Possibly the dumbest anticommunist video 

This video was pretty stupid. The one you were responding to not your video of course.

Can you do a Debunking of the Black Book of Communism

the book debunks itself@@JohnKobaRuddy

LOL there is a conflict between individualism vs. collectivism as a political project. You must be some clueless kid.

i think there are text to speech tools for pretty long time (albeit these days are more sophisticated but still recognizable), and yes you can make the 1948 error by feeding the wrong text

Chat bots are actually better at understanding Marxism than this guy.

*glowing brain*

I thought so too but its from 6 years ago so Idk

You were right about that first sentence being incorrect. Whoever wrote this is borderline illiterate

The fact that it's barely possible to distinguish between real people actually making these arguments and a glorified Markov Chain producing a facsimile of these arguments says a lot

Modern AIs can generate so much better than this nonsense. This video was clearly written by someone who had no idea what they were talking about, not chatgpt. And if you don't believe me, ask Chatgpt to give some anti-communist arguments. While they will be the same bullshit arguments we get from anti-communists, they will be fully coherent unlike the video being reacted to.

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404Why did you bother posting this boring content? Seriously, you thought it was worthwhile to react to chatgpt text? You’re lazy.

Exactly 💯 I was anti Communist until I decided to read what it was about and saw that all the hate was ignorance and propaganda

Upravo tako!

Where is my reply?

The people spouting anticommunist stuff dont think for themself they watch these kinds of videos before talking and thinking.

Činjenice!

its a content farm for sure, but did they have this kind of AI 6 years ago?

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 This is from 6 years ago? I can't believe it Like, all the manerisms are beat by beat what you would expect from an AI generated voice, and so are all the weird mistakes concerning dates Holy cow, I can't believe that this was written by a human

​@@thefinnishbolshevik2404there was actually AI 6 years ago. Just no one knew about it. And it was ass.

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404They had AI like this 40 years ago :)

Turbo anti-revisionist AI

Commyism sounds really nice until put into practice.

​​​@@blokcomNativeFaces When it's put into practice you get a free house, free education, and free healthcare along with a job that gives you full payment for your labor, sounds so terrible. 😐 Before you say "it kills millions" ummm those millions are either Fascist, babies that weren't even have been born yet, or other bullshit reasons. While Capitalism killed over 100 million in the 20th century way more than the Socialists countries had killed. Stop reading the Black Book of Communism it has been debunked already.

Derp, how's capitalism fairing for Filipino or Congolese people?

@@KimJong-101 Hows commyisms doing for Nkorea? lmaoooo

@@grizzlycharizard0017 LMAO oh boy free stuff eh? This confirms the stoopidity you believe in

Preach🙌

The biggest challenge of stalin was staying alive and in power. Every dictator has such problem. WW2 was challenge to him as it was challenge to his power, not because he lead SU through it. He did not, this period was time when he did suddenly discover other people and orthodox church to lean on, he just kept working on his power base, others solves ww2 for him.

Communism with undead characteristics.

That sounds like it would be the case, but finbol just said it's 6yo

Based pfp

Its definitely taken from wikipedia, but maybe something else was done to it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_communism

I'll try to make a video on E. H. Carr pretty soon.

More specific questions: Was it correct for the Soviet Union and Cuba to support Ethiopia in the way they did? Was Somalia's claim on the Ogaden reactionary chauvinism or self-determination in the Leninist sense like Siad Barre claimed?

I'm honestly not sure what to make of it. The text is poorly copied from wikipedia, but the video is so old that it probably wasn't made by AI

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 if it wasn’t that would be sad

I'm not sure. According to wikipedia he advocated the pooling of goods, so he would be a consumption-communist. Did he also advocate the pooling production?

The two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive but why would you be homophobic?XD

It is advisable not to discriminate against our comrades because they like one flavor of person over another.

Homophobia isa reactionary ideology which also happens to have no ground when looked from a material analyst point if view, all of that aside why would you even be homophobic to begin with? Like it literally doesnt affect anyone? And everyone is different, like just because you like idk Ferraris and the person down the street likes Lamborghinis doesn't mean you have to hate the person or have any form of hostility towards them. The point of Communism and to be more specific Marxism is to emancipate humanity and make sure all humans can live life how they want without anyone being oppressed, so being hateful and undermining the existence of a certain group of people in this case homosexuals is kind of counter-intuitive. Just try to understand where you homophobic views come from and try to re-evaluate them

what are you talking about? 1) Leninism is the Marxism of the era of imperialism 2) Lenin's view did not really differ from Marx on those questions 3) the intelligentsia is not even a class, so I don't really understand what you mean

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 LMAO "era of imperialism" imperialism has been around long before Marx or Lenin, my country has suffered under it for centuries and part of it still occupied, despite the efforts of the INLA.. Lenin was very opposed to the ideas of council communism, he believed the working class were not educated enough to carry out a successful revolution on their own so the radical intelligentsia and revolutionary vanguard would guide them, that's why the worker controlled. Factory Committees and Workers Councils were centralized under the Bolsheviks. The idea of a Labour Army with a supreme leader at the head, that has nothing to do with socialism it's the exact opposite. And what type of socialist follows a single leader and just dismisses every idea of other socialists out of hand just because they disagree with their great leader? This is just authoritarianism with radical rhetoric to cover it up. Oh look, it's time to go worship your statute of Lenin, hahaha.

@@user-qw3rq6xv3n 1) you don't understand the topic at hand. The imperialism Lenin talks about is modern monopoly capitalism, not colonialism, which indeed has existed long before. I would imagine that the INLA agrees with Lenin, since they claim to be a Marxist-Leninist organization. 2) Council communism has nothing to do with this topic. I don't understand what you mean by that remark. Lenin believed the workers had to be organized into a party. The most active and class conscious workers formed the party. His opponents (economists) said that socialist views emerge automatically, but Lenin said socialist views are the result of scientific research which workers must learn by study. Lenin advocated a unified disciplined party, while his opponents (mensheviks) said that any supporter should be able to declare themselves a party member, without having to take any responsibility. 3) The worker councils (Soviets) were the foundation of the Soviet state. Lenin said that every country needs Soviets. What does it mean to say the Soviets or factory committees were "centralized"? Its gibberish. The Soviets elected delegates to the district and national congress of Soviets, which created all the laws and elected a government. A labor army is something the Communist Manifesto talks about, but you clearly must mean something else. Trotsky wanted to create labor armies where workers are controlled in military style, but this policy was ended after the civil war. Trotsky's proposal to make the policy permanent was rejected. 4) Nobody is rejecting other socialist ideas out of hand, except you, apparently. If Marxists reject certain other ideas, they have good reasons for it. It is very strange that you say these things. Lenin supported James Connolly and called his citizen army the first Red Army, and the INLA calls itself Leninist.

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 I know what he's talking about, but you talk about imperialism as if it only began in the mid 19th century, It has been around before modern industrial capitalism, from the Anglo, Franco, Spanish and Portuguese invasion of the Americas back to imperial Rome and beyond. Lenin did more to harm socialism in the west than anyone with his cult of personality, even though I was against the break up of the USSR & the Warsaw pact countries I knew it would be a boost for socialist movements in the west, I'm sceptical of people like Bernie Sanders especially with his response to the Gaza genocide but if you openly called your self a socialist like he does even though he's a social democrat it would have been a political death sentence during the cold war. In my view the only countries that practiced socialism were Yugoslavia, Cuba and Vietnam, it's probably why China invaded Vietnam..

@@user-qw3rq6xv3n if you know what I'm talking about then why are you bickering about terminology. I should've said "modern imperialism" and then we would've been in agreement. Obviously I don't disagree that colonialism has existed for all that time. Colonialism largely is what gave rise to capitalism. The collapse of the USSR has not been a boost for socialism anywhere. Bernie Sanders is a supporter of American imperialism. Lenin led the first successful workers' revolution, but you dislike him because the capitalists fear-monger about him. The socialist movement completely collapsed during WW1 and Lenin was the one who saved it. His ideas inspired the revolutionaries in Cuba and Vietnam. Yugoslavia was never socialist. It was a fascist capitalist regime and an ally of NATO.

but its from 6 years ago : /

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 Some type of brainlet then, though there were some simple text generating tools 6 years ago, or could be poorly translated. Must be using a tts cause it's just painful to listen lol

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 Some DARPA/Google pre-modern-GPT project being used by some bored anti-communist programmer? Honestly it's either an early Machine Learning program or just an incredibly poor English anti-communist yapping.

I think that's an ignorant statement. Before 1989 revisionist countries already had tons of private capital, selling of labor power as a commodity and exploitation, free buying and selling of means of productions and their planned economies had been replaced with market economy. Why do you believe revisionists hadn't restored capitalism before that point? Is it because most big industry still belonged to the state?

but did that kind of AI exist already 6 years ago?

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 my bad, didn't see the video was that old. clear incoherences + liberal bias + TTS made me immediately think of AI pollution.

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 if that was AI then I wonder what this anti communist video is ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yCk8UlvsEEM.html

Improvements for which class?

People who defend modern Chinese revisionism should honestly look at the realities. "Today there are still around 300 million peasants remaining in the countryside who barely survive on the money their children send home. They often have to abandon farming or just grow some vegetables for their own consumption. As a result China’s scarce arable land has become even scarcer. Their lives are very hard and some do not survive. There have been reports (not frequent but not rare either) where grandparents have poisoned their grandchildren with pesticides and then committed suicide. I still remember vividly what an old peasant said to me: “I followed Chairman Mao in his fight against capitalism. But I did not really know what capitalism was. Now I know. This is the capitalism Chairman Mao warned us about.”" (Pao-yu Ching, From Victory to Defeat, p. 105) "Glaring inequality is everywhere in today’s China. In the cities, it is common to see construction workers who migrated from the countryside sleeping in the streets, in tents temporarily set up in construction sites. Just a few yards from these tents are newly finished high-rises where well-dressed urbanites go in and out of expensive restaurants and stores. A meal in one such restaurant could be more than a whole month’s pay for these construction workers. A wine importer in Beijing told me that his business was booming and that China was the biggest customer for the world’s most expensive wine, which costs several thousand dollars a bottle. At the same time, one out of three rural residents in China now cannot afford clean drinking water." (Pao-yu Ching, Revolution and counterrevolution, p. 268) According to an interview by the People’s Daily, "Professor Wang Doming of the China University of Mining and Technology admitted that “China has a poor safety record among coal producing countries: in fact, we can say it has the poorest safety record.”" (Pao-yu Ching, Revolution and counterrevolution, p. 154) "China only produces 35 per cent of the world’s coal but suffers 80 per cent of the world’s mining accident deaths, with the death rate 30 times higher than that of South Africa" (Mobo Gao, The Battle for China's past) "Since 2015 the Chinese government has responded with harsher measures to crack down on this overt resistance by savagely beating up and sometimes killing strike workers and jailing their leaders." (“The Current Phase of Imperialism and China” by Pao-yu Ching in Lenin’s ‘Imperialism’ in the 21st, p. 70) I could give similar examples from all areas of Chinese life. There is terrible environmental destruction, absolutely terrible working conditions, fascist repression against workers who want to improve their lives. The new Chinese rulers are capitalists themselves: According to Mobo Gao (The battle for China's past, pp. 183-184, Constructing China, pp. 91-92) new big millionaire and billionaire capitalists include: -former vice-president of China Rong Yiren -Jiang Mianheng, the son of former general secretary Jiang Zemin -Ding Yuchen, the son of long time government propaganda chief Ding Guangen -Simon Jiang, the son of politburo member Qiao Shin -Zhu Yunlai, the son of former president of China Zhu Rongji -Li Xiaolin, The daughter of former prime minister Li Peng, whose wealth is estimated at half a billion dollars. - Zeng Qinghuai, the brother of former Chinese vice president Zeng Qinghong -Tian Chenggang, the son of former prime minister and politburo member Tian Jiyun -According to the Panama papers, 8 current or former members of the permanent committee of the Chinese politburo were involved in embezzlement and tax havens. -The eldest son of Deng Xiaopeng was caught stealing charity funds Mobo Gao cites a report according to which 90% of the more than 3000 Chinese billionaires are the sons and daughters of high ranking "communist" party members (Battle for China's past, p. 184) Pao-yu Ching interviewed an old communist activist who said that "During socialist times most of the delegates to the National People’s Congress were workers and peasants. Today, National People’s Congress delegates are business owners and intellectuals. They are all of considerable wealth." (From Victory to Defeat, pp. 91-92) Pao-yu Ching has explained in many works that China has huge excess of capital. That is why China builds massive infrastructure projects and too much housing in China itself. China also builds huge projects like 'one belt one road' to export capital and plunder foreign lands. The problem is that the living standard of Chinese workers is too low, so they cannot consume China's products. Thus China has a crisis of overproduction and excess capital. China is reliant on foreign markets. "housing stock expanded rapidly, reaching a level far above people’s ability to buy, causing the fear of a housing bubble burst. From the government rescue package came the extensive construction of the transportation network, which included 30,000 kilometers (18,600 miles) of high-speed railway and 35,000 km (22,000 miles) of highways. The major infrastructure construction facilitated the flow of goods and people. At the same time, tremendous waste resulted from over-building. Many four-lane highways built in small towns are still deserted, while whole cities and towns with rows and rows of residential and commercial buildings, roads, hotels and exhibition centers stand empty. This overinvestment has represented an extreme imbalance in the Chinese economy and caused tremendous damage to China’s natural environment. Despite the efforts made by the government to rebalance China’s economy to correct the low level of domestic consumption, the level has stayed unchanged at around 40% of GDP. The level of consumption cannot be raised, because of the low wages of Chinese workers." (From Victory to Defeat, p. 98) After the 2008 crisis China had to implement a recovery program which consisted of investments. Thus the investments rose to more than 50% of GDP, and remained there at least in 2018. This demonstrates how badly distorted the Chinese economy is. Huge investments producing for foreign consumers and a proportionally small rich and middle class. If capitalism goes into crisis abroad, the Chinese economy also goes into crisis.

@@manuellanthaler2001 Look up their poverty rate

@@kristoffer3000 I looked up the amount of billionaires and I didnt even know that China has more than US... in order to be a billionaire A LOT of other people need to be poor.

@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 one of the billionaires "shan weijan" also said something like The US is more socialist than China today. The guy was working at jp morgan and then went back to china or something. The capitalists themself like China more than the US which is absolutely wild.

no huhhuh

Didn't you know that there was a civil war in Finland between whites and Reds, and the whites won it only through intervention?

@@bethram0077 Thats pure copium. Communists are the most consistent patriots, while capital is willing to sell its homeland.

@@bethram0077 The "patriotic" Finns who licked German boot for the entirety of the interwar period? The "patriots" who wanted a foreign man to be the king of Finland, but didn't succeed only because their big brother Willy couldn't handle the heat in WW1?

@@bethram0077 There is no logic in what you're saying. You admit that capitalists wanted a German king to rule Finland and also sold their country to Hitler. Yet you accuse communists of opposing independence. You are clearly totally ignorant of the subject, most likely since you seem like a foreigner. There was never any plan for Finland to join the USSR and Red Finland never did. It was the workers and communists who always fought for independence while the capitalists always opposed it, even under the tsar. The leader of the Finnish army was Mannerheim, a tsarist general. He opposed both democracy and independence. The first video in this series talks about it in detail ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xygUXauKEY0.html And now the capitalists have sold our country's economic independence to the EU and its military independence to NATO, so that there is almost nothing left!

​@@bethram0077 You are clearly ignorant of the subject. The pact of non-aggression says nothing about those countries becoming part of the Soviet Union. The pact only says that Germany cannot expand to Finland, Latvia, Estonia or Eastern Poland. Likewise it says the USSR cannot intervene in the German sphere. That is why its a non-aggression pact. That is also why the USSR did not conquer Finland but was satisfied if there was a buffer between Germany and the USSR, and also did not enter into Poland until it became evident Germany was not following the pact and was trying to conquer all of Poland and go right to the Soviet border. Furthermore, Lithuania, which actually did join the USSR, was in the German sphere of influence. As a result of German aggression in Poland the pact had to be re-negotiated after Germans were driven out of Eastern Poland. The Finnish government attacked the USSR in the 1920s several times, hoping to conquer territory. Those same people, the fascist AKS and their ally the Kokoomus party and their allies in the Agrarian League party were the ones who provoked the war in 1939, which the Soviet Union wanted to avoid. The Soviet Union won the war, but did not occupy or conquer the country. The USSR only wanted to secure itself against Germany. The USSR knew that already before the war of 1939 Finland was closely tied to Germany, but also to England and France. In 1941 Finland again invaded the USSR and did not only return lost territory, but conquered Eastern-Karelia which the Finnish fascists had tried to conquer since the 1920s. There they setup an apartheid regime of racial segregation and colonial fascism. The Finnish fascist invaders did not consider the other Finno-Ugric nations deserving of independence. They forced Karelians, Veps and Ingrians to convert to protestantism and to stop speaking their native languages, which Finnish fascism claimed were not real languages but only "corrupted dialects" and forced them to learn Finnish. After Finnish fascism collapsed in 1944, the Soviet Union did not conquer the country. You should stop deceiving yourself and look at the facts.

Miks kirjotat suomeks englanninkieliseen videoon vitun urpo? :D

@@mixlllllll sen voi kääntää englanniksi vitun retu, mutta en sun kaltaiselta kommarilta odottaisi mitään enempää. Hirteen🙏🙏🙏