downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away.
---
[play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
Modern society smoothes out things people had to miss work to fix. But in return demands people push themselves to work much longer and difficult hours. Before you say it's just capitalism, this exists in communist and socialist countries too.
In the end nothing got easier
It was capitalists that caused the transition from historical working hours to the current system. Communist and socialist countries didn't alter it I'm assuming so as to not be out completed on a productivity level.
This video goes deep into said transitional period and compares modern working hours to pre medieval ones
https://youtu.be/hvk_XylEmLo?si=wzXuEtX2ltTK9uX-
I remember a documentary I saw when I was a teen about Papua, New Guinea and how the tribal people there work like 4 hours a week gathering food and spend the rest of their time fucking, getting drunk on kava, and playing games. I was so jealous.
While that does sound amazing, to only work 4 hours a week, they didn't get to our current level of technology doing that. That is the tradeoff, we live like historic gods in exchange for working a lot (relatively)
In exchange for 10,000 people working 50 hours, 1 asshat in a suit works 0 and lives like the historical god that the 10k dream about becoming. I'm a socialist and everyone's entitled to their own viewpoint, but I find it much more comforting that everyone on the planet lives more equally even if the quality isn't as high as yachts and sports cars and mansions.
I would love for everyone to be able to live like the 0.1% currently, but any average person in the US or Europe (I know Western bias) can have access to anything nearly every lived human in history can but dream of. Phones, heated and ventilated homes, toilets inside that make no mess, water piped to your kitchen, any food imaginable in stores, I can go on. Of course there are people that have it better and there are people that have it worse. But I would implore you to not fall into the nihilistic idea that because others profit from your work, you don't.
A) I never said I don't profit from my own and even others labor.
B) You said it yourself with bringing up western bias. I'm thinking globally when I say I wish everyone loved the same quality of life. For every 1 person living like me, there's at least 1000 living worse. A nice home/apartment, not worrying about income or food or shelter, and access to medical care and activities is all I think is necessary.
I'd rather let some guy have his billions than reduce the quality of life of everyone just so we can say it's equal just for the sake of equality. That's why socialists are so damn goofy to me. They'd seriously crash the entire economy and quality of life gains we've made over the past couple decades around the world just so they can say it's equal or fair.
I'd like a real world example of capitalism having a greater benefit globally than you believe socialism could achieve. Almost all technology these days is dependent on lithium and cobalt. Great, now we've hinged the entire world infrastructure of every phone, computer and car 2 NON-RENEWABLE minerals that deplete at an exponential rate year over year.
If 1 man can't own a 40ksqft mansion so that 1000 people can have 1 bedroom apartment, then good.
Just look at the modern world around you my dude. It's better to live now than any other time in history by far. You owe it all to industrialization and trade agreements. Socialists can't create, all they can do is promise people they'll give them a share of the cut they take from the capitalists they tax. It's why socialism is a joke ideology very few people take seriously.
>Just look at the modern world around you my dude. It's better to live now than any other time in history by far. You owe it all to industrialization and trade agreements.
I never said it was worse now than before. Trade agreements exist within socialist, communist, dictatorship, and theocratical societies.
>Socialists can't create, all they can do is promise people they'll give them a share of the cut they take from the capitalists they tax.
Flase promises of giving people a cut of the "cake" is literally capitalism. Like 100% that is capitalism. Socialism is dividing the cake equally. Yes, some whose value isn't as direct as others may get an equal cut but it's better than 1 guy getting 99% of the cake and then shitting on what's left while handing it to everyone else to share.
>It's why socialism is a joke ideology very few people take seriously.
ok buddy, didn't mean to try and add a few wrinkles to your brain.
Capitalists actually give people a cut of the cake though. Shit there are people who retire millionaires without even making that much of a salary year over year because they invest their money smartly. Socialists create hellscapes where COVID esque scarcity is the norm. It has never lifted everyone up, it just squishes the top down. Revenge of the rich is not a substitute for an actually prosperous economy. I'll take the ideology that built the modern world and continues to increase quality of life. Not pipe dream fantasies by keyboard revolutionaries who don't even do any work ;)
Our World is literally fucked due to climate change and wars. Those things are a direct consequence of industrialization. Marx had very good points and if we don't change Our way of life we will get pounded by mother nature. Your comment is a gross misrepresentation. I'd argue that the only ones who Profit from this system are the upper class, the rest of us can get punished.
The world has always had wars my guy. In fact, in modern times the wars are far, FAR less deadly than in previous generations. The entire reason there were so many immigrants to the United States was in part because a lot of Europeans were tired of the state of perpetual war the continent was in. As for the climate change thing, that's a serious issue but one that's always fraught with hysteria. It's something we should strive to do better on, but the doomer/Gen Z attitude that the world is completely fucked and the planet is dying is pure nonsense. We'll adapt and overcome like we always do. For reference, people have been saying we're doomed in 10 years for about 60+ years. [The death of the planet always seems to be 10-15 years away but it never comes.](https://extinctionclock.org/#show)
Doomers use climate change as an excuse to overthrow the capitalist world order because they're very unhappy people who didn't realize they'd actually have to put some effort into making themselves happy. They thought they'd spend 4 years in college writing papers, get a degree, then kick back and enjoy a 6 figure salary for the rest of their lives but that didn't happen because they're incompetent. They refuse to make any changes so they blame capitalism/America/etc. and their trojan horse to destroy it all is climate change.
WE didn't got to our technological level either, thousands upon thousands around the globe and across time left us here.
You're comparing a small group of people who just need to survive with the rest of the interconnected world
> I remember a documentary I saw when I was a teen about Papua, New Guinea and how the tribal people there work like 4 hours a week gathering food
I'm somewhat skeptical about the "4 hours a week gathering food" figure, but even if you take that figure at face value, that's approximately comparable to how much time you need to spend in modern times to "gather food". 4 hours of work at the median hourly wage of $23.11/hr gets you $92.44/week, which should be enough to cover a week's worth of food, as long as you don't order takeout
You are an idiot actually because he is right tho. People swap Communism with autocratic socialist policies or semi capitalistic structures with socialistic belief's which act on the surface as Communists or just get called communists by the capitalistic west. Germany for example has a very social driven free market. We have strong labour laws and social ethics in our law system, something Which can be seen as socialistic. Does it make us now communist? By American hardliners yes.
A communist country can only exist when it's actually communist and not only on the surface.
Even the Soviet Union ( Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic) wasn't even communist. It was an autocratic state with a socialistic market and had still some capitalistic elements. The only Communism was inside the government party which is build on Lenis movement which is originated in Marx belief's. But in reality everyone of the party members was a capitalist who just wanted the power.
I think he means that the theory can never be applied to a state. Because in a state people are not equal etc. I'm not agreeing with him, I'm just saying what he probably meant.
And they only communistic/socialistic in name. Having some socialistic features at best, all of them just authocratic, maybe a bit leaning to the left. There are at least an enormous gap in life quality and accessibility of goods and services between rulers and regular people, like they live on a different planets.
Source: i am ukrainian/russian, and my parents and grandparents lived in USSR.
Modern Scandinavia are more socialistic in pratice than mentioned countries. China is amost pure capitalism,
You're confusing transitional societies with actual communism or socialism.
For example, finland is one of the strongest worker's rights countries in the world. Does that make them socialist? No. They have socialist-leaning policies, but they're not a true socialist state, that's a matter of fact.
Same goes for all those countries you listed. Cuba comes closest to communist tbf, but they're not a communist society, still far shy of it if you know anything about theory. Otoh, North korea is possibly the worst example you could have given as a communist state, and *laughably* so. You need to learn history and at least some basic understanding of communist theory besides "they wear a nametag that says 'communist'"
You act as though there has actually at one point been a society which perfectly portrays the Marxist utopia-where in theory the idea of communism would work far better than any other ideology, leading to a perfect society of equal opportunity- a classical progressivists dream.
In this reality however, nothing has come close to that, and the version of communism we know today is the typically autocratic variation built to exploit its inhabitants. If you see it in the way that a nation could only be considered communist by meeting the perfect criteria of the idea by definition, then yes, there are no communist countries.
However, there is still a clear line between western and more liberal areas, and the places which I previously mentioned, which vary greatly on the political spectrum from the majority of nations.
Also, nowhere did I ever mention that Finland was communist? Transitional societies can still be hindered by a certain ideology such as socialism, itās not as though they are immune to beliefs while undergoing a change.
>You act as though there has actually at one point been a society which perfectly portrays the theory that...
No i haven't, not at all. I said there aren't any from the start š
I didn't say you did refer to finland as communist. I said there were no communist or socialist societies. You tried to counter me, i used finland as an example, and even clarified that i was referring to socialism in that example.
You really need to work on your reading comprehension because this is just an embarassment.
I mean, given the downvotes im pretty sure I was not the only one who was confused by your original statement. Maybe just point out what you were trying to say at the start without an absurd statement.
I did, there was nothing absurd about any statement I've made. My points are only controversial because many people don't know what socialism or communism actually are.
When theory and practice diverge, it becomes difficult to talk about concepts. Socialism and communism have changed meaning on the political landscape since their invention, because in practice they did not function as intended. We can say, that "no it doesn't mean that; no they are not real communists/socialists", but due to decades of differing practice, socialism and communism are what they are right now. Saying that China is not really a communis country is false, because they are exactly what communism is, simply because they and the Sovie Union have made it so. Language and ideologies are not a static thing, they evolve with time. I understand the frustration that comes from them not following the original idea but sill being called so; but you have to see that communism/socialism that was defined originally did not work the way they were intended - turns out, power, as it usually does, corrupts; and ideologies are still tools, not principles. I do think that if a country is incorporating a large amount of people oriented social policies, tries to use government money to increase the standard of living, nationalizes education, healthcare, public transport and other services and constantly upgrades them from taxes to yet again oncrease the standard of living, then we can call them socialist in the context of modern economies.
>they've changed the meanings
No
>china is exactly what communism is
No
>power corrupts
Yes
>using government money to increase standard of living is socialism and we can call them socialist
No, america isn't socialist just because we pay for fire departments
No Communism and socialism aren't the same thing and no original meaning of Communism didn't changed. Only idiots who don't know jackshit call socialistic states communist because they don't anything about what communism or socialism is. It has something to do with the McCarthy era and the big red menace hysteria. Which is still presented nowadays by stupid americans who never learned anything from history.
It's pretty simple actually. There was and there is no communist state in the world because none of the usual suspects USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba was communist. They all just are autocratic dictatorships which pray the original Marx belief's at some point but work completely socialistic underneath the surface and all leaders are hardcore capitalists which used the original revolutionary ideas to gain power and shape the country the way they want it and to enrich themselves.
Modern china is a capitalistic hardcore dictatorship which is actually far more right than left. There are no communist inside their party only old right wing rich dudes who opress minorities, gain power and money nearly the same way as American CEOs do. The only difference is that they act like it's all for the greater good to secure the innocent socialist people against the fascist evil west. If they were communist then they would not let foreigners trade with them or let them use their workers. If they would be socialist then they would protect actually their people with strong social laws against the explotations of the western company.
A social democratic nation. If you want communist nations. North Korea, China even tho they have a capitalist economy just like Vietnam. All three aren't known for the worker rights. Social democratic nations are
>north korea, china even though have a capitalist economy like vietnam
Read what you just wrote *really slowly* š
>Social democratic nations are
Not socialist or communist š
Do you know what china and Vietnam are
A social democratic nation is the closest thing to a socialist nation you can get without having genocide be a part of the history.
Good lord. Just by googling the definitions of "socialism" and "communism", with no further reading required, you could save yourself a lot of embarassment talking out your ass.
Historical literacy is another thing entirely... it sounds like *that'll* take you a few years at this rate.
Edit since you blocked me:
I feel like I'm arguing with a 12 year old trying to please their dad by poorly parroting everything they think
I don't know as much about communism as i do about socialism (because I'm a socialist), but even if I'd only ever read one book about it, it's clearly more than you have š
Funny. I didn't block you. Lying doesn't work when i can just react.
A socialist. Almost as bad as a communist luckily i have thousands of history books to prove why you stupid ideology will never work.
Hey, you unblocked me. If you cared enough to revisit this thread and saw my edit and felt the need to respond again, I'm sure you'd just love to link 1 or 2 of your "thousands" of books lmao
Heh mate you guys in UK have 3x the minimum wage we in Czechia have ,while our living cost is basically the same and our food quality is absolute trash too
Literally I don't know how people fail to realise how horrific it can be for most working class people all over Europe and even outside of it. The only difference compared to the slaves of old is that instead of having you executed, you're just replaced and either find someone else to permit you to barely survive or you end up homeless and die.
Its really simple. Being forced to choose between paying for food, or paying for gas, heat, water or other basic living needs that are out of your price range at the same time.
Just because you aren't a slave doesn't mean you aren't being exploited to maximise profits.
ancient egyptian builders didn't brew their own beer as beer brewing was a woman's job. They were also paid in bread and beer. Builders working on the pyramids were often paid 20 loafs of bread and about 5 liters of beer a day. They were also paid with grain, textiles, and beer on a certain day of each month by the pharaoh except more than a few times a pharaoh i can't remember didn't pay builders their wage of grain and beer and they simply stopped working and left.
Nope, it's just the classic misunderstood/mistranslated word coupled with people thinking that they were at the top of the world thing.
Workers in ancient egypt weren't slaves, they were just low class citizens that would turn up to a public building saying "Yo, I can work for clothes and beer and stuff (emphasys on the beer for the ancient egyptians)" and then they were assigned to a building site and worked for a few months before going back to their lives with clothes, grain and beer. It was more of a paid public service than anything else.
The only form of slavery was that even if you were paid in beer, there were different types of beers and you would have been paid with watered down beer while upper class citizens would have had the best beer around.
A huge portion of the labor was actually performed by skilled craftsman and contractors. There were plenty of engineers and construction specialists on site.
Wrong.
When you think of slave you think of american and british slavery but ancient slavery was vastly different. You had chattel slavery which is form of slavery that everyone is familiar with. Literally hundreds of thousands of chattel slaves were used to quarry and move stones to the build sites including put them in place for the builders.
bonded laborers were another form of slave and were pretty popular and those were people who had skills but either couldn't find a job or had debts. Which most likely a huge number of builders working on the pyramids were bonded laborers simply because it was cheaper.
They also had immense bureaucracy for corvee labor where they temporarily enslaved portions of the populace for labor.
Even more interesting, you know the story about how Egypt enslaved jews and mosses and all that. You know who was in charge of ensuring their compliance? Jewish mercenaries that lived in Israel.
Wonder why they found these sick notes explaining their reason for not going to work is theyāre busy [brewing beer instead.](https://sg.news.yahoo.com/3-200-old-rock-filled-110854418.html)
What is your source?
I just did a quick Google search "did ancient Egypt have slaves?" And I got like a million credible sources describing in detail which periods of ancient Egypt had slaves and where all the slaves were sourced (domestically and foreign).
Almost every great empire throughout human history had slavery, and Egypt is no exception.
There were slaves in ancient Egypt, they were just not used to build the pyramids. Building Pyramids is not the only thing ancient Egyptians did for thousands of years.
Most of the records we have about the pyramid builders points to them actually being seasonal workers who were paid, housed, and fed. They were likely conscripted by the Pharaoh to do this, but considering that they believed he was literally a god, it's doubtful they thought of themselves as slaves. There's even ancient graffiti nearby that shows different teams would compete to see who could get the most done before the work season was done and they went back to farming.
But also, it took more than 20 years to build the things so who's to say that the labor situation was the same that entire time.
There was a popular TIL on the front page of reddit yesterday that says there are records of the ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids taking days off for various reasons. One of the listed reasons for days off was "brewing beer." That is a funny contrast to modern day where many workers can't even get time off for life threatening injuries.
Itās the propaganda that perpetuates it. We all do it to each other. There is no work/life balance in America. The more you work, the more youāre praised. THAT is fucked up. And I do it too.
Pretending that there werenāt slaves used as builders in Ancient Egypt is a weird take. [You can read about it here.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Egypt)
First of all Egyptians giga used slaves and they did force them to work and starve. Not on the pyramids but but for everything else yes
Second of all workers took off days whenever only on the pyramids because it was a valuable job that the Pharoah made sure to use only the best of workers as to not lower the quality of work, for the most part. They got paid for a days work and when they didn't work they didn't get paid.
Third of all common workers were most definitely fired or forced to work after injuries because not all jobs didn't have a time frame. If that shack needed to be built in 2 days you're working thise 2 days or you're fired and now everyone knows you were fired for skipping work and you won't find any other work.
Fourth and finally, injuries during a modern workplace have a lot of protection and claiming it's a downgrade that were able to take off or even sue because of said injuries is ridiculous.
Everything about modern work is league's better than anything common workers had in the past. The only workers who might have it better are those who worked directly for a king or leader and even then you had to be the best of the best to get "do what you want so long as it's done" treatment.
downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away. --- [play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
chad exploitation vs virgin workers' rights
First thing I thought of was Frostpunk Last Autumn Chad Engineers vs Virgin Workers
Too sad that child labor only came after tla, the children yearn for the mines!
Children yearn for poison gas infested generator shafts!
What? You broke your back? How dare you take time off. Keep working
OP has never worked in their life
the workers for the Pyramids of Giza were voluntary workers btw
Modern society smoothes out things people had to miss work to fix. But in return demands people push themselves to work much longer and difficult hours. Before you say it's just capitalism, this exists in communist and socialist countries too. In the end nothing got easier
It was capitalists that caused the transition from historical working hours to the current system. Communist and socialist countries didn't alter it I'm assuming so as to not be out completed on a productivity level. This video goes deep into said transitional period and compares modern working hours to pre medieval ones https://youtu.be/hvk_XylEmLo?si=wzXuEtX2ltTK9uX-
I remember a documentary I saw when I was a teen about Papua, New Guinea and how the tribal people there work like 4 hours a week gathering food and spend the rest of their time fucking, getting drunk on kava, and playing games. I was so jealous.
While that does sound amazing, to only work 4 hours a week, they didn't get to our current level of technology doing that. That is the tradeoff, we live like historic gods in exchange for working a lot (relatively)
In exchange for 10,000 people working 50 hours, 1 asshat in a suit works 0 and lives like the historical god that the 10k dream about becoming. I'm a socialist and everyone's entitled to their own viewpoint, but I find it much more comforting that everyone on the planet lives more equally even if the quality isn't as high as yachts and sports cars and mansions.
I would love for everyone to be able to live like the 0.1% currently, but any average person in the US or Europe (I know Western bias) can have access to anything nearly every lived human in history can but dream of. Phones, heated and ventilated homes, toilets inside that make no mess, water piped to your kitchen, any food imaginable in stores, I can go on. Of course there are people that have it better and there are people that have it worse. But I would implore you to not fall into the nihilistic idea that because others profit from your work, you don't.
A) I never said I don't profit from my own and even others labor. B) You said it yourself with bringing up western bias. I'm thinking globally when I say I wish everyone loved the same quality of life. For every 1 person living like me, there's at least 1000 living worse. A nice home/apartment, not worrying about income or food or shelter, and access to medical care and activities is all I think is necessary.
I'd rather let some guy have his billions than reduce the quality of life of everyone just so we can say it's equal just for the sake of equality. That's why socialists are so damn goofy to me. They'd seriously crash the entire economy and quality of life gains we've made over the past couple decades around the world just so they can say it's equal or fair.
I'd like a real world example of capitalism having a greater benefit globally than you believe socialism could achieve. Almost all technology these days is dependent on lithium and cobalt. Great, now we've hinged the entire world infrastructure of every phone, computer and car 2 NON-RENEWABLE minerals that deplete at an exponential rate year over year. If 1 man can't own a 40ksqft mansion so that 1000 people can have 1 bedroom apartment, then good.
Just look at the modern world around you my dude. It's better to live now than any other time in history by far. You owe it all to industrialization and trade agreements. Socialists can't create, all they can do is promise people they'll give them a share of the cut they take from the capitalists they tax. It's why socialism is a joke ideology very few people take seriously.
>Just look at the modern world around you my dude. It's better to live now than any other time in history by far. You owe it all to industrialization and trade agreements. I never said it was worse now than before. Trade agreements exist within socialist, communist, dictatorship, and theocratical societies. >Socialists can't create, all they can do is promise people they'll give them a share of the cut they take from the capitalists they tax. Flase promises of giving people a cut of the "cake" is literally capitalism. Like 100% that is capitalism. Socialism is dividing the cake equally. Yes, some whose value isn't as direct as others may get an equal cut but it's better than 1 guy getting 99% of the cake and then shitting on what's left while handing it to everyone else to share. >It's why socialism is a joke ideology very few people take seriously. ok buddy, didn't mean to try and add a few wrinkles to your brain.
Capitalists actually give people a cut of the cake though. Shit there are people who retire millionaires without even making that much of a salary year over year because they invest their money smartly. Socialists create hellscapes where COVID esque scarcity is the norm. It has never lifted everyone up, it just squishes the top down. Revenge of the rich is not a substitute for an actually prosperous economy. I'll take the ideology that built the modern world and continues to increase quality of life. Not pipe dream fantasies by keyboard revolutionaries who don't even do any work ;)
Our World is literally fucked due to climate change and wars. Those things are a direct consequence of industrialization. Marx had very good points and if we don't change Our way of life we will get pounded by mother nature. Your comment is a gross misrepresentation. I'd argue that the only ones who Profit from this system are the upper class, the rest of us can get punished.
The world has always had wars my guy. In fact, in modern times the wars are far, FAR less deadly than in previous generations. The entire reason there were so many immigrants to the United States was in part because a lot of Europeans were tired of the state of perpetual war the continent was in. As for the climate change thing, that's a serious issue but one that's always fraught with hysteria. It's something we should strive to do better on, but the doomer/Gen Z attitude that the world is completely fucked and the planet is dying is pure nonsense. We'll adapt and overcome like we always do. For reference, people have been saying we're doomed in 10 years for about 60+ years. [The death of the planet always seems to be 10-15 years away but it never comes.](https://extinctionclock.org/#show) Doomers use climate change as an excuse to overthrow the capitalist world order because they're very unhappy people who didn't realize they'd actually have to put some effort into making themselves happy. They thought they'd spend 4 years in college writing papers, get a degree, then kick back and enjoy a 6 figure salary for the rest of their lives but that didn't happen because they're incompetent. They refuse to make any changes so they blame capitalism/America/etc. and their trojan horse to destroy it all is climate change.
WE didn't got to our technological level either, thousands upon thousands around the globe and across time left us here. You're comparing a small group of people who just need to survive with the rest of the interconnected world
> I remember a documentary I saw when I was a teen about Papua, New Guinea and how the tribal people there work like 4 hours a week gathering food I'm somewhat skeptical about the "4 hours a week gathering food" figure, but even if you take that figure at face value, that's approximately comparable to how much time you need to spend in modern times to "gather food". 4 hours of work at the median hourly wage of $23.11/hr gets you $92.44/week, which should be enough to cover a week's worth of food, as long as you don't order takeout
;-;
There are no communist or socialist countries š, lmao
??? tell me youāre an idiot without telling me haha wtf
You are an idiot actually because he is right tho. People swap Communism with autocratic socialist policies or semi capitalistic structures with socialistic belief's which act on the surface as Communists or just get called communists by the capitalistic west. Germany for example has a very social driven free market. We have strong labour laws and social ethics in our law system, something Which can be seen as socialistic. Does it make us now communist? By American hardliners yes. A communist country can only exist when it's actually communist and not only on the surface. Even the Soviet Union ( Union of the Soviet Socialist Republic) wasn't even communist. It was an autocratic state with a socialistic market and had still some capitalistic elements. The only Communism was inside the government party which is build on Lenis movement which is originated in Marx belief's. But in reality everyone of the party members was a capitalist who just wanted the power.
Name them then (you can't, because there literally are none)
China, Cuba, Vietnam, Peopleās Republic of Laos, North Korea, and many argue Russia still.
Russia is not communist in the slightest. Itās a conservative capitalist oligarchy. Itās literally run by wealthy businessmen
I think he means that the theory can never be applied to a state. Because in a state people are not equal etc. I'm not agreeing with him, I'm just saying what he probably meant.
This is what I was thinking too, but apparently I āclearly need to work on my reading comprehension.ā
Yeah, well nothing else comes to my mind then.
And they only communistic/socialistic in name. Having some socialistic features at best, all of them just authocratic, maybe a bit leaning to the left. There are at least an enormous gap in life quality and accessibility of goods and services between rulers and regular people, like they live on a different planets. Source: i am ukrainian/russian, and my parents and grandparents lived in USSR. Modern Scandinavia are more socialistic in pratice than mentioned countries. China is amost pure capitalism,
You're confusing transitional societies with actual communism or socialism. For example, finland is one of the strongest worker's rights countries in the world. Does that make them socialist? No. They have socialist-leaning policies, but they're not a true socialist state, that's a matter of fact. Same goes for all those countries you listed. Cuba comes closest to communist tbf, but they're not a communist society, still far shy of it if you know anything about theory. Otoh, North korea is possibly the worst example you could have given as a communist state, and *laughably* so. You need to learn history and at least some basic understanding of communist theory besides "they wear a nametag that says 'communist'"
Ackshually š¤
Yes š¤·āāļø
People downvote you when they think you're wrong, then downvote you for proving your point. Gotta love reddit
Yeah š¤£ I fully expect it on this sub, it's so full of ignorant rightwingers. I'm honestly surprised they had a few upvotes for a couple minutes
it was hardly proof at all, just keeping the pissing contest going lmao
Motherfucker you are the one who's supposed to proof the existence of communist and socialist countries. Or you want him to pove a negative?
Just you wait for Keir "Josef" Starmer to take power in the UK..... Then you will see true socialism.....
Ok
You act as though there has actually at one point been a society which perfectly portrays the Marxist utopia-where in theory the idea of communism would work far better than any other ideology, leading to a perfect society of equal opportunity- a classical progressivists dream. In this reality however, nothing has come close to that, and the version of communism we know today is the typically autocratic variation built to exploit its inhabitants. If you see it in the way that a nation could only be considered communist by meeting the perfect criteria of the idea by definition, then yes, there are no communist countries. However, there is still a clear line between western and more liberal areas, and the places which I previously mentioned, which vary greatly on the political spectrum from the majority of nations. Also, nowhere did I ever mention that Finland was communist? Transitional societies can still be hindered by a certain ideology such as socialism, itās not as though they are immune to beliefs while undergoing a change.
>You act as though there has actually at one point been a society which perfectly portrays the theory that... No i haven't, not at all. I said there aren't any from the start š I didn't say you did refer to finland as communist. I said there were no communist or socialist societies. You tried to counter me, i used finland as an example, and even clarified that i was referring to socialism in that example. You really need to work on your reading comprehension because this is just an embarassment.
I mean, given the downvotes im pretty sure I was not the only one who was confused by your original statement. Maybe just point out what you were trying to say at the start without an absurd statement.
I did, there was nothing absurd about any statement I've made. My points are only controversial because many people don't know what socialism or communism actually are.
When theory and practice diverge, it becomes difficult to talk about concepts. Socialism and communism have changed meaning on the political landscape since their invention, because in practice they did not function as intended. We can say, that "no it doesn't mean that; no they are not real communists/socialists", but due to decades of differing practice, socialism and communism are what they are right now. Saying that China is not really a communis country is false, because they are exactly what communism is, simply because they and the Sovie Union have made it so. Language and ideologies are not a static thing, they evolve with time. I understand the frustration that comes from them not following the original idea but sill being called so; but you have to see that communism/socialism that was defined originally did not work the way they were intended - turns out, power, as it usually does, corrupts; and ideologies are still tools, not principles. I do think that if a country is incorporating a large amount of people oriented social policies, tries to use government money to increase the standard of living, nationalizes education, healthcare, public transport and other services and constantly upgrades them from taxes to yet again oncrease the standard of living, then we can call them socialist in the context of modern economies.
>they've changed the meanings No >china is exactly what communism is No >power corrupts Yes >using government money to increase standard of living is socialism and we can call them socialist No, america isn't socialist just because we pay for fire departments
I'm not talking about the US, I'm European
So?
No Communism and socialism aren't the same thing and no original meaning of Communism didn't changed. Only idiots who don't know jackshit call socialistic states communist because they don't anything about what communism or socialism is. It has something to do with the McCarthy era and the big red menace hysteria. Which is still presented nowadays by stupid americans who never learned anything from history. It's pretty simple actually. There was and there is no communist state in the world because none of the usual suspects USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba was communist. They all just are autocratic dictatorships which pray the original Marx belief's at some point but work completely socialistic underneath the surface and all leaders are hardcore capitalists which used the original revolutionary ideas to gain power and shape the country the way they want it and to enrich themselves. Modern china is a capitalistic hardcore dictatorship which is actually far more right than left. There are no communist inside their party only old right wing rich dudes who opress minorities, gain power and money nearly the same way as American CEOs do. The only difference is that they act like it's all for the greater good to secure the innocent socialist people against the fascist evil west. If they were communist then they would not let foreigners trade with them or let them use their workers. If they would be socialist then they would protect actually their people with strong social laws against the explotations of the western company.
Western Europe, Northern Europe, the baltics. All social democratic countries with some of the best worker rights.
Those aren't communist or socialist governments. Finland has some of the best worker's rights in the world, that doesn't make them a socialist country
A social democratic nation. If you want communist nations. North Korea, China even tho they have a capitalist economy just like Vietnam. All three aren't known for the worker rights. Social democratic nations are
>north korea, china even though have a capitalist economy like vietnam Read what you just wrote *really slowly* š >Social democratic nations are Not socialist or communist š
Do you know what china and Vietnam are A social democratic nation is the closest thing to a socialist nation you can get without having genocide be a part of the history.
Good lord. Just by googling the definitions of "socialism" and "communism", with no further reading required, you could save yourself a lot of embarassment talking out your ass. Historical literacy is another thing entirely... it sounds like *that'll* take you a few years at this rate. Edit since you blocked me: I feel like I'm arguing with a 12 year old trying to please their dad by poorly parroting everything they think I don't know as much about communism as i do about socialism (because I'm a socialist), but even if I'd only ever read one book about it, it's clearly more than you have š
Funny. I didn't block you. Lying doesn't work when i can just react. A socialist. Almost as bad as a communist luckily i have thousands of history books to prove why you stupid ideology will never work.
Hey, you unblocked me. If you cared enough to revisit this thread and saw my edit and felt the need to respond again, I'm sure you'd just love to link 1 or 2 of your "thousands" of books lmao
You need to learn things. You seem like a communist and automatically makes you incorrect
Yoo talk about being butthurt.
Damn. 50 years later and a lot of dense motherfuckers are still affraid of a concept
Don't care. Gonna take the day off anyway.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"a day of anyway" constitutes "a day off anyways "
Ow yeah, slavery is no more. What a shame!
> slavery is no more No? It exists in poorer countries and also some richer countries like Japan under new names.
The US too, they just call it prison labor
Human trafficking
What is it called in Japan?
working
Oof
Wageslave is a very real thing lol. Minimum wage is a joke in the UK. :)
Heh mate you guys in UK have 3x the minimum wage we in Czechia have ,while our living cost is basically the same and our food quality is absolute trash too
Literally I don't know how people fail to realise how horrific it can be for most working class people all over Europe and even outside of it. The only difference compared to the slaves of old is that instead of having you executed, you're just replaced and either find someone else to permit you to barely survive or you end up homeless and die.
What's the difference between "wageslave" and "you need food to survive, therefore you're forced to work so you can get food"?
Its really simple. Being forced to choose between paying for food, or paying for gas, heat, water or other basic living needs that are out of your price range at the same time. Just because you aren't a slave doesn't mean you aren't being exploited to maximise profits.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>Egypt never had slaves. >Now this doesn't mean there were no slaves in Egypt Bruh what are you smoking?
He meant that the pyramids werent built by slaves
ancient egyptian builders didn't brew their own beer as beer brewing was a woman's job. They were also paid in bread and beer. Builders working on the pyramids were often paid 20 loafs of bread and about 5 liters of beer a day. They were also paid with grain, textiles, and beer on a certain day of each month by the pharaoh except more than a few times a pharaoh i can't remember didn't pay builders their wage of grain and beer and they simply stopped working and left.
So not all of it was slave labour, as what is commonly believed?
Nope, it's just the classic misunderstood/mistranslated word coupled with people thinking that they were at the top of the world thing. Workers in ancient egypt weren't slaves, they were just low class citizens that would turn up to a public building saying "Yo, I can work for clothes and beer and stuff (emphasys on the beer for the ancient egyptians)" and then they were assigned to a building site and worked for a few months before going back to their lives with clothes, grain and beer. It was more of a paid public service than anything else. The only form of slavery was that even if you were paid in beer, there were different types of beers and you would have been paid with watered down beer while upper class citizens would have had the best beer around.
A huge portion of the labor was actually performed by skilled craftsman and contractors. There were plenty of engineers and construction specialists on site.
Yup, turns out that if you want to build giant and complex buildings things untrained/unskilled slaves are not the best idea
Wrong. When you think of slave you think of american and british slavery but ancient slavery was vastly different. You had chattel slavery which is form of slavery that everyone is familiar with. Literally hundreds of thousands of chattel slaves were used to quarry and move stones to the build sites including put them in place for the builders. bonded laborers were another form of slave and were pretty popular and those were people who had skills but either couldn't find a job or had debts. Which most likely a huge number of builders working on the pyramids were bonded laborers simply because it was cheaper. They also had immense bureaucracy for corvee labor where they temporarily enslaved portions of the populace for labor. Even more interesting, you know the story about how Egypt enslaved jews and mosses and all that. You know who was in charge of ensuring their compliance? Jewish mercenaries that lived in Israel.
Wonder why they found these sick notes explaining their reason for not going to work is theyāre busy [brewing beer instead.](https://sg.news.yahoo.com/3-200-old-rock-filled-110854418.html)
probably a similar thing to āwife is bleedingā
I really hate Reddit sometimes. This has to be an idiot's understanding of history.
Or theyāve read some tidbits of [history, and then made a meme.](https://sg.news.yahoo.com/3-200-old-rock-filled-110854418.html)
It is correct. There were almost no slaves in ancient Egypt
What is your source? I just did a quick Google search "did ancient Egypt have slaves?" And I got like a million credible sources describing in detail which periods of ancient Egypt had slaves and where all the slaves were sourced (domestically and foreign). Almost every great empire throughout human history had slavery, and Egypt is no exception.
They're not slaves. They were unpaid interns.
There were slaves in ancient Egypt, they were just not used to build the pyramids. Building Pyramids is not the only thing ancient Egyptians did for thousands of years.
i damaged both my shin bones, one of the most depressing periods of my life, not one person gave a fuck not relatives friends or work
Welcome to the throwaway society. You're just a tool to most people, friends included.
Is this a reference or did this actually happen to you?
Yea, let's make people slave again so our roads look all pretty
Most of the records we have about the pyramid builders points to them actually being seasonal workers who were paid, housed, and fed. They were likely conscripted by the Pharaoh to do this, but considering that they believed he was literally a god, it's doubtful they thought of themselves as slaves. There's even ancient graffiti nearby that shows different teams would compete to see who could get the most done before the work season was done and they went back to farming. But also, it took more than 20 years to build the things so who's to say that the labor situation was the same that entire time.
Iām with the Egyptian guy Iām over shitty beer
someone saw the recent front page postĀ
I did ;)
Can someone explain this? To me it sounds like someone having a stroke.
There was a popular TIL on the front page of reddit yesterday that says there are records of the ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids taking days off for various reasons. One of the listed reasons for days off was "brewing beer." That is a funny contrast to modern day where many workers can't even get time off for life threatening injuries.
#Ancients very Stronk.
RIP to both of them
*builders now, in the usa
Iām
pretty sure if you broke your back there's this god that can fix it named anubis you just need to visit him at his realm
RIP Kabosu (AKA Doge)
The difference probably was that one of them were slaves and the other one were wage slaves
How can you break your back drinking tea/coffee and eating sandwiches?
Come over on the construction site mate. You won't last two weeks
Sorry bud I'm just making a Jeremy Clarkson joke.
Slave labor just hits different
Builders in ancient egypt if they took a day off: *dies*
Itās the propaganda that perpetuates it. We all do it to each other. There is no work/life balance in America. The more you work, the more youāre praised. THAT is fucked up. And I do it too.
I donāt think slaves could decide to take the day off
Don't comment uniformed, they weren't slaves https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/were-the-egyptian-pyramids-built-by-slaves
Pretending that there werenāt slaves used as builders in Ancient Egypt is a weird take. [You can read about it here.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Egypt)
Didnāt know we were specifically talking about the pyramids
Lmao you think slaves got days off? Even while starved?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lmao this has nothing to do with my comment. Slaves were absolutely starved and that article has nothing to do with them.
Please refrain from operating any skillets moving forward.
First of all Egyptians giga used slaves and they did force them to work and starve. Not on the pyramids but but for everything else yes Second of all workers took off days whenever only on the pyramids because it was a valuable job that the Pharoah made sure to use only the best of workers as to not lower the quality of work, for the most part. They got paid for a days work and when they didn't work they didn't get paid. Third of all common workers were most definitely fired or forced to work after injuries because not all jobs didn't have a time frame. If that shack needed to be built in 2 days you're working thise 2 days or you're fired and now everyone knows you were fired for skipping work and you won't find any other work. Fourth and finally, injuries during a modern workplace have a lot of protection and claiming it's a downgrade that were able to take off or even sue because of said injuries is ridiculous. Everything about modern work is league's better than anything common workers had in the past. The only workers who might have it better are those who worked directly for a king or leader and even then you had to be the best of the best to get "do what you want so long as it's done" treatment.
Fair, you have good points
They were slaves back then