@socialism

Owning things in socialism is a complete lie and you know that, that’s why you’re getting so defensive, because you cannot argue your case well and instead bark at me to, “do some research” and whatnot. Also, doing a bit of research has led me to this… this public ownership of things…. STILL EXIST! They still exist, and most things were still private back then too. And what’s even worse is that you argue, “Oh, public ownership of things were great in the UK, therefore we should be socialist.” That’s literally what you were arguing, when really the UK didn’t control the means of production, otherwise they would be socialist, which would actually have more devastating consequences, as their economy would’ve stagnated a lot faster. Take Vietnam for example, when they implemented socialism, Vietnam’s economy has stagnated for a long time, until they implemented capitalist policies. Why was that the case, huh? Also, the reason people voted for the Labour party is simply due to the fact they just wanted Tories out, not because they support their policies. In fact, the Labour Party, although left-wing, is still capitalist and has no interest in changing the capitalist UK. So your argument here makes absolutely no sense. If you don’t want to argue with me anymore, it would honestly be great if you did, because that proves that you can’t make a good argument that would make socialism a utopia, because you and I both know socialism is not the way to go.

Oh… well still, the British empire still existed during post WW2.. and also, that wasn’t socialism. That was capitalism. In fact, after doing a bit of research, I found that Britain was the first country to implement capitalism and has been great from there. Also, I will admit a small error, as I did say that the potato famine during the British Empire was similar to socialism, yet I was wrong, as public ownership was not there yet, but the rest of my points still stand as public ownership of things controlled by the government have damaging consequences and that’s what should worry socialists, as in socialism, nothing you have is actually yours, including the car you drive or the house you live in. We believe in a capitalist society because they allow people to actually own the things they buy, including the house, car, etc. Socialism takes that away from us and I do not want to live a life where we own nothing and that all the hard work I do is pointless if I’m earning the same paycheck compared to someone who just lounges around all day doing nothing for society. That’s socialism in its finest, or even communism at its extreme.

That is NOT what I’m saying. I never said that the UK was socialist, never. Where did I ever mention in my posts, “The UK was socialist?” It’s not there because I don’t think that way. Please read it in context before assuming such BS. I was saying that the UK publicly owned things (which was a part of your argument), and that it was similar to socialism, not that it’s the same thing. They are not the same and that was never my claim. Please please please actually read it in context before twisting my words like this. Thank you.

So you’re resorting to insults now? That's not a good look ngl. Also, you mentioned the UK as an argument so we might as well refer to its past when it was originally called the British Empire, since that was the time when most of everything was owned publicly, and was used against the Irish, which is very similar to what we have in socialism and communism today. We don’t think the UK had socialism during the British Empire when it was in place, but what we do know is that they did publicly own things, and what does socialism promote? Public ownership of all goods and services by the government. You used the UK as an argument of how bad capitalism is, told me that I was scared to mention the UK, and then you used insults like stupid and muppet when I actually did mention them. That’s a really awful look and that proves your inability to argue your case well. Do better next time. Or better yet, really reflect on your view on socialism and compare it to what socialism really is, because if you think socialism will be a magical utopia where everyone’s basic needs will actually be met and everyone (including the poor) will be prosperous under socialism and its government without any exploitation from anyone, let me tell you this… you need a brutal reality check, because your view is the complete opposite of reality.

when did i mention the british empire you muppet, do you genuinely think that we had socialism during the british empire and then after the british empire everything was privatised? you're not just wrong, you're stupid.

Lmao that’s a lie and you know that. Firstly, just because we didn’t mention the UK, doesn’t automatically mean that we “know how much better everything was when it was publically owned” because it wasn’t. Look at Ireland, the UK literally took away their food and put them in a potato famine because they wanted to be Catholic and they didn’t like it. And in the UK, things were publicly owned by the government, as you said, so everyone was at the mercy of the British Empire, hence why we are arguing against socialism and for capitalism. And if the empire was so great back then, why did countries like India, Canada, the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Bangladesh, Pakistan, etc declare independence? Because they wanted freedom, and the UK refused to give it to them. It’s the same in communism and socialism. We are not red-scared, we are simply informed individuals that will fight for our economic and civil liberties to be protected. This is the main purpose of creating this account. Guys, do not fall for socialism’s lies. They say we are scared but they don’t want to debunk anything we’ve said, because they can’t do it, which is why they are putting false assumptions and lies against us, a classic tactic in the socialist and communist nations. Don’t fall for them. We can’t let history repeat itself and spread everywhere. Follow us today to fight for our freedoms and liberties from lies and economic control.

Again, neoliberalism does equate to capitalism, as said before. One country doing poorly with their nation does not mean the entire system is all horrible and we need to switch to socialism. Seriously, socialism doesn’t work, and there are examples of that in many countries that have tried socialism but ended up failing because of poor funding from the government because they just can’t afford to keep the people fed. Other socialist governments like Vietnam had to adopt capitalist policies because the economy has stagnated, because they realize that socialism doesn’t entirely work. Even China, a communist government, had to adopt capitalist policies because an economy that’s entirely communist doesn’t work either. Capitalism is superior and these two countries know that, that’s why these nations are successful.

@capitalism and @democracy

@socialism and @communism

FACT CHECK TIME!

(Note: We have already responded once to this, so go check that out first, but we thought we would do a fact check here as well)

Firstly, neoliberalism has nothing to do with capitalism since it’s been around way before this ideology came around, and there are plenty of capitalist countries that are not neoliberalist, such as Greece, Turkey, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, Monaco, North Macedonia, Russia, the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, the Maldives, the UAE, and a lot more. Secondly, how do you know that the socialist and communist governments in the world are not going to do the same thing? In a socialist government, they are the monopoly and we have to put all our trust in them, putting us at their mercy, which ends poorly a lot of times as the government has too much power over the economy and how it’s run. Now am I saying that capitalism doesn’t have its problems either? No, but unlike a socialist government, a capitalist government has often times held companies accountable for any exploitation and harmful actions done to the public time and time again, and corrupt government officials are also called out for their crimes too, holding them accountable. Best of all, privatization allows freedom for every person to own things and to own property and to own the things they have to meet their basic needs and help others. That’s the reason capitalism is better and more rewarding and freer than socialism.

Socialism claims to prioritize the public good, yet its track record shows that planning and state control frequently result in inefficiency. The irony lies in their inability to reliably provide services they promise for “everyone’s benefit.” Under socialism, transportation, utilities, and infrastructure have often decreased in quality due to lack of competition and innovation, creating widespread inconvenience without any real path to improvement, except if capitalist policies are placed. Even Vietnam had to adopt capitalist policies after their economy stagnated in order to thrive, as well as China. And sure, Capitalism is far from perfect, but it at least offers the flexibility for creativity and innovation. Rather than imposing one-size-fits-all solutions, capitalism allows the people to meet the needs of people with diversity, including government oversight to ensure that the rights of people are protected.

FACT CHECK TIME!

A country with a lack of safety and everyone’s basic needs not being met does NOT equate to capitalism. On the contrary, many places like Switzerland, Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Singapore, Taiwan, Ireland, Hong Kong, Japan, Monaco, Andorra, South Korea, Portugal, New Zealand, and Australia all have the lowest homelessness rates, the highest qualities of life, and least amount of homelessness and starvation.

And since we are on the topic of living in a dangerous world where most people can barely feed themselves except two people with 500 yachts, let’s talk about countries like Venezuela, Cuba, Eritrea, Laos, and North Korea. Let’s ask those countries how they are doing right now under a socialist government with starvation, homelessness, oppression, and danger, except for a small group of people ruling the nations with lavish lifestyles that only those people under socialist nations can even DREAM OF. Talk about exploitation, and yet they’re calling the capitalists out for it. Maybe don’t falsely accuse us of encouraging exploitation by elites next time without even considering how horrible these people in the socialist (and communist nations) are being exploited by their own government. At least with capitalism, we have more freedom and higher living standards, and it worked out well for dozens of countries adopting capitalism across the world.

Join capitalism today, as we advocate for the facts against the facade of socialism and communism.

Actually, it’s quite the opposite. While socialism may have good intentions, it limits the drive for innovation because the control in socialism is centralized, which can also stagnate economic growth. Under a socialist society, productivity can lag because there's less personal incentive to excel when the rewards are shared indiscriminately. Capitalism thrives on fair competition, pushing businesses to innovate and improve efficiency, ultimately benefiting everyone with better products & lower prices. While socialism promises equality, it leads to inefficiency and limited personal freedom, as the government decides what is produced, who receives it, and what they can do with them. Capitalism empowers people to decide what they want to give to the world and gives them the freedom to pursue these goals, creating a dynamic society with more opportunities and high living standards. In fact, since you’ve mentioned exploitation, many capitalist societies addresses issues like inequality and monopolization, and even has regulations on them, but without stripping away personal freedom or the drive to innovate. Simply put, capitalism’s focus on individual initiative has a reputation of raising living standards and progress that socialism just can't match. Most of the best inventors in the world used their capitalist freedoms to invent things we all rely on today, like for example, Thomas Edison for the light bulb, Alexander Bell for the cellphone, and Vint Cerf for the internet.