• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

CEPS Meme and Satire Megathread v2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
Factualist said:
Most figures include death by starvation and other indirect causes and capital punishment for all crimes, not just political ones. You can't just say that literally every person who dies in a country was killed by the ruling ideology.

This guy on AskHistorians has a good analysis with sources:

r/AskHistorians - Is the Black Book of Communism an accurate source?

44 votes and 5 comments so far on Reddit
coinsh.red coinsh.red

If you use the same logic that people used to come up with the 100 million figure, capitalism has killed far more people:
Click to expand...

I hope this doesn't turn into a debate, and by no means am I trying to cause an argument ... remember this is a "fun" thread" haha. We are all friends here! No matter what political affiliation, race, religion, gender, etc. etc. you are.

Capitalism is the economic system based on individual private property rights, requiring a ban on the initiation of violent force. If someone blames some violent incident on capitalism, they do not understand what capitalism is.

Capitalism is responsible for bringing hundreds of millions of people out of abject poverty. It has, in fact, brought peace. No two countries that both have a McDonald's franchise have ever gone to war with one another. Not only is war a massive violation of the private property rights of the people in all warring nations, both the attacking and defending nations, not only is war a massive use of force in violation of basic capitalist principles, war destroys capital. Factories are bombed, capital is diverted away from production for consumers to war production, and people who could be both workers and consumers are killed.

It is said that if soldiers are not to cross borders, goods MUST. Free trade promotes peace. When there is an international division of labor and countries depend on one another for necessary resources, they have a strong motive to NOT go to war with one another. (If the Iraq war was for oil, how well did that turn out? How much of Iraq's oil got to America?) International capitalism results in commerce, which brings people together in peace. People learn one another's languages and cultures. They learn to see one another as people, and appreciate their differences. You need to be polite to engage in trade.

Capitalism has put an end to famine. There has never been a wide scale famine in any industrialized nation since the Industrial Revolution. All famines were caused by governments violating the private property foundation of capitalism. The Irish Catholics who died in the Potato Famine had been forbidden from owning land. India was under the rule of the East India Company, which was a monopoly established by the British government. Famines in African countries like Ethiopia happened under communist regimes. And now Venezuela, which used to be a wealthy country in more capitalist times, is suffering food shortages under its present socialist government. Mao implemented some really crazy industrialization policies which destroyed China's agricultural capacity, resulting in famines.

Not only is it NOT fair to say that capitalism has killed more people than socialism, the exact opposite is true. Capitalism SAVES lives.
 
MGxHO3C.png


eh europeans :rolleyes:
 
Chris42393 said:
No two countries that both have a McDonald's franchise have ever gone to war with one another
Click to expand...

This is an interesting adage but not true. I don't necessarily like Snopes all that much but they back this article up pretty well. Whether it's true or not is kind of nitpicking though I realize that's not the point. Also, I wholeheartedly disagree with your premise but I don't feel like this is the right thread to have a debate. Maybe we can hash this out elsewhere but I'd rather not. I can tell there probably isn't going to be a meeting of the minds here on this particular issue so we might as well focus on common ground instead of getting into it. Maybe that sounds like a cop out but I'd rather keep things positive than have a fruitless argument. I've said my piece and you've said yours, might as well get back to memes :)
 
Factualist said:
This is an interesting adage but not true. I don't necessarily like Snopes all that much but they back this article up pretty well. Whether it's true or not is kind of nitpicking though I realize that's not the point. Also, I wholeheartedly disagree with your premise but I don't feel like this is the right thread to have a debate. Maybe we can hash this out elsewhere but I'd rather not. I can tell there probably isn't going to be a meeting of the minds here on this particular issue so we might as well focus on common ground instead of getting into it. Maybe that sounds like a cop out but I'd rather keep things positive than have a fruitless argument. I've said my piece and you've said yours, might as well get back to memes :)
Click to expand...
Sounds good :)
 
Chris42393 said:
We're just going to have to agree to disagree. And I'll leave it at that. :) I'm not trying to get into a debate about who kills more people. This is simply a "meme" thread.
Click to expand...
facts dont care about your feelings, bub; they dont need your approval, agreement, or consent to be true. there's a word for the refusal to believe facts and accept objective reality... and like with all other words whose definitions perfectly describe you and others like you, its one you certainly take offense at people accurately and correctly using it to describe you since its definitions fits your actions perfectly.

and yet, rather than doing the intelligent and obvious thing and, you know, taking actions to ensure that these words you find oh so offensive no longer correctly and accurately describe you and people like you, you'd rather rage and flip your shit when people correctly and accurately point out that you and your actions are described by the definitions of these words.
 
Last edited:
tathra said:
facts dont care about your feelings, bub; they don't need your approval, agreement, or consent to be true. there's a word for the refusal to believe facts and accept objective reality... and like with all other words whose definitions perfectly describe you and others like you, its one you certainly take offense at people accurately and correctly using it to describe you since its definitions fits your actions perfectly.

and yet, rather than doing the intelligent and obvious thing and, you know, taking actions to ensure that these words you find oh so offensive no longer correctly and accurately describe you and people like you, you'd rather rage and flip your shit when people correctly and accurately point out that you and your actions are described by the definitions of these words.
Click to expand...
You having a stroke or something?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top