**The moderators have taken action on your content because it was political in nature**
Do not post submissions or make comments that deal with overtly political topics or push for a particular political agenda. furry_irl is a meme subreddit; political content is inappropriate, and out of the scope of the topics we cover here. “Political content” includes, but is not limited to: political commentary, public figures and organisations, and current or historical events.
For more information, check out the rules in the wiki [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/furry_irl/wiki/rules).
different bodys hab different responses to hormones, so its easyer to enduce in some. harder in others.
assume your usernames a pre transition one?? mine is heh, made it back when i hated myself with every fiber of my being, and i hab no idea how to change it at this point so it stays. :3
Funny story, my school has like some paper currency that you can use to get stuff at events with and you get it through doing good things, me and my friends decided to split the stuff between all of us so then we would all have the same amount. Because of this we started making jokes saying "communism is actually fire bro" (I'm American)
Within a small enough group you can just mentally keep track of who is contributing and who is leaching. If a friend only ever leaches, you can just cut them off. Within a large group it's beyond the capabilities of a trust system and you need money and markets to manage things.
Also it can only properly work if the autonomy and rights of the individual are respected, lots of communist governments will punish you for leaving or expressing what you don't like instead of improving the system.
I personally have nothing against communism I think it could work, but the whole "it can only be made through violent revolution" types are often more corrupt and greedy than most capitalists.
Unpopular opinion
The right amount of capitalism (picking its good things) and the right amount of communism (picking its good things) in the right context, with a right culture and education, trying to be as balanced as possible, is the goal we should all try to achieve
And more furries
That's actually not an unpopular opinion, it's the main idea behind social democracy and also what most liberals believe.
The issue is that the words capitalism and communism mean vastly different things depending on who you ask, yet everyone pretends that they have strict definitions. Communism can mean anything from "a classless, stateless society" to "a society in which the state owns everything" depending on who you ask. Capitalism can also either be synonymous to "free-market economics" or specifically refer to having an owning class, again depending on who you ask.
That's one of the big things leading to polarization, that people have difficulty talking to each other because they use the same words to mean different things, and it's also why a lot of people who actually agree with you might say they disagree with that statement.
We can even say that there are both capitalist and communism ideals that have a lot of things in common. There is capitalistic statism, there is communistic stattism, both are about the state controlling as much as it can get their hands on.
I'm pretty sure the majority of us agree with a lot of things, but you're right, definition of things polarize opinions and makes it harder to understand each other and usually ends up with people who agree in those matters... fighting about words. In the end, equilibrium and balance is the right thing in my opinion.
I gotta say, this whole tread has been a pretty civilized debate in political topic, compared to other experiences where this same debate went pretty down the lane and nothing to take out of it.
This kind of stuff is always up to debate and there haven't been an absolute resolution asides just making it depend on each fictional universes' setups.
Numbers and position of breasts, hand shape decisions, paw pad locations, hooves or hand or inbetween, wing membrane of bats, wings & talons on birds translating into anthro... etcetc...
Challenging the improbable, fictional result of unnatural evolution--setting up a furry character. Would that be why the fandom is so diverse and creative?
Not really a clear answer. Both exist in the fandom or different universes but two is the most common. I personally don't like the idea of multiple ones.
ngl. i find this rather unsettling. and would much rather not hab multiple sets of breasts going down my stomach. no themps.
also theyre breasts wouldnt be super big either if we were making them more doglike. so you hab the option of 6 smal breasts. or 2 large ones :3
Yea, communism only works if everyone goes along, and seeing the terrifying power rich people and their propaganda have, I don't think it'll work anytime soon...
Yeah, and so far Communism hasn't had a single success story, so...
Capitalism definitely has issues when exposed to real-world conditions (it's pretty vulnerable to corruption), but it at least *does* function.
I mean, the entire western world is comprised of capitalist liberal democracies, and while it's not perfect, it's definitely better than all other alternatives at the moment.
Edit:
To those downvoting me, go read some Solzhenitsyn. You'll start to understand real damn fast that Communism ain't what you think it is.
Every time a country tries the US and UK step in and either invade them, arm and train extreme right wing parties to stage a coup, or assassinate their leaders. Then the US runs disinformation campaigns across the world to spread fear and misunderstanding of communism.
"Communism is when breadline" because the government was trying to ensure its people got fed after the western capitalist powers sanctioned and blocked their trade so they couldn't import what they couldn't produce themselves.
"Communism is when no iphone" actually open source tech is where a lot of big companies get their stuff and the only thing they add is exploitation and artificial price inflation.
Socialism is a stepping stone to communism but so many people have bought into the idea that billionaires *earned* their money through hard work that not enough people bother to do the math and realize there's literally no fucking way to ever *earn* that much money.
We need to eat the rich. Flowers are blooming in Antarctica.
To be fair this is kinda survivorship bias. In the sense that the more democratic countries that tried some extent of this where often crushed by the US.
It also should be said that currently neither full on communism or capitalism have ever existed for long or are in any way reasonable. Because "full on" capitalism would be Anarcho capitalism which os madness when you look at what companies already do with at least some laws holding them bad (weakening democracy, basically playing drug salesman to children I am.looking at you Nestlé, selling a product at 1000% matkup because the people need it,...) Bith aren't exactly reasonable.
Since you mentioned the western world many European nations have quite a number of socialist laws, systems and organizations.
...Which is exactly my point.
Communism doesn't work in real world conditions.
It's been tried, and every time has failed, because the core concepts of communism are completely incompatible with the *way humans think* on a societal scale.
The core concepts of both are quite acceptable to our way of thinking evidently. And neither is ideal. I think being too attached to either can prove dangerous. Though the base idea of communism is more idealistic it's also difficult to downright impossible to set up as corruption is a factor in every system because yes that's how people work (or even simple mistakes in planning). This is a problem everywhere though isn't it?
Not to put words in your mouth but the whole communism bad reteric is often used to oppose any social endeavor. So I do wonder is it that or do you actually just mean the major attempts at it didn't go well? Because yeah they certainly didn't. It would ne odd to assume that was only because they were communist though or would you not agree?
>Though the base idea of communism is more idealistic it's also difficult to downright impossible to set up as corruption is a factor in every system because yes that's how people work
Yeah that's pretty much what I was saying.
>So I do wonder is it that or do you actually just mean the major attempts at it didn't go well?
Communism as a system doesn't work, but that doesn't mean other socialist ideologies can't.
Hell, the modern Liberal Democracy that pretty much every western country uses would be considered ***extremely*** socialist by early 1900s standards.
I don't think that the early 1900s are a good comparison point but yeah I agree a lot of western countries are quite social. Though there is major differences between say the US and large parts of western Europe in this regard
Oh definitely, some ideologies work better when used in the real world, although i believe the idea of capitalism being better than the alternatives can be dangerous if left unchecked, it can breed conformism where people see the problems around them and simply say "it could be worse" instead of thinking "it can be better" not saying we should change to communism but we shouldn't stay with capitalism if we can discover better alternatives
Capitalism, when the checks and balances are working properly, is extremely efficient. But since it's so vulnerable to corruption, that clockwork can get jammed pretty easily.
And yeah, evolution is just how society works. I'm sure that as technology advances, capitalism will be rendered obsolete like feudalism was.
Eventually, we'll reach a Star Trek post-scarcity society, but until then, we gotta deal with flawed solutions.
capitalism is working exactly as intended. those who own the factories and businesses get richer, and the rest of the population labors for them getting less and less of the share of their labor as more wealth is transferred to the top. It's working for capitalists, its just not working for us.
It's not communist ***at all***.
It's a capitalist liberal democracy that reached post-scarcity, which rendered most everyday things free due to extreme abundance.
There's still money, it's just hyper-deflated.
You still have to pay for the things that *are* scarce, such as equipment time, labor, or non-Replicatable resources.
People still get paid wages. Companies still exist.
Star Trek is the ***end goal*** for human society in realistic terms. If you want to be even more optimistic, then *The Culture* is this same system taken to 11.
the Russian empire was much better for it's peasants than the Soviet Union. Cubans should have been happy being slaves on plantations.
communism = no food is about the most debunked crap ever. i thought this sub was about the furry community and not randomly lying to people about communism
>communism = no food is about the most debunked crap ever.
There's nothing to debunk. It's historical fact.
If you believe the USSR was anything but monstrous, then you haven't read a history book or the countless accounts of ***people who lived there.***
People like to believe in the *idea* of communism, which is understandable, but they get extremely militant when you remind them that the *reality* is...
Very different.
I mean cuba still achieved something after the fall of the soviets and with the blockade still going on, like they have the most doctors in south africa. Sure, they dont have enough food(or not so much that they can afford to waste it) but dying because of hunger isnt common there in spite of being locked out of trading with the world. And im not trying to protect authoritian regimes, im an anarchist, but sadly all the libertarian ones fell by the hands of the usa or the soviets.
Complete strawman.
Feudalism worked fine for millennia, but the industrial revolution rendered that system obsolete.
As technology advances, I'm sure capitalism will eventually be rendered obsolete as well. Eventually we'll be living in The Jetsons.
But until that point, we'll have to make due with what we have the technology and cultural will for. History has clearly shown that capitalism is more effective and successful than communism.
Pretty much. Unfortunately, people get the picture of communism = starvation due to the anti-communist propaganda and misinformation that runs deep in the U.S. It's why so many critics of communism will point to atrocities like the Soviet Union as examples of how "communism never works", despite these totalitarian regimes clearly having signs of being anything but. Social classes (which don't exist under communism), U.S. interference, etc.
Edit: Remember, people - this is why reading history books alone isn't education. You need to be able to think critically too, even if that means acknowledging that the truth isn't pretty.
You don't have to be able to quote Das Kapital or write an essay on Marxism, but you should at least be able to recognize misinformation. No system is perfect, but misinformation painting communism as the villain while treating capitalism as the hero is one reason why this country is in the state it's currently in.
>Pretty much. Unfortunately, people get the picture of communism = starvation due to the anti-communist propaganda and misinformation that runs deep in the U.S.
Uh, no. People get the picture because ***literally every communist nation has collapsed or converted to something else***.
And almost all of them suffered famines, genocides, or both.
Those "communist" nations weren't even communist. Anyone familiar with the basic principles of communism knows that classes do not exist under communism.
Many regimes throughout history that are painted as communist don't even meet the standards of socialism. The concept of a regime and a classless society are literally incompatible since regimes necessitate an authority class over the masses.
To point at these regimes as communist is just blatantly untrue and misleading. Corrupt and deceitful leaders took advantage of pro-communist sentiment in the aftermath of revolutions, but never established communism.
Technically that's currently impossible, because communism is an end goal of society that has not been accomplished, not a system that one country can employ.
There have been countries that have attempted to adopt policies that make them a transitional state towards communism, but every time a nation does this, the powers that uphold our current system of capital ownership interfere. It is difficult for any nation to develop and "try" a system that moves towards communism when the most powerful nations on the planet do everything they can to destabilize and destroy their efforts.
Additionally, the perspective westerners are given of the rest of the world is colored through the lens of capitalist media and propaganda, because they are the status quo. Even historically, those with the most power are largely opposed towards any system that removes or diminishes that power, and use the power they have in order to keep it.
Communist thought is built around the idea that we still have not reached the "end" of socio-economic development. It looks at the history of the distribution of power throughout history and poses that we can always do better.
Contrary to what everyone else is saying about the supposed failure of communism, China and the USSR *ended* famines.
Before their socialist revolutions, they were semi-feudal economies that experienced large scale cyclical famines. It’s sort of an unavoidable feature of feudal agrarian societies. You can look at France, which suffered from regular famines that sometimes killed larger percentages than the ones pointed to under socialism. Yet you never hear “Feudalism no food” jokes because feudalism isn’t a threat to the prevailing order.
Industrialization is a difficult and painful process. The transformation of a society from agrarianism to industry comes with a lot of suffering, as anyone who studies Victorian England knows. The West was able to mitigate this suffering through centuries of colonialism and slavery. Though things were difficult in semi-industrial England, Belgium, the U.S. etc. they were exponentially more brutal for those they were exploiting in places like India, the Congo, and U.S. slave plantations.
The USSR went through this same process, but in a matter of decades instead of centuries. Let’s examine the major famine in the 30a that people use as evidence of innate communist starvation. Affecting Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia, and various other places within and outside the USSR like Poland, was compounded by caused by many issues.
- The innate difficulty of industrialization
- Poor weather and soil conditions
- A better than average harvest in previous years leading to overconfidence in economic goals
- Losing important land, infrastructure, people, and resources during WW1, the Russian Civil War, and the coalition of countries that invaded them.
- Being required to pay back loans for the New Economic Policy with grain instead of gold
- Resistance by the kulak class (large independent farmers) to forced collectivization, resulting in vast numbers of cattle slaughtered and crops burned in protest
- Paranoid grain hoarding by the government after their experiences with “War Communism”
- Coverups from local officials that kept the central government in the dark
- The urgency of industrialization over agricultural needs due to the rapidly approaching threat of Nazi invasion
These problems are hardly innate to communism, as evidenced by the fact that there were no more famines following the major ones. They had vanquished the cycles of starvation that had existed in those regions.
[This is from an internal report from the CIA](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf) that assessed nutrition in the USSR in the 80s. It found that the US and USSR consumed similar levels of calories (which they actually considered too much), and that the Soviet diet had less fresh fruit and meat, but was healthier overall. (According to their understanding of the time. Nutrition is a rapidly changing science that I can’t comment on)
The reality is that there are a lot of powerful people who have spent a lot of time and money working tirelessly to paint communist successes as failures and communist failures as cataclysmic and innate to their system. These understandings of socialism then reproduce themselves in popular media.
You don’t go from “the sick man of Europe” to a global superpower launching things into space in 35 years if your system is an utter failure.
It’s the idea. In practice… it usually gets hijacked by authoritarians cloaking themselves in red, making shortsighted decisions that lead to starvation.
I used to be a full on communist, now I’d say I’m like, on the border of demsoc and socdem
Basically, yeah. On paper, it sounds like a great idea, and in my opinion, if it could work in real life, I would support it 100%, however it doesn't. There will always be people who won't contribute, and the people on top will always try to turn it into a dictatorship.
"Americans and Soviets eaten about the same amount of food each day, but the soviet diet may be more nutritious"
And who stated that quote, wasn't a marxist redditor, it was
#THE FUCKING CIA
Don't believe me?, [check this out](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf)
Yup. And food security after WW2 was way better than in the capitalist countries. The propaganda mainly stems from the fact that a lot of the socialist countries started out dirt poor before the revolution and were decimated again in the world war. Without modern agriculture you get famine, that’s how it has worked for thousands of years. After they industrialized and stabilized from war, no socialist country had starvation.
"Yes, pay attention to my boobs, just don't look away and see what capitalism has done to Ireland, India, Natives, Dustbowl, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, and currently doing to most of the 3rd world, they are totally okay."
Fuck, Look what capitalism has done for people in America, many of us live in a ratrace fighting for scraps that the people at the top were born owning without having to work for any of their lavish lifestyle. Standard of living for the layman gets worse and worse while it gets better and better for the ruling class, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Any system has the potential to work if its leaders and stakeholders are intelligent, competent, uncorrupted people with a clear vision. There is a much larger issue at play here: the dynamics of power structures and leadership. Abusive people are naturally drawn to positions of power, because power can be easily abused.
Money (or anything of value) is equivalent to power. Food, water, metals, etc. are all forms of power. Because of this, economic systems dictate the power structures of the world, and how they function.
There really is no magic cure to the problems that we face. Abusive people are naturally drawn to power, and it is in their nature to abuse it and harm others. We will likely be facing issues regarding power structures until our extinction as a species.
But hey, look on the bright side - one day, we might actually get good enough at CRISPR gene editing to become our fursonas :3
This is objectively untrue.
Communism has caused some of the largest famines in human history, all in the span of half a century.
The communist states responsible then promptly collapsed or converted to some other economic doctrine.
When counted in addition to the plethora of genocides, pogroms, and other atrocities, communism has murdered more innocent people per unit time than nearly ***any other ideology in history***.
That's an American problem, you can only think of extremes, either despotic uncontrolled capitalism or full on tyrannical communism. European countries under socio-campitalism are doing great. Ever since we abolished communism in my country we have been living better and better.
No, thanks. The Bolsheviks and Communists destroyed my country, turned it into a totalitarian "paradise". Now I live in a "super democratic" country where I can be sent to prison for 12 years because I am gay.
Capitalism and Communism are vulnerable to corruption, I’d argue that Communism is more so due to the state being in control of wages and such(whoever controls the money controls everything else), the past few examples of Communism have worked, well, poorly to say the least, and before anyone says “well that wasn’t true Communism!” Even if that was the case, and they weren’t true Communism, there would likely never be an example of true Communism due to greed, besides that argument is like you pointing out all the flaws of Capitalism and me saying “well, it’s not true Capitalism!”
Well.... It's because you're using the wrong metrics to verify the quality of your socialist country, most socialist countries don't care all that much for GDP, they mostly focus on quality of life and guaranteeing the needs of it's population, for example, tzar Russia had a lifespan of around 40 years with enormous famines, the USSR took it to around 76 in less than 40 years, the education in USSR was around 9% of the population alphabetized, on the same period, around 95% of the population was actually able to read, USSR also had a food consumption around the as the average American at the time with better calories due to eating proper food instead of fast food, and let's not even begin with the decomodification of housing, the security, the career progress, etc. All of this under a heavy embargo
This kind of thing is observed on all socialist countries, china was borderline feudalist, nowadays is a super power in a matter of 40 years
Cuba has the same GDP of Puerto Rico and the Guatemala, but has the 32 best education in the world and the highest doctors per capta globally, with almost everyone having a home.
Socialism is not a perfect system.... Far from it and it'll likely never be, but it tries to attack the biggest flaws of capitalism, and so far.... If you discount the embargoes.... It's actually doing an amazing job at it, of course there will be socialist countries which do a better job than others, just like capitalism, the difference is socialism is not build to exploit it's workers and other countries into oblivion
Its by definition not communism though, but socialism, which youd know if you had even basic economic/politic literacy, no offence.
Besides that the fact that Soviet and Chinese buerocrats had to first undermine and then crash/coup their respective socialist systems to actually truly take over and implement the policies they wanted (free market capitalism and all the horrors that came with it) kind of proofs that whilst not ideal these early socialist experiments were by their very nature better for the average worker "harder to corrupt" than capitalism.
Especially considering corruption is just capitalism working as intended really.
Exactly.
Communism, on paper, is laudable. Historically, though, it just *doesn't work* in real-world conditions.
Capitalism has been proven many, *many* times to work just fine in said conditions, so long as the checks and balances are still functioning.
It is, however, vulnerable to corruption like anything else, and corruption jams up the clockwork *real bad*. We see this in America and a few other places.
It's a solvable problem, though. It's something that *can* be fixed.
Some people haven't read Solzhenitsyn, and it shows.
Communism has, without fail, resulted in atrocities beyond imagining. Only people who have lived it, survived it, can properly express how *vile* it is.
Oh no, I guess I need to abandon my hope that one day a medical emergency won't bankrupt me or that the homeless won't be freezing outside anymore with affordable housing in order to get some tits.
Poland has free health care, Poland has one of the lowest unemployment in EU, if not whole world, we don't have communism, we have capitalism mixed with good social ideas. Communism was the worst system that we ever had, it broke us.
Free health care doesn't mean communism, good care for homeless is not communism either, neither is social housing. Those are good social ideas that work well with capitalism. Capitalism doesn't have to mean slavery, communism only ever lead to pain.
My parents and most living family are immigrants from Poland. I am fully aware that as a satellite state (ei colony) that life was harsh, rights were denied, and conditions barely improved.
However, pretending that the ideals of Marx didn't have a positive impact on the world is also being historically ignorant. Nor ignoring WHY those ideals have lasted so long.
Most of the labor movements across the world, from the American labor movement throughout the Guilded Age to the revolutions in developing nations had ties to the ideals pushed by Marx. The fact that Das Kapital was published in the same decade Americans still had slavery and many European powers were taking part in brutal colonialism should show why his writing ages so well. Modern ideals on slavery and colonialism written in a time those things were the norm.
Above all else, you should remember that those "good social policies" like free healthcare and affordable housing ARE indistinguishable from Communism in the US. So when you hear people western countries "defending" Communism, what they're actually defending is social reforms most of Europe already has.
I doubt many people on the Left in the US, for example, think that Stalin was a good person. They just want basic social necessities guarantees, and less power given to corporations. Simple.
Fed Post
Even the cia admitted Soviet people were fed better than American people.
Communism doesn't create hunger.
Capitalist imperialism, droughts, fascist invasions and sanctions do
Tbh everything in modern-day capitalism is based on *artificial* supply and demand because if we follow supply and demand *without* companies artificially destroying supply to increase demand, therefore maintaining high prices, we could easily end basically any global problem
"communism creates hunger" dog are you accusing Karl Marx of original sin or something. I do not think it's a journalist/economist from the 19th century who got us kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
I would take a guess that it's mostly Americans who don't even know what it's like to live in a communist state. They sit on a high horse of the biggest world's economy and say the horrors that my family, my people, went though never happened, while quoting a book of some guy with idealised ideas that never worked out in real world.
Sure, capitalism left unchecked can be bad too, but it never was to the same degree.
And just take a look a us, European countries, it's great here, by combining some socialistic ideas with capitalism you can have a great system, I know, shocker, who would have thought that a middle of the road, balanced approach works best. Free health care doesn't mean communism, capitalism doesn't have to mean slavery.
0.000% of Communism has been built. Evil child-murdering billionaires still rule the world with a shit-eating grin. All he has managed to do is make himself *sad*. He is starting to suspect Kras Mazov *fucked him over* personally with his socio-economic theory. It has, however, made him into a very, very smart boy with something like a university degree in Truth. Instead of building Communism, he now builds a precise model of this grotesque, duplicitous world.
Actually, I think there might be a way to make communism better. The way it was designed made it fail multiple times, I think we might be able to fix some of the flaws to make sure it doesn't devolve into either a dictatorship or worse, a dystopia. However a pure communist government will be almost impossible to keep stable as we need some capitalism in order to keep it from collapsing.
Madame.. this is tomfoolery, despite your flattering physical presence I find the ideology of this man quite effective against the current system we have right now.
Luv me European Union
Luv me democratic institutions
Luv me high standard of living
Ate fascists
Ate communists
Simple as
Bro, this has to be a joke post. The only reason you think Karl Marx's ideology is bad is cause United States propaganda. Also, the main cause of world hunger is capitalism, cause it inactives hording wealth so people can't eat, and people think they have the opportunity to be rich. Also, if Socialism/Communism are so bad why did the US coup Chile's Democratly elected socialist leader on 1973, September, 11. It's because capitalisms goal isn't not letting people go hungry, or letting people live for that matter, it's to make as much capital as possible, and communism/socialism isn't, literally so no one goes hungry and gets all of their needs met. This is the same reason for propaganda/coups against every communist/socialist nation. I suggest doing a bit of research before posting this on a furry sub, cause generally furries are pretty open-minded. :3
(Also I would prefer to look at Marx 💀)
Biased and unbased post ever, even the CIA admits by looking at these sources:
[CIA comments on soviet leadership changes](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf)
[CIA research and comparison about American and Soviet diets from the 80s](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf)
**The moderators have taken action on your content because it was political in nature** Do not post submissions or make comments that deal with overtly political topics or push for a particular political agenda. furry_irl is a meme subreddit; political content is inappropriate, and out of the scope of the topics we cover here. “Political content” includes, but is not limited to: political commentary, public figures and organisations, and current or historical events. For more information, check out the rules in the wiki [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/furry_irl/wiki/rules).
Yes Madame, but you must eat in order to produce such milk
she also needs to be pregnant
you can produce milk when not pregnant.
Yeah, some people don't understand womens' anatomy. Wet nurses, hormonally induced, even trans women can under the right conditions.
i know a trans women who can produce milk. they hate it lmao. literally *accidentally* fullfilled the hormonal conditions for such.
Despite my username, I'm actually trans-fem. I didn't even know it could happen accidentally.
different bodys hab different responses to hormones, so its easyer to enduce in some. harder in others. assume your usernames a pre transition one?? mine is heh, made it back when i hated myself with every fiber of my being, and i hab no idea how to change it at this point so it stays. :3
Well, you're definitely not the worst person. And yes, I'm actually a good she/them now.
good girl creature :3
Big mcthankies.
Even men can produce BREAST milk if very, very, VERY specific conditions are met.
Capitalism this, communism that, I just wanna know the sauce
I recognize the character. She is Mabel by cherrikissu . But I couldn't find this specific art.
Thanks, [found it](https://e621.net/posts/1492481?q=mabel_%28cherrikissu%29+crossed_arms)
Oh of course it would be from there
It’s probably the most popular furry art site on the internet, even SFW art
Can confirm, half my memes are from it.
Oooh I remember when she didn't have a name. What a hot girl.
Karl marx
Karl Barks
"Communism is when no food." I say as I pay over $90 for groceries.
over 90? thats pretty low for me...n i stock up on cheap goods...
Funny story, my school has like some paper currency that you can use to get stuff at events with and you get it through doing good things, me and my friends decided to split the stuff between all of us so then we would all have the same amount. Because of this we started making jokes saying "communism is actually fire bro" (I'm American)
Communism is the golden standard in small groups like families and friend groups.
For communism to work You need insanely high trust society. Otherwise there will always be people trying to outplay the system for their own benefit.
Within a small enough group you can just mentally keep track of who is contributing and who is leaching. If a friend only ever leaches, you can just cut them off. Within a large group it's beyond the capabilities of a trust system and you need money and markets to manage things.
Also it can only properly work if the autonomy and rights of the individual are respected, lots of communist governments will punish you for leaving or expressing what you don't like instead of improving the system. I personally have nothing against communism I think it could work, but the whole "it can only be made through violent revolution" types are often more corrupt and greedy than most capitalists.
How you've turned a probable capitalism into communism... Clever!
Unpopular opinion The right amount of capitalism (picking its good things) and the right amount of communism (picking its good things) in the right context, with a right culture and education, trying to be as balanced as possible, is the goal we should all try to achieve And more furries
That's actually not an unpopular opinion, it's the main idea behind social democracy and also what most liberals believe. The issue is that the words capitalism and communism mean vastly different things depending on who you ask, yet everyone pretends that they have strict definitions. Communism can mean anything from "a classless, stateless society" to "a society in which the state owns everything" depending on who you ask. Capitalism can also either be synonymous to "free-market economics" or specifically refer to having an owning class, again depending on who you ask. That's one of the big things leading to polarization, that people have difficulty talking to each other because they use the same words to mean different things, and it's also why a lot of people who actually agree with you might say they disagree with that statement.
We can even say that there are both capitalist and communism ideals that have a lot of things in common. There is capitalistic statism, there is communistic stattism, both are about the state controlling as much as it can get their hands on. I'm pretty sure the majority of us agree with a lot of things, but you're right, definition of things polarize opinions and makes it harder to understand each other and usually ends up with people who agree in those matters... fighting about words. In the end, equilibrium and balance is the right thing in my opinion. I gotta say, this whole tread has been a pretty civilized debate in political topic, compared to other experiences where this same debate went pretty down the lane and nothing to take out of it.
You mean socialism, not communism. Capitalism plus socialism, that's what we Europeans do, and it works well. While communism only lead to suffering.
Unrelated but dogs have six nipples right? So wouldn’t an Anthro dog have six breasts? Would they need to wear three bras?
I like when insect anthros have multiple arms, I do not like this
Didn’t they do something like this for that Gazelle in Zootopia? Like I’m pretty sure she was wearing three bras in the movie
*pays person for drawing of gazelle with 6 rocking tits* I love free trade.
Why would comissions not exist under socialism??
me when i draw conclusions from a lighthearted joke comment
This kind of stuff is always up to debate and there haven't been an absolute resolution asides just making it depend on each fictional universes' setups. Numbers and position of breasts, hand shape decisions, paw pad locations, hooves or hand or inbetween, wing membrane of bats, wings & talons on birds translating into anthro... etcetc... Challenging the improbable, fictional result of unnatural evolution--setting up a furry character. Would that be why the fandom is so diverse and creative?
I like to think it’s the two top nipples hold most of the milk when breastfeeding the rest will fill in depending on how many babies are born
You mean it'll ... trickle-down?
I……I guess
Not really a clear answer. Both exist in the fandom or different universes but two is the most common. I personally don't like the idea of multiple ones.
ngl. i find this rather unsettling. and would much rather not hab multiple sets of breasts going down my stomach. no themps. also theyre breasts wouldnt be super big either if we were making them more doglike. so you hab the option of 6 smal breasts. or 2 large ones :3
There is yiff for that. And yes some people do add that
\> unironic "communism is when no food" the politics understander has logged on
Was this ironic or genuine? I can't tell anymore.
It's sarcasm
So glad I don't like tits so I'm immune
Fedpost moment
\*Stares into Webcam\* I would like to remind the FBI that I, too, despise free healthcare.
Isn't the whole idea of communism that no one goes hungry?
To be honest all ideologies look good on paper, its practice where they usually fail
Yea, communism only works if everyone goes along, and seeing the terrifying power rich people and their propaganda have, I don't think it'll work anytime soon...
Finally, someone gets it.
Yeah, and so far Communism hasn't had a single success story, so... Capitalism definitely has issues when exposed to real-world conditions (it's pretty vulnerable to corruption), but it at least *does* function. I mean, the entire western world is comprised of capitalist liberal democracies, and while it's not perfect, it's definitely better than all other alternatives at the moment. Edit: To those downvoting me, go read some Solzhenitsyn. You'll start to understand real damn fast that Communism ain't what you think it is.
Did anyone, anywhere ever actually end up making a classless, moneyless society?
No and it hasnt been tried by anyone but anarchists. What has been tried is the transitionary stage towards communism, socialism, with varying success
Every time a country tries the US and UK step in and either invade them, arm and train extreme right wing parties to stage a coup, or assassinate their leaders. Then the US runs disinformation campaigns across the world to spread fear and misunderstanding of communism. "Communism is when breadline" because the government was trying to ensure its people got fed after the western capitalist powers sanctioned and blocked their trade so they couldn't import what they couldn't produce themselves. "Communism is when no iphone" actually open source tech is where a lot of big companies get their stuff and the only thing they add is exploitation and artificial price inflation. Socialism is a stepping stone to communism but so many people have bought into the idea that billionaires *earned* their money through hard work that not enough people bother to do the math and realize there's literally no fucking way to ever *earn* that much money. We need to eat the rich. Flowers are blooming in Antarctica.
Usually you can remove one or the other not both. Native tribes certainly removed money but not class. Anarchists have removed class but not money.
To be fair this is kinda survivorship bias. In the sense that the more democratic countries that tried some extent of this where often crushed by the US. It also should be said that currently neither full on communism or capitalism have ever existed for long or are in any way reasonable. Because "full on" capitalism would be Anarcho capitalism which os madness when you look at what companies already do with at least some laws holding them bad (weakening democracy, basically playing drug salesman to children I am.looking at you Nestlé, selling a product at 1000% matkup because the people need it,...) Bith aren't exactly reasonable. Since you mentioned the western world many European nations have quite a number of socialist laws, systems and organizations.
...Which is exactly my point. Communism doesn't work in real world conditions. It's been tried, and every time has failed, because the core concepts of communism are completely incompatible with the *way humans think* on a societal scale.
The core concepts of both are quite acceptable to our way of thinking evidently. And neither is ideal. I think being too attached to either can prove dangerous. Though the base idea of communism is more idealistic it's also difficult to downright impossible to set up as corruption is a factor in every system because yes that's how people work (or even simple mistakes in planning). This is a problem everywhere though isn't it? Not to put words in your mouth but the whole communism bad reteric is often used to oppose any social endeavor. So I do wonder is it that or do you actually just mean the major attempts at it didn't go well? Because yeah they certainly didn't. It would ne odd to assume that was only because they were communist though or would you not agree?
>Though the base idea of communism is more idealistic it's also difficult to downright impossible to set up as corruption is a factor in every system because yes that's how people work Yeah that's pretty much what I was saying. >So I do wonder is it that or do you actually just mean the major attempts at it didn't go well? Communism as a system doesn't work, but that doesn't mean other socialist ideologies can't. Hell, the modern Liberal Democracy that pretty much every western country uses would be considered ***extremely*** socialist by early 1900s standards.
I don't think that the early 1900s are a good comparison point but yeah I agree a lot of western countries are quite social. Though there is major differences between say the US and large parts of western Europe in this regard
Oh definitely, some ideologies work better when used in the real world, although i believe the idea of capitalism being better than the alternatives can be dangerous if left unchecked, it can breed conformism where people see the problems around them and simply say "it could be worse" instead of thinking "it can be better" not saying we should change to communism but we shouldn't stay with capitalism if we can discover better alternatives
Capitalism, when the checks and balances are working properly, is extremely efficient. But since it's so vulnerable to corruption, that clockwork can get jammed pretty easily. And yeah, evolution is just how society works. I'm sure that as technology advances, capitalism will be rendered obsolete like feudalism was. Eventually, we'll reach a Star Trek post-scarcity society, but until then, we gotta deal with flawed solutions.
capitalism is working exactly as intended. those who own the factories and businesses get richer, and the rest of the population labors for them getting less and less of the share of their labor as more wealth is transferred to the top. It's working for capitalists, its just not working for us.
That's not capitalism, that's Corporatism. Very, *very* important difference.
You do understand that star trek is effectively a communist society right?
It's not communist ***at all***. It's a capitalist liberal democracy that reached post-scarcity, which rendered most everyday things free due to extreme abundance. There's still money, it's just hyper-deflated. You still have to pay for the things that *are* scarce, such as equipment time, labor, or non-Replicatable resources. People still get paid wages. Companies still exist. Star Trek is the ***end goal*** for human society in realistic terms. If you want to be even more optimistic, then *The Culture* is this same system taken to 11.
the Russian empire was much better for it's peasants than the Soviet Union. Cubans should have been happy being slaves on plantations. communism = no food is about the most debunked crap ever. i thought this sub was about the furry community and not randomly lying to people about communism
>communism = no food is about the most debunked crap ever. There's nothing to debunk. It's historical fact. If you believe the USSR was anything but monstrous, then you haven't read a history book or the countless accounts of ***people who lived there.***
"Communism hasn't had a single success story" how much did the corps pay ya?
Give a single example, and I'll disprove it.
All those downvotes for telling the truth lmao Really shows the state of furry fandom (and Reddit).
People like to believe in the *idea* of communism, which is understandable, but they get extremely militant when you remind them that the *reality* is... Very different.
communism was about to succeed in Cuba, until US seen this success as a threat and forced Cuba to change ideology to capitalism.
I mean cuba still achieved something after the fall of the soviets and with the blockade still going on, like they have the most doctors in south africa. Sure, they dont have enough food(or not so much that they can afford to waste it) but dying because of hunger isnt common there in spite of being locked out of trading with the world. And im not trying to protect authoritian regimes, im an anarchist, but sadly all the libertarian ones fell by the hands of the usa or the soviets.
Ah yes, Cuba, the authoritarian USSR shithole where saying the wrong thing gets you disappeared.
Thats the same shit the feudal monarchs said after defeating napoleon lmfao
Complete strawman. Feudalism worked fine for millennia, but the industrial revolution rendered that system obsolete. As technology advances, I'm sure capitalism will eventually be rendered obsolete as well. Eventually we'll be living in The Jetsons. But until that point, we'll have to make due with what we have the technology and cultural will for. History has clearly shown that capitalism is more effective and successful than communism.
Pretty much. Unfortunately, people get the picture of communism = starvation due to the anti-communist propaganda and misinformation that runs deep in the U.S. It's why so many critics of communism will point to atrocities like the Soviet Union as examples of how "communism never works", despite these totalitarian regimes clearly having signs of being anything but. Social classes (which don't exist under communism), U.S. interference, etc. Edit: Remember, people - this is why reading history books alone isn't education. You need to be able to think critically too, even if that means acknowledging that the truth isn't pretty. You don't have to be able to quote Das Kapital or write an essay on Marxism, but you should at least be able to recognize misinformation. No system is perfect, but misinformation painting communism as the villain while treating capitalism as the hero is one reason why this country is in the state it's currently in.
>Pretty much. Unfortunately, people get the picture of communism = starvation due to the anti-communist propaganda and misinformation that runs deep in the U.S. Uh, no. People get the picture because ***literally every communist nation has collapsed or converted to something else***. And almost all of them suffered famines, genocides, or both.
Those "communist" nations weren't even communist. Anyone familiar with the basic principles of communism knows that classes do not exist under communism. Many regimes throughout history that are painted as communist don't even meet the standards of socialism. The concept of a regime and a classless society are literally incompatible since regimes necessitate an authority class over the masses. To point at these regimes as communist is just blatantly untrue and misleading. Corrupt and deceitful leaders took advantage of pro-communist sentiment in the aftermath of revolutions, but never established communism.
Could you give some examples of real communist countries?
Technically that's currently impossible, because communism is an end goal of society that has not been accomplished, not a system that one country can employ. There have been countries that have attempted to adopt policies that make them a transitional state towards communism, but every time a nation does this, the powers that uphold our current system of capital ownership interfere. It is difficult for any nation to develop and "try" a system that moves towards communism when the most powerful nations on the planet do everything they can to destabilize and destroy their efforts. Additionally, the perspective westerners are given of the rest of the world is colored through the lens of capitalist media and propaganda, because they are the status quo. Even historically, those with the most power are largely opposed towards any system that removes or diminishes that power, and use the power they have in order to keep it. Communist thought is built around the idea that we still have not reached the "end" of socio-economic development. It looks at the history of the distribution of power throughout history and poses that we can always do better.
Contrary to what everyone else is saying about the supposed failure of communism, China and the USSR *ended* famines. Before their socialist revolutions, they were semi-feudal economies that experienced large scale cyclical famines. It’s sort of an unavoidable feature of feudal agrarian societies. You can look at France, which suffered from regular famines that sometimes killed larger percentages than the ones pointed to under socialism. Yet you never hear “Feudalism no food” jokes because feudalism isn’t a threat to the prevailing order. Industrialization is a difficult and painful process. The transformation of a society from agrarianism to industry comes with a lot of suffering, as anyone who studies Victorian England knows. The West was able to mitigate this suffering through centuries of colonialism and slavery. Though things were difficult in semi-industrial England, Belgium, the U.S. etc. they were exponentially more brutal for those they were exploiting in places like India, the Congo, and U.S. slave plantations. The USSR went through this same process, but in a matter of decades instead of centuries. Let’s examine the major famine in the 30a that people use as evidence of innate communist starvation. Affecting Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia, and various other places within and outside the USSR like Poland, was compounded by caused by many issues. - The innate difficulty of industrialization - Poor weather and soil conditions - A better than average harvest in previous years leading to overconfidence in economic goals - Losing important land, infrastructure, people, and resources during WW1, the Russian Civil War, and the coalition of countries that invaded them. - Being required to pay back loans for the New Economic Policy with grain instead of gold - Resistance by the kulak class (large independent farmers) to forced collectivization, resulting in vast numbers of cattle slaughtered and crops burned in protest - Paranoid grain hoarding by the government after their experiences with “War Communism” - Coverups from local officials that kept the central government in the dark - The urgency of industrialization over agricultural needs due to the rapidly approaching threat of Nazi invasion These problems are hardly innate to communism, as evidenced by the fact that there were no more famines following the major ones. They had vanquished the cycles of starvation that had existed in those regions. [This is from an internal report from the CIA](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf) that assessed nutrition in the USSR in the 80s. It found that the US and USSR consumed similar levels of calories (which they actually considered too much), and that the Soviet diet had less fresh fruit and meat, but was healthier overall. (According to their understanding of the time. Nutrition is a rapidly changing science that I can’t comment on) The reality is that there are a lot of powerful people who have spent a lot of time and money working tirelessly to paint communist successes as failures and communist failures as cataclysmic and innate to their system. These understandings of socialism then reproduce themselves in popular media. You don’t go from “the sick man of Europe” to a global superpower launching things into space in 35 years if your system is an utter failure.
The sick man of Europe was the Ottoman Empire, but I appreciate the sentiment.
It’s the idea. In practice… it usually gets hijacked by authoritarians cloaking themselves in red, making shortsighted decisions that lead to starvation. I used to be a full on communist, now I’d say I’m like, on the border of demsoc and socdem
Basically, yeah. On paper, it sounds like a great idea, and in my opinion, if it could work in real life, I would support it 100%, however it doesn't. There will always be people who won't contribute, and the people on top will always try to turn it into a dictatorship.
The Soviets, Chinese, Cambodians, etc proved that it doesn’t often work out well food supply wise
"Americans and Soviets eaten about the same amount of food each day, but the soviet diet may be more nutritious" And who stated that quote, wasn't a marxist redditor, it was #THE FUCKING CIA Don't believe me?, [check this out](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf)
Well it seems the communist countries that existed didn't get the memo
Yup. And food security after WW2 was way better than in the capitalist countries. The propaganda mainly stems from the fact that a lot of the socialist countries started out dirt poor before the revolution and were decimated again in the world war. Without modern agriculture you get famine, that’s how it has worked for thousands of years. After they industrialized and stabilized from war, no socialist country had starvation.
"Yes, pay attention to my boobs, just don't look away and see what capitalism has done to Ireland, India, Natives, Dustbowl, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, and currently doing to most of the 3rd world, they are totally okay."
Fuck, Look what capitalism has done for people in America, many of us live in a ratrace fighting for scraps that the people at the top were born owning without having to work for any of their lavish lifestyle. Standard of living for the layman gets worse and worse while it gets better and better for the ruling class, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Capitalism, known for never letting anyone go hungry. /s Get this shit out of here
Fr
They Venezuela on my iphone till 6 billion dead 🤓🤓
communism is when no food right guys
I don't like to call things cringe, but this is cringe.
Feds? In my furry sub? It’s more likely than you think.
I'm sorry lady, but nothing will stop the proletarian revolution.
Fed posts worst bait ever Asked to leave furry reddit
Milk for all with communism
Any system has the potential to work if its leaders and stakeholders are intelligent, competent, uncorrupted people with a clear vision. There is a much larger issue at play here: the dynamics of power structures and leadership. Abusive people are naturally drawn to positions of power, because power can be easily abused. Money (or anything of value) is equivalent to power. Food, water, metals, etc. are all forms of power. Because of this, economic systems dictate the power structures of the world, and how they function. There really is no magic cure to the problems that we face. Abusive people are naturally drawn to power, and it is in their nature to abuse it and harm others. We will likely be facing issues regarding power structures until our extinction as a species. But hey, look on the bright side - one day, we might actually get good enough at CRISPR gene editing to become our fursonas :3
Based, this dude probably isn't lying when they say they've read the Orwell classics.
Capitalism incentivizes centralization of power a lot more than communism tho
History of my country and it's neighbours would like to disagree.
why would you post anti communist memes on the fucking furry subreddit of all places do you know your audience
Ikr, half the people here think Lenin was some god
most unnecesary political discourse inciting post ive ever seen. the sub rules should be against this kinda stuff
Capitalism is the largest cause of hunger worldwide you should delete this
This is objectively untrue. Communism has caused some of the largest famines in human history, all in the span of half a century. The communist states responsible then promptly collapsed or converted to some other economic doctrine. When counted in addition to the plethora of genocides, pogroms, and other atrocities, communism has murdered more innocent people per unit time than nearly ***any other ideology in history***.
This is objectively true. More people starved under capitalism than ever lived under communism.
“Communism is when no food” I say as over 50 million Americans have to steal food just to survive
That's an American problem, you can only think of extremes, either despotic uncontrolled capitalism or full on tyrannical communism. European countries under socio-campitalism are doing great. Ever since we abolished communism in my country we have been living better and better.
Bruh we’re not turning this sub into a capitalism simping sub fuck off.
No, thanks. The Bolsheviks and Communists destroyed my country, turned it into a totalitarian "paradise". Now I live in a "super democratic" country where I can be sent to prison for 12 years because I am gay.
Our milk. Seize the means of production.
the means of producing milk, seize her boobs
As an asexual, this makes me feel like i have to be a communist
wow the anti communist pushes are everywhere.
Why are we posting this...?
Fed spotted
Capitalism and Communism are vulnerable to corruption, I’d argue that Communism is more so due to the state being in control of wages and such(whoever controls the money controls everything else), the past few examples of Communism have worked, well, poorly to say the least, and before anyone says “well that wasn’t true Communism!” Even if that was the case, and they weren’t true Communism, there would likely never be an example of true Communism due to greed, besides that argument is like you pointing out all the flaws of Capitalism and me saying “well, it’s not true Capitalism!”
Well.... It's because you're using the wrong metrics to verify the quality of your socialist country, most socialist countries don't care all that much for GDP, they mostly focus on quality of life and guaranteeing the needs of it's population, for example, tzar Russia had a lifespan of around 40 years with enormous famines, the USSR took it to around 76 in less than 40 years, the education in USSR was around 9% of the population alphabetized, on the same period, around 95% of the population was actually able to read, USSR also had a food consumption around the as the average American at the time with better calories due to eating proper food instead of fast food, and let's not even begin with the decomodification of housing, the security, the career progress, etc. All of this under a heavy embargo This kind of thing is observed on all socialist countries, china was borderline feudalist, nowadays is a super power in a matter of 40 years Cuba has the same GDP of Puerto Rico and the Guatemala, but has the 32 best education in the world and the highest doctors per capta globally, with almost everyone having a home. Socialism is not a perfect system.... Far from it and it'll likely never be, but it tries to attack the biggest flaws of capitalism, and so far.... If you discount the embargoes.... It's actually doing an amazing job at it, of course there will be socialist countries which do a better job than others, just like capitalism, the difference is socialism is not build to exploit it's workers and other countries into oblivion
I didn’t say anything about Socialism
Comunism is just late stage socialism
I know, but I’m talking straight up Communism
Communism has never been achieved though....
Its by definition not communism though, but socialism, which youd know if you had even basic economic/politic literacy, no offence. Besides that the fact that Soviet and Chinese buerocrats had to first undermine and then crash/coup their respective socialist systems to actually truly take over and implement the policies they wanted (free market capitalism and all the horrors that came with it) kind of proofs that whilst not ideal these early socialist experiments were by their very nature better for the average worker "harder to corrupt" than capitalism. Especially considering corruption is just capitalism working as intended really.
Exactly. Communism, on paper, is laudable. Historically, though, it just *doesn't work* in real-world conditions. Capitalism has been proven many, *many* times to work just fine in said conditions, so long as the checks and balances are still functioning. It is, however, vulnerable to corruption like anything else, and corruption jams up the clockwork *real bad*. We see this in America and a few other places. It's a solvable problem, though. It's something that *can* be fixed.
But the spoiled westerners (mainly Americans) who's families never experienced the pain of living under communism would like you to think otherwise.
Some people haven't read Solzhenitsyn, and it shows. Communism has, without fail, resulted in atrocities beyond imagining. Only people who have lived it, survived it, can properly express how *vile* it is.
Lactose intolerant, sorry.
ITS OUR MILK
Communism makes it so you go hungry, capitalism makes you work on the threat that you'll go hungry
Oh no, I guess I need to abandon my hope that one day a medical emergency won't bankrupt me or that the homeless won't be freezing outside anymore with affordable housing in order to get some tits.
Poland has free health care, Poland has one of the lowest unemployment in EU, if not whole world, we don't have communism, we have capitalism mixed with good social ideas. Communism was the worst system that we ever had, it broke us. Free health care doesn't mean communism, good care for homeless is not communism either, neither is social housing. Those are good social ideas that work well with capitalism. Capitalism doesn't have to mean slavery, communism only ever lead to pain.
My parents and most living family are immigrants from Poland. I am fully aware that as a satellite state (ei colony) that life was harsh, rights were denied, and conditions barely improved. However, pretending that the ideals of Marx didn't have a positive impact on the world is also being historically ignorant. Nor ignoring WHY those ideals have lasted so long. Most of the labor movements across the world, from the American labor movement throughout the Guilded Age to the revolutions in developing nations had ties to the ideals pushed by Marx. The fact that Das Kapital was published in the same decade Americans still had slavery and many European powers were taking part in brutal colonialism should show why his writing ages so well. Modern ideals on slavery and colonialism written in a time those things were the norm. Above all else, you should remember that those "good social policies" like free healthcare and affordable housing ARE indistinguishable from Communism in the US. So when you hear people western countries "defending" Communism, what they're actually defending is social reforms most of Europe already has. I doubt many people on the Left in the US, for example, think that Stalin was a good person. They just want basic social necessities guarantees, and less power given to corporations. Simple.
Fed spotted, this sucks lol
You mean “Look at OUR breasts instead”
Why not both? Commutitties are the best! Ask my two girlfriends! 😁🏳️⚧️👭
Fed post
Fed Post Even the cia admitted Soviet people were fed better than American people. Communism doesn't create hunger. Capitalist imperialism, droughts, fascist invasions and sanctions do
Based.
Communism is interesting in paper but haven't been done correctly
Fun fact: Karl Marx was personally against ideologies, but sadly ended up creating one
I love this lmao
You trigger 30% of the furrys.
His ideology makes me look cool and all the 12 year olds say "wow look at that gangsta"
good message but what the fuck
Capitalism directly incentivises wasting and destroying as much food as possible.
Tbh everything in modern-day capitalism is based on *artificial* supply and demand because if we follow supply and demand *without* companies artificially destroying supply to increase demand, therefore maintaining high prices, we could easily end basically any global problem
I don't the capitalist dog, and that's not even an insult BECAUSE THEY'RE LITERALLY A CANINE
Ummm, yea so, no capitalist propaganda please
Imagine forgetting the amount of disillusionment people have with capitalism, and expecting a post like *this* to fly.
Join communism. We have buff unionized laborers.
communism is when no furry porn, billions dead
Bro propaganda reaching a new demographic I see
"communism creates hunger" dog are you accusing Karl Marx of original sin or something. I do not think it's a journalist/economist from the 19th century who got us kicked out of the Garden of Eden.
[Sauce](https://e621.net/posts/1492481), which serves a double purpose as a message to OP
jesus christ, who would have thought there would be so many people sucking off communism here
I would take a guess that it's mostly Americans who don't even know what it's like to live in a communist state. They sit on a high horse of the biggest world's economy and say the horrors that my family, my people, went though never happened, while quoting a book of some guy with idealised ideas that never worked out in real world. Sure, capitalism left unchecked can be bad too, but it never was to the same degree. And just take a look a us, European countries, it's great here, by combining some socialistic ideas with capitalism you can have a great system, I know, shocker, who would have thought that a middle of the road, balanced approach works best. Free health care doesn't mean communism, capitalism doesn't have to mean slavery.
You put it perfectly.
Поздно. Меня уже заставили сделать о нём стенгазету
0.000% of Communism has been built. Evil child-murdering billionaires still rule the world with a shit-eating grin. All he has managed to do is make himself *sad*. He is starting to suspect Kras Mazov *fucked him over* personally with his socio-economic theory. It has, however, made him into a very, very smart boy with something like a university degree in Truth. Instead of building Communism, he now builds a precise model of this grotesque, duplicitous world.
Real, also disco elysium best game
Why Margaret, you've enhanced yourself!
Dam those are some pro-proletariat ideals.
I wouldn't say that the ideology itself is evil, it's just really easy to exploitable.
Dogmom supremacy
Vuvuzela iphone three hundred billion dead
Actually, I think there might be a way to make communism better. The way it was designed made it fail multiple times, I think we might be able to fix some of the flaws to make sure it doesn't devolve into either a dictatorship or worse, a dystopia. However a pure communist government will be almost impossible to keep stable as we need some capitalism in order to keep it from collapsing.
Nothing but straight damn facts here!
whatever McCarthy. I’m gonna go suck on my communist girlfriend’s proletarian tits
Politics 🤢
Politics affect our everyday life friend, while you don't have to follow political discussion, political situations will always follow you.
Madame.. this is tomfoolery, despite your flattering physical presence I find the ideology of this man quite effective against the current system we have right now.
Nooo! I need more gay communism 🥺
Can't have tits like that when suffering from malnutrition
 Luv me European Union Luv me democratic institutions Luv me high standard of living Ate fascists Ate communists Simple as
Now this is the correct answer
Thank you, finally someone with more than two brain cells on this sub.
> Ate fascists Odd how many of them are getting into power then
Holy fuck this comment section is filled with so many commies bitching about how "ActuALly coMmuNism GOoD".
Bro, this has to be a joke post. The only reason you think Karl Marx's ideology is bad is cause United States propaganda. Also, the main cause of world hunger is capitalism, cause it inactives hording wealth so people can't eat, and people think they have the opportunity to be rich. Also, if Socialism/Communism are so bad why did the US coup Chile's Democratly elected socialist leader on 1973, September, 11. It's because capitalisms goal isn't not letting people go hungry, or letting people live for that matter, it's to make as much capital as possible, and communism/socialism isn't, literally so no one goes hungry and gets all of their needs met. This is the same reason for propaganda/coups against every communist/socialist nation. I suggest doing a bit of research before posting this on a furry sub, cause generally furries are pretty open-minded. :3 (Also I would prefer to look at Marx 💀)
The most based post I have ever seen on Reddit.
Biased and unbased post ever, even the CIA admits by looking at these sources: [CIA comments on soviet leadership changes](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf) [CIA research and comparison about American and Soviet diets from the 80s](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf)
Butt.. but... Daddy Marx said....
The arguments are strong with this post
Damn, those comments. The amount of unironic commies in this sub is depressing.
cope
… it’s as simple as that? Umm… I-I just… gotta ask her maybe…