Hacker News Reader

Comment by marcusverus | Hacker News Reader

I assume that this criticism is offered in good faith, and that you're in need of good, solid Wiki articles about the tens of millions of victims of Communist regimes--well, I'm happy to get you started!

Here's an article about the Soviet terror-famine (known as the Holodomor) which killed 4 million Ukranians. No worrisome notifications on this article, so I assume it meets your rigorous standards:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

And here's one about the so-called 'Great Leap Forward', when the Chinese Communist Party's top-down modernization plans resulted in the accidental deaths of ~50 million human beings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

View on HN

I don't know if you want to open the can of worms that is "accidental deaths from mismanaged resource distribution" under capitalism.

Global deaths from hunger result in one great leap forward every 5 years.

The fact that Capitalism has not (yet) solved the global issue of extreme poverty is hardly an argument against it. Particularly when it is the transition to capitalism which has done the most to solve the problem!

After all, it's a simple matter of fact that the accelerating decline of global poverty since 1990 was the result of the transition to capitalism in formerly Communist/Socialist countries in Asia, including the CCP's own particular flavor of state capitalism.[0]

[0]https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2019/04/Extreme-Poverty-p... [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty

I think comparing Capitalism and Socialism is a red herring. There is no "pure" Capitalism nor pure Socialism.

There are only countries with specific sets of laws governing them. The question is which system of laws is better and why and when and most importantly: Better for WHO?

Arguing that capitalism is the solution is like saying: Don't look here, we are better than socialist countries and therefore there is no need to improve anything in our country. Same for the other side too.

I'm not denying or excusing that historical atrocities occurred under socialist governments, but for perspective one should also look at the myriad atrocities that were and continue to be committed under capitalist governments. That doesn't excuse such actions, but neither side is innocent. I suggest reading The Wretched of the Earth* Chapter 1, "On Violence".

Here are a few examples off the top of my head:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race_massacre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_MOVE_bombing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_brutality_in_the_United...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St...

* Though I will object that it is unfair to attribute the actions of the Khmer Rouge to socialism. Like the Nazis they were socialist in name only, and in fact were supported by the United States in their war against the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

The issue is that these atrocities were committed more specifically as a result of communism, whereas other attrocities are less closely attributable to capitalism since it has been the majority default throughout history.

EDIT:. I'm not saying what's normal is ok, I'm saying what's common is more likely to falsely correlate with anything. Whereas as the common factor for communism across the board has been a high statistical propensity for mass murder and genocide. This includes the nazi regime I might add (look it up)

I'm not really interested in having this argument anymore, but I'll leave you with this:

Just because something is the "default" option doesn't mean it is non-ideological. Ideology is a powerful tool for shaping people's actions. People will go along with insane and sometimes horrifying things just because they perceive them as "normal". Maybe expose yourself to some alternative ideology. You don't have to agree with it to learn something.

That's ahistorical considering almost all deaths attributed to communism were a result of industrialization, a process which was just as deadly under capitalism.

The only difference as a result of ideology was the timeframe. The USSR was forced to rapidly industrialize due to global pressure from foreign militaries and famines in China were exceedingly common long before communism.

History is not as simple as you're making it out to be.

The famine under Mao was because of his failed policies, though.

Aside from the fact that mismanagement is not unique to communism, there have been many famines under capitalism.

I'm not a maoist, so I'm not about to defend his ineptitude, but it seems intellectually lazy to point to these problems as unique. In the 18th, 19th and 20th century, depending on what level of development a country was in, these problems were widespread across all ideologies.

Not unique, but some truly terrible leaders were inspired by Marxism in the 20th century. I'm not sure what the selling point is supposed to be if the rebuttal is that bad things happen under capitalism too.

I'm not selling revolutionary marxism here, but an informed view of history that doesn't fall into such ideological chasms.

Think about why Stalin is presented as a terrible leader and Churchill as a great one.

Holocaust is not due to capitalism. It's actually due to socialism. "The National Socialists German Workers Party"

That is the same thing as saying North Korea's failures are actually due to democracy. "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea"

Obviously the name of an organization doesn't mean jack compared to their actually implemented and enforced policies. The first things the Nazi's did when they gained power was kill all the socialists, communists, and unionists. They are anything but socialist.

This is a common rewriting of history in the last few years. Hitlers speeches are rife with rants against capitalism:

"We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” ~ Hitler

Literally the point you are replying to is that you can't take fascists at their word. You have to use their actions.

Communists were among the first inhabitants of Hitler's concentration camps. The Communist Part of Germany started the organization Antifaschistische Aktion, the direct precursor of what we now know as Antifa.

And please stop equating "anti-capitalist" and "communist". The two are not the same or even close.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com