this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
369 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43963 readers
1270 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stems from the black book of Communism which counts nazis killed by the Soviets, everyone killed by the nazis in the USSR, unborn children and even more absurd shit like that just to get to that number lmao.
If we count shit like that, Capitalism has killed billions.
Even using their numbers, if the choice is between 100 million people and every single living thing on the planet, communism sounds like a pretty good deal.
Comunism always sounds like a pretty good deal. UNFORTUNATELY IT'S LEADERS ARE ALWAYS CORRUPT
Only if you don't adjust for functioning existence lmao.
functioning existence isn't counted for Communism in the Black Book, so it shouldn't be for Capitalism.
You call this functioning?
I'd sure as shit rather live in China than India. I'd rather live in Cuba than Haiti, I'd rather live in Vietnam than Myanmar, I'd rather have lived in the USSR than the vast majority of Africa.
Turns out, the only capitalist countries that communist countries didn't do better than are the ones that got wealthy through centuries of brutal colonialism, exploitation, and slavery. Communist countries managed to develop in a fraction of the time, and with a fraction of the human misery, that it took places like the USA and Britain.
Ah yes, India, Haiti, and Myanmar. Definitely what people instantly think of when prompted for the average modern capitalist democracy rather than the us, uk, denmark, sweden, norway, germany, netherlands...cherry pick a bit harder and you might start making sense
Correct, other than extremely self-absorbed westerners who don't know that the rest of the world exists and that non-white people are people too.
You're literally the one demanding that we cherry pick here, man.
Those were your picks for the average capitalist democracy but I'm the one cherry picking? Lmao
Correct, yes. I'm not sure what your confusion is.
Do you have actual point, beyond performative incredulity and slurs?
I notice none of the countries you used as "Average capitalist democracies" (which were all western, European, colonialist states that had gotten rich off exploitation before they were even democratic, for some reason) aren't in the middle of the list (the completely nonobjective list with an arbitrary methidology) either.
I guess your selection was just bad faith coping garbage.
If all you're trying to prove is that rich countries are richer than poor countries; no kidding.