Okay, tankies annoy the shit out of me, but lets not ignore that capitalism really does kill significantly more people and super needs to go. The future of humanity is either communist and collectivist, or nonexistent.
Capitalism needs to go, but the main point of dispute there is that it’s a whataboutism, not that it’s not true.
Additionally, I’d point out that the argument as commonly formulated isn’t true. The death tolls commonly attributed to capitalism require that essentially all excess mortality in third-world countries, many of which are not particularly capitalist, be attributed to capitalism. With the fall of the Soviet Union and the transition of the PRC to a capitalist model, it can be argued that capitalism causes more deaths in the present day, but that’s generally not what the argument is positing. Conversely, it can be argued that capitalism, having exercised considerable influence since the 17th century AD, is responsible for large death tolls, but that itself raises questions of where capitalism’s influence comes in, and where and in what proportions capitalism, as a largely non-revolutionary ideology which subsumed previous reactionary institutions piece by piece, rather than all-at-once, is responsible and is responsible for a worse outcome than would otherwise have occurred (as feudal and mercantilist systems are certainly not short of the urge to rack up massive death tolls).
On the other hand, the argument that communism ‘caused’ the massive death tolls in Soviet-style countries in the 20th century is only really applicable insofar as one is willing to accept the definition of communism, in the context of this particular argument, as “Stalinist insanity”.
… I think I lost where I was going with this. It’s early, I’m barely awake, have mercy on my poor scattered mind 😭
Okay, tankies annoy the shit out of me, but lets not ignore that capitalism really does kill significantly more people and super needs to go. The future of humanity is either communist and collectivist, or nonexistent.
Capitalism needs to go, but the main point of dispute there is that it’s a whataboutism, not that it’s not true.
Additionally, I’d point out that the argument as commonly formulated isn’t true. The death tolls commonly attributed to capitalism require that essentially all excess mortality in third-world countries, many of which are not particularly capitalist, be attributed to capitalism. With the fall of the Soviet Union and the transition of the PRC to a capitalist model, it can be argued that capitalism causes more deaths in the present day, but that’s generally not what the argument is positing. Conversely, it can be argued that capitalism, having exercised considerable influence since the 17th century AD, is responsible for large death tolls, but that itself raises questions of where capitalism’s influence comes in, and where and in what proportions capitalism, as a largely non-revolutionary ideology which subsumed previous reactionary institutions piece by piece, rather than all-at-once, is responsible and is responsible for a worse outcome than would otherwise have occurred (as feudal and mercantilist systems are certainly not short of the urge to rack up massive death tolls).
On the other hand, the argument that communism ‘caused’ the massive death tolls in Soviet-style countries in the 20th century is only really applicable insofar as one is willing to accept the definition of communism, in the context of this particular argument, as “Stalinist insanity”.
… I think I lost where I was going with this. It’s early, I’m barely awake, have mercy on my poor scattered mind 😭
Thats my main point of contention with the argument. Maoism and Stalinism can barely be considered communism. Really in name only.
Oh yeah, I agree entirely with that.