Typing it all in caps doesn’t make it not true. Words have meanings, Russia and China both have private corporations run for profit. They do have some socialist policies, but they certainly do not have economic systems characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
If you keep having people tell you “those aren’t real communists”, then just maybe you should reevaluate your definition of Communism.
When did I try to form a Utopia, or call Russia and China a utopia, or call Communist countries utopias? Also, that wasn’t my definition of Communism, it was the American Heritage Dictionary’s (5th edition).
I think what you meant to say was “If countries that have tried to implement Communism consistently add Market Economics, then perhaps Communism is not a self-sufficient system, and as such it is not a comprehensive solution to the ills of Capitalism”. Which wouldn’t change the definition of Communism, but would at least be an argument that makes sense.
Also, as much as I hate to say it, Trump did win the 2016 election. Not the Popular vote mind you, but the election all the same. Unless you mean the 2020 election, in which case I’ll have to go ahead and state what should have been an obvious caveat. When evaluating anything, it’s important to make sure you check your facts and sources.
Saying “maybe you should reevaluate” =/= “must be true”. People did reevaluate if Trump won the 2020 election (a bit too many times frankly), and every time it came up to be a false claim. Just because people keep telling you that you are wrong about the definition of Communism, doesn’t mean every thing others say “must be true”… Frankly that assertion is just stupid.
P.S.
Just curious, do you ever get tired of misrepresenting the positions you are arguing against? Seems like conversations have no where to go when you engage as such.
Typing it all in caps doesn’t make it not true. Words have meanings, Russia and China both have private corporations run for profit. They do have some socialist policies, but they certainly do not have economic systems characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
If you keep having people tell you “those aren’t real communists”, then just maybe you should reevaluate your definition of Communism.
And if you need to incorporate market economics everytime you try to form a utopia, maybe you should reevaluate your definition of Communism.
Next you’re gonna tell me Trump actually won the election. By your logic it must be true, people keep repeating it after all.
When did I try to form a Utopia, or call Russia and China a utopia, or call Communist countries utopias? Also, that wasn’t my definition of Communism, it was the American Heritage Dictionary’s (5th edition).
I think what you meant to say was “If countries that have tried to implement Communism consistently add Market Economics, then perhaps Communism is not a self-sufficient system, and as such it is not a comprehensive solution to the ills of Capitalism”. Which wouldn’t change the definition of Communism, but would at least be an argument that makes sense.
Also, as much as I hate to say it, Trump did win the 2016 election. Not the Popular vote mind you, but the election all the same. Unless you mean the 2020 election, in which case I’ll have to go ahead and state what should have been an obvious caveat. When evaluating anything, it’s important to make sure you check your facts and sources.
Saying “maybe you should reevaluate” =/= “must be true”. People did reevaluate if Trump won the 2020 election (a bit too many times frankly), and every time it came up to be a false claim. Just because people keep telling you that you are wrong about the definition of Communism, doesn’t mean every thing others say “must be true”… Frankly that assertion is just stupid.
P.S. Just curious, do you ever get tired of misrepresenting the positions you are arguing against? Seems like conversations have no where to go when you engage as such.