China isn't the only place that capitalist nations sell their trash to. And Korea is a military dictatorship, not a DotP. also China is Dengist not actually communist. it's a state capitalist nation. learn actual economics.
1,447,433,079 people can, on occasion, produce some. The days of "night soil" are kinda somewhat gone-ish. Heck, these people build entire ghost cities. Hard to do that without some leftover bags from all that concrete.
The closest to that would be Corporatist, which is what the US is.
The party still controls all aspects of the economy and the country overall, keepiing the course on ye olde road to socialism - or so they claim.
Isn't Iceland supposed to be what Alt Righties call "Socialist"?
btw, late 80s or so, a volcanic eruption threatened to engulf a harbor there, so they drenched it with sea water till it hardened. That's kinda killing the climate locally, and helping to rid Great Auks from the face of the earth wasn't exactly a great thing either.
Killing climate is irrelevant to being communist or capitalist. Any human population contributedcto deforesting and causing damage to the environment. Your statement is out of context and wrong just shows that you lack the ability to prove me wrong when I say that communism is a failure and you can't back that up. BTW any erupting volcano of a decent size or a meteor can cause more clumate damage in a single day than all humanity in a millenia. Just shows how weak your argument is.
Actually, extreme destruction of the environment happens when ownership of resources is obtained by people who do not experience the consequences of resources extraction. the socialist theory calls for the ownership of the means of production by the workers, the workers likely live near where the process is taking place, the workers then would experience the consequences and so would have a higher incentive to properly manage the extraction of resources. capitalism alienates ownership from the worker, and the CEO rarely has reason to be concerned with the consequences of their extractive industry.
Again, as the famines (which killed mega millions) caused by such 'management' in the USSR and China can testify?
Were those lives not deemed worthy of preventable diseases level status? And while we're at it, how IS the preventable disease scene going in those massive behemoths of serfdom?
Pffft, you been learning garbage. I lived communism, I have first hand experience of what is like. You want an example, name me a single successful communist country, just one, just a single one, go ahead ask your teachers for help. There is your answer. I do not care what garbage they are teaching you in college.
Yeah, you keep pretending you know your stuff. You are just making yourself a fool in front of everyone. Hey everyone, do note how they completely dodge the question and are not able to name me a single successful successful capitalist country! Did everyone catch that?! Dodging and projecting, the liberal way.
Now you are just doing circles in your brain. I provided you a quote from Lenin, you just went on into your own tantrum with your own OPINIONS. We are done talking, you lack essence and argument power. You are just living in that make believe fantasy world. you are not worth my time.
I mean on a long enough timeline success cannot be defined but clearly if looking for countries that provide stable economies and provide for defense of the citizen to live in liberty capitalism destroys both socialism and communism, but keep up the subtlety of cherry picking nonsense because you hate capitalism because you are an incapable loser.
Oh there hasn't been a successful communist regime because of hierarchy. Hierarchy is a rule of nature and it is perverse to believe you are going to create a social system that completely ignores this fact. If ownership doesn't exist, nor a symbol for competence like money, the hierarchy goes to power for powers sake and heads will roll. Capitalism isn't perfect but it's clearly better and proven better.
Liberty is handed down by a power above you, I prefer freedom. and if you want to talk about stable economies, capitalism has not offered anything of the sort.
Claims of "rules of nature" in regards to human society are pseudoscientific. Human beings augment their environments with society and culture, nature as a concept is far too vague and nebulous to mean anything. Also a favourite term of eugenicists and race scientists which I'm sure you aren't.
I think the USSR was shit, but after the fall the majority of people wanted it back. Yeah, society is hard to figure out. but you're talking about socialist transition states, not communist countries. no society has fulfilled the ideology of communism better than the zapatistas, but yeah most experiments failed for various reasons related to hierarchy and ingroup thinking.
shit, nuance is a thing, sorry that might be to much for you.
Yeah, you keep pretending you know your stuff. You are just making yourself a fool in front of everyone. Hey everyone, do note how he completely dodge the question and was not able to name me a single successful successful communist country! Did everyone catch that?! Dodging and projecting, the liberal way.
Oh, wait, did you say "mass murdered"?
The Capitalist boom of the 19th to 20th Centuries in the US and European countries with colonial holdings came from stripping resources from where and incurred heaps of mass murder as 'collateral damage' to whom again?