarcasm aside, you’re wrong about everything, from your weird council thing to the idea that demand can’t be predicted before price markers. Central Planning is not at all like what you’ve painted it as. The USSR managed constant growth even with planning by hand, in the age of computers where Amazon and Walmart predict demand before it appears this isn’t an issue.

You have a lot of history to dig through, as well as logistics, before you make such a terribly ignorant statement like that.

What policies?

Socialism isn’t welfare.

Hundreds of Millions have died under tyrannical Capitalism built on the sentiment you’re expressing here. No Communist wants to hold people down, they want to build people up. It’s Capitalists that want to hold people down, as without doing so the bourgeoisie would not exist.

By that definition, there aren’t many Tankies on this platform at all. I haven’t seen a single person uncritically glorifying any of those states.

It’s pretty simple. Most MLs critically support ML states. Almost all of them, for example, hate that Stalin banned homosexuality. At the same time, they can also appreciate how both Mao and the USSR doubled life expectancy and ended famine. By metrics, both states improved rapidly.

As an Anarchist, you can learn a lot from MLs on how to actually get stuff done. Anarchism is a beautiful dream currently, outside of fringe cases like Revolutionary Catalonia it hasn’t actually existed to a meaningful extent. I’m not saying you should become an ML, but MLs typically take their routes because it gets results, even if the Means aren’t pretty at all.

I’m saying this as a non-ML Marxist.

Sankara was a supporter of the USSR and a Marxist-Leninist. Sankara isn’t a non-tankie just because he didn’t live to the tankie phase, he was always acting as an ML. If that makes you sympathize more with MLs, or makes you hate Sankara as you do tankies, either is your choice.

Not even that, even finding loopholes or ways to sneak in the profit motive at the expense of the consumer.

Wonder how they are going to twist this into somehow being even more anti-consumer.

Is whether or not something is “authoritarian” to you simply determined by vibes, or is it actual actions? By all measures, you should hate Sankara as well. Be consistent.

It’s more that blending doesn’t actually fix the issues with Capitalism. That’s a take by someone who doesn’t actually know why Socialists are Socialists and Communists and just heard about Social Democrscy.

Every time Apple tried to make the iPhone 32 it failed. It can never exist because there is no iPhone 32. History is over and humanity cannot progress. I am very smart.

You do realize that forces in one direction do not entirely prevent actions in the opposite, correct?

That’s a lot of gesturing and exactly 0 explanation, because you’re full of shit and don’t know what you’re talking about.

So you can’t actually challenge the premise of anything I’ve said, you just say “you’re wrong” then mald.

A. The US is on friendlier terms with Sweden and Finland and serves as a peacemaker. You didn’t challenge this, you added unrelated bullshit.

B. Not an actual challenge, US presence is a dominant force in the world of geopolitics, and denial of that is delusional.

C. No, not false. The fact that Finland and Sweden have militaries doesn’t mean US presence isn’t a deterrent against conflict. You have a child’s understanding of geopolitics and the role of NATO.

D. Again, not what I said, so again, not a challenge.

You’re delusional and have a child’s understanding of geopolitics.

Which of the following is false?

A. The US spends more money and has a much larger military force than Sweden and Finland

B. US presence in the geopolitical space serves as a deterrent against possible aggression against any countries on good terms with the US

C. If a deterrent like the US did not exist, other countries would have to spend more money to continue protecting themselves effectively

D. Just because Finland and Sweden have militaries and neutrality practices does not mean that the US no longer exists as a global peacemaker against aggression towards countries on friendly terms with it

Please tell me which of these is an alternative reality. I can then educate you on why you’re wrong and we can move on.

Yes, Finland and Sweden both spend money and effort as deterrence. Not as much as they would have to if the US didn’t exist.

Is global politics a mutually exclusive game to you? Does “nuance” not exist in your vocabulary?

No, I said precisely neither of those.

Finland and Sweden do in fact have militaries. They don’t have to spend nearly as much money on them because the US exists as a global deterrent. If the US was not a global deterrent, then Finland and Sweden would have to spend more money on their militaries.

Social Democracy is not when the US spends money on military. Social Democracy is just Capitalism but the government does some stuff, which solves none of the actual problems of Capitalism.

Social Democracy as found in the Nordic Countries only exists because these countries do not have to spend as much on their militaries, and practice economic Imperialism a la Nestlé where these companies practice brutal Imperialism of developing countries.

This isn’t a difficult concept to understand. Yes, Social Democracies are generally better for their own citizens, but are parasitic in nature.

Lying? In what way? Is it a lie to say that the US as a peacemaking, Imperialist force with military supremacy and war deterrent has an impact on what other countries spend on their military?

Is it a lie to say that Finland spends less both in total and as a percentage of GDP on their military than the US does?

Is it a lie to say that Nordic countries have companies like Nestlé where the working conditions and environmental damage done to developing countries are massive, yet workers within said Nordic countries are generally treated well?

Is it a lie to say that Marx specifically mentioned the concepts of Social Democracy as insufficient and therefore Communists aren’t just blind people who haven’t discovered magical Capitalism but the government does some stuff yet none of the issues with Capitalism are actually solved?

All in all, you’re painfully unaware of how economics or politics works.

I never said they had no armies, but they both spend much less than the US does as a percentage of GDP.

Again, you can’t actually refute the points I made. Modern Nordic Social Democracy doesn’t actually solve the issues Communists take with Capitalism, it only makes the downsides slightly more bearable. It still relies on economic Imperialism to export shitty labor conditions to developing countries to poach local resources, and still generally relies on the US spending so much more on their military both percentage wise and in total.

Your point that Communists just haven’t discovered Social Democracy is ludicrous, anyone who has spent 5 minutes reading Marx will know about Social Democracy’s issues systemically. Simply batting for the team with the highest standard of living without giving any critical thought as to why these countries have the highest standard of living is primary education level political and economic thought.

This is incredibly inaccurate, Marx talks at length why Social Democracy isn’t enough and merely supports the status quo, preventing the liberation of the Proletariat.

Communists are typically critical of Nordic Social Democracy as they can only exist due to US Military supremacy as a peacemaker (so they don’t have to have a large military budget), and economic Imperialism via corporations like Nestlé exporting shitty working conditions. Even then, they are still seeing increasing disparity.

I’m not even a tankie, this is just basic Marx.