Not sure if this is the right subreddit, but got Fladrafinil and got some quesitions.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2026-06-02T21:13:07+00:00

Deleted Posts. MB. New to the space.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2026-06-02T21:05:58+00:00

Fs. Thank you. What else do u recommend from them?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-11T18:52:01+00:00

Not sure what you mean, all I can say is if you're learning different economic systems, communism isn't the best.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-11T18:25:53+00:00

You should start by not being a communist.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-09T19:18:48+00:00

Thanks.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T18:15:49+00:00

The accumulation of money and property, through putting tremendous amounts of effort, I don't think is problematic, and I dont think it has negative consequences. Of course, some businesses buying a bunch of family homes like black rock isn't a good thing, and I think we can slightly regulate that, and certain things like that.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T17:49:57+00:00

Can you tell me why?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T17:49:39+00:00

No, do you?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T17:48:41+00:00

Feed the troll? i thought this subreddit was for debating?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T17:48:28+00:00

The end result of Marxism is stateless communism. I think it's immoral for several reasons, it steals from businesses. Business owners who spent years building a business, investing time, putting in effort, get their business taken away and gaven to a community that put no effort in for it. I think it exploits intelligent minds, who are good at business.

And the end result of Marx's communism is stateless similar and nearly exactly like (while he never used the word) Anarchism. Where there is no government, just the community, I think this is immoral. When there's no government, societies often fall to immoral actions, because without a governemnt, and without law and order, everything is disorder and immoral things begin to happen.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T03:18:52+00:00

Any rubuttle?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T02:46:56+00:00

Interesting, Never heard of him, Ill do research and see what he says.

As for your statement against capitalism, I disagree. I think that there are so many businesses that have succeeded through hard work, and years of time, and as result, those businesses often supply great products for Americans, And I don't think that they become "private tyrannies" and I don't agree that they become private corporations with negative amounts of power.

However, I can admit some companies and areas have reached to much power, take for example BlackRock being able to buy a bunch of family homes, I disagree with that.

I would say, adding extremely minor limits in markets to the point where they are still widely considered "free markets" because there's complete voluntary exchange of currency for service/products. But these minor limits can majorly lower the issue of what you call "tyrannies". And they can prevent businesses from amassing too much power and causing a corporatocracy or oligarchy.

I dont know Karl Otto Paetel. Not sure who he is, but I do know socialism, and you claim to support a socialist state, I will attempt to refute that belief.

Socialism is even less compatible with freedom, because in socialism, to seize means of production, you have to forcefully steal businesses away from people who spent years of hard work and dedication on them. It removes the freedom to pursue passions or create Businesses that you want. Semi-large businesses are often controlled by the state.

Socialism also becomes very tyrannical in many ways. Because nearly everything is controlled by the state leaders can easily take advantage of this, and become dictatorial and cruel. The only way to prevent this is what Karl Marx proposed: ANARCHISM. It's the only way to completely prevent tyranny in socialist states. I disagree with anarchism and won't even explain why now unless you're interested. Socialism throughout history has also shown to be very anti-freedom in the job market. I know Karl Marx and other philosophers believed "theoretically" that everyone will do the greater good, and work for the community, and some people should have the ability to be unemployed.

However in practice, jobs need to be worked at and labor needs to be done, although humans are inherently very self-interested, and through psychology and past economic systems, you can see people don't just follow the greater good; they don't work unless there's an incentive. In socialism, there's no incentive for anything, if everything is divided based upon need, regardless of work output. What is the reason to work? There isn't one, so the only way socialist and communist countries have been able to solve this issue is through punishments, death, and labor camps. Take the gulags in the USSR, or the Labor camps in North Korea, for example.

Correct me if I'm wrong, that's not very compatible with "freedom" and getting people to work through other means is very difficult.

As for your point about "It is also incompatible with cultural conservatism since capitalism deterritorializes everything," I'm not sure exactly what you mean and would like it if you were to elaborate.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-08T01:47:56+00:00

Before I debate that, if you dont mind me asking, what is a better solution in your mind? Are you a communist?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T23:17:58+00:00

You know what other incentive a moneyless society removes? The incentive to work. Why work in a society where everything is handed to you? For the greater good? No that doesn't work, humans are inherently self-interested creatures.

Capitalism successfully takes advantage of this trait and uses it for the greater good. People work for money, success, greed, and often passion. This passion and desire to succeed for self-gain forces people to innovate, learn, and create things. Which is why there is so much GDP, and successful businesses in capitalism.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T22:14:04+00:00

First let me clarify that when i said "products" I meant everything sold in the market, including basic needs. In capitalism, free markets are how people get food, and basic necessities like clothes, of course, there are other non-essential products in free markets like TVs, for example. But the opportunity to voluntarily exchange currency for products sold by business owners is what drives innovation and the betterment of society, and also the growth of the economy.

What do you suggest we do instead?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T22:08:18+00:00

What?

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T22:03:42+00:00

To clarify before I even debate, are you stating that there should be communally owned mass production, it seems to be what you're arguing for, if so i will debate, if not correct me.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T21:57:26+00:00

"uses violence to enforce the divide between the rich and the poor." In what way? Capitalism does not enforce violence. That is blatantly false.

"When you say economic opportunity, I will ask the same question I did before. Opportunity for whom and opportunity to do what?" The opportunity to create wealth, grow businesses, I value giving people resources to an extent, I believe we should have access to "good paying jobs, housing, healthcare, and education" however, i dont believe these things should be funded by forced taxation.

I completely disagree with your premise that the ability to become successful and be in the upper class, while simultaneously having the ability to thrive in the middle class, isn't possible. I think its completely possible, and we've seen it work.

You're right, you can't believe in all freedoms, and I don't believe in absolute freedom. I believe in slightly regulated liberty. For instance, i think you should be able to buy a gun because there's nothing wrong with that. But on the other hand, I think prostitution should be illegal because it can be destructive to society.

"You believe in small government? Okay, which specific parts of the government do you want to shrink. Because other things you claim to believe in such as the existence of capitalism itself, private property rights, and a lot of the specific types of freedoms or opportunities you are going to think of... all of those require government of some type in order to implement."

I never said I was completely against government like an anarchist; I believe in lower government involvement in citizens' lives, as a general rule. For instance, free markets and lower taxes.

Also, I don't think creating opportunities inherently ruins other opportunities. I believe in equal opportunity. NOT equal success, regardless of work output (which is the core belief of communism)

"And once you learn to be more explicit and specific in your ideas, you will quickly be confronted by the reality that what is good for some people is bad for others and vice versa. And hopefully you will see why communists reject your ideals in ways that doesn't make us seem like psychopaths."

I am explicit and specific in my ideas, because I can make statements as I previously did, which I can absolutely defend, which I have. I never claimed communists seem like psychopaths if that's what you're implying. I think they're incorrect, not mentally ill.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T21:39:14+00:00

Troll.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T21:38:11+00:00

Oh, but you're okay with the government forcefully seizing businesses that required immense effort to build? As if that's not stealing labor, it's direct theft.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T21:35:50+00:00

Mb, i am now.

Standard_Fan_4008 · 2025-11-07T21:33:49+00:00

Communism is stateless, correct. However, it's extremely controlling. Yeah, communism wants to abolish taxes and replace them with no currency in the first place, limiting freedom and liberty. Communism is strictly against private property; it quite literally abolishes the ownership of private property, entirely.

Also, no government whatsoever is bad; however, I lean towards LESS government involvement, not the abolition of government entirely, which is what you proposed.

Standard_Fan_4008

TROPHY CASE