use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
詳しくは検索FAQを参照
高度な検索: 投稿者や、subredditで……
~67 人のユーザーが現在閲覧しています
Rules
No blatant racism
Be nice to eachother
You can make your own starterpacks here: http://starterpackbuilder.com/
Internet Communist starter pack (i.imgur.com)
Repulsive_Anteater が 25日前 投稿
[–]xtromp 91ポイント92ポイント93ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
paging r/FULLCOMMUNISM.
Reactionaries need to be sent to the Gulag.
[–]PUBLIQclopAccountant 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 20日前 (0子コメント)
you mean /r/gulag?
[–]hoppierthanthou 71ポイント72ポイント73ポイント 25日前 (40子コメント)
Looks a lot like an internet libertarian starter pack.
[–]wasteknotwantknot 46ポイント47ポイント48ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
All you're missing is some bitcoin and a Rand Paul bumper sticker
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-49ポイント-48ポイント-47ポイント 25日前* (38子コメント)
Well, of course. Both are economic-political theories that have been repeatedly shown not to work because they clash with basic human nature. Both are touted as flawless by teenagers and college students without the real world experience to realize why they won't work. Both are defended by their proponents with the phrase, "Well, it's never been done right! If it were done right, it'd work." Both are irritating to talk to because both use cookie cutter arguments over and over that have been disproven over and over.
I could go on. But the gist of it is that it's horseshoe theory in its finest.
edit I adore how this comment has pissed off both communists and libertarians. Keep the downvotes coming, when you get older you'll realize how much y'all have in common.
edit II Here's the unadulterated truth:
Marx's manifesto was an interesting prediction when he wrote it in the 18-fucking-40s, but shit was dated within twenty years. Wanna know why communism failed? Because the Russians were working off a seventy year old prediction of the direction society was going that didn't happen. Even then, it was meant as a prediction within industrial economies and they applied it to a feudalistic agrarian society.
The problem with Ayn Rand? There didn't need to be an author before her because it was the status quo in industrial societies, and the status quo sucked shit. She was extolling the so called benefits of a society that existed thirty years before her that everyone who lived through it realized sucked the sweat off a dead man's balls. The woman lived through the ultimate worst of communism and instead of taking a measured approach to any alternative, advocated a system that her adopted homeland already figured out did not work.
Both sides are for are fools. There's no convincing us adults that your foolish philosophies aren't foolish. Grow up.
[–]x_glo 53ポイント54ポイント55ポイント 24日前 (4子コメント)
Muh horseshoe theory
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント 24日前 (2子コメント)
My point exactly.
Does /u/x_glo's reply look like that of a grown adult with years of experience under their belt and knowledge of history? Or that of a teenager who thinks they know everything? Can you even tell what side they're on, communism or libertarianism?
[–]x_glo 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
I think /u/FreakingTea put it well
"It's an asinine theory that declares itself to be openly superficial. Two enemies may at times use similar strategies, but it is their cause that determines why they fight. Anyone who thinks opposing sides in a war are the same has no idea what a war actually is. Drawing a horseshoe shape does not make this any more convincing, especially as the so-called "center" finds itself aligning with the far-right more often than not. You'll also see Ayn Rand's name listed among prominent supports of the theory."
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント 24日前* (0子コメント)
In this case, the center is the mixed market economy that has proven itself, again and again, as sustaining more stable growth than either libertarianism or communism. Proponents draw themselves from everywhere but the the extremes of the economic-political spectrum.
Which is another part of my point. Reality and history trump philosophy; especially philosophies that have been disproven by the same metric.
edit That argument works if the extremes are inherently unknowable. But we can look at history to see how each turn out. This is no cosmic mystery here, mixed market has won out; the question lies in how much role the government should play versus private enterprise. The only persons who argue against the mixed market economy are communists and libertarians, both of whom have had history prove their philosophies wrong.
edit II This is seriously inarguable. Nearly no one over the age of 22 contests this. I get being a high school or college student, I've been there. But in what we adults call "the real world," libertarians and communists are seen as jokes. It's just not how the world works.
[–]PainusMania2018 28ポイント29ポイント30ポイント 24日前 (11子コメント)
I adore how this comment has pissed off both communists and libertarians.
And just about any body who has any understanding of the subject matter.
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント 24日前 (10子コメント)
Considering a bunch of your comment history is defending Marxism, I'm gonna go ahead and not assume you're neutral in all this.
[–]PainusMania2018 19ポイント20ポイント21ポイント 24日前* (9子コメント)
Bias is an interesting concept, in that it apparently only ever holds true for people who hold to positions opposite from the person making the accusation of bias.
Yes, I defend communism (within a Marxist context). As it happens I like to discuss ideas, both their merits and failings in a serious manner. As it happens "hoomin natr", horseshoe theory, and "killed millions" are not serious objections and are entirely indicative of someone's desire to neutralize a subject without having to engage with it on an intellectual level or alternatively has little idea what they are talking about to begin with.
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 24日前 (8子コメント)
killed millions
Never said that, champ. Every philosophy since the dawn of man has killed multitudes. It's a non argument.
hoomin natr
Dismissing your opponent's intelligence through misspelling their argument. Mature tactic.
Both libertarianism and communism expect their philosophies to work by expecting us to deny parts of our being.
Libertarianism expects us to be purely selfish. Perfect economic actors. That a pure meritocracy can exist. That if your brother was starving and you were looking for someone to hire, you wouldn't hire him because someone could provide you 0.5x more value. Or that, in a scenario we wouldn't be as sympathetic to, a racist would hire someone of the race they dislike even if that person brought them 5x more value than a person of a race they do like.
Communism expects us to deny our desire for proper compensation for our labor. The concept of "each according to his ability to each according to his need" means that the person producing the greatest value sees no more benefit from it than the one providing bare minimum. That anyone's motives for production must include everyone else, any enterprise for personal benefit is immoral.
I've known many persons from the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. I've heard their stories firsthand.
I've read the history of my country, the US, in the 19th century.
Neither work. And to the point, literally no one argues against the fundament of the mixed market economy beyond high school or college. At most, if anything, they argue about the level that the government or free enterprise should play. The basis of the economy isn't something that we care about in the real world. If people do know, they know it has worked this long and has worked better than the alternatives.
You can muse all you want with your fellows in /r/philosophy, but until you can show an alternative that can play out well in the day to day life of the average person, no one's gonna give a rat's ass.
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 24日前* (4子コメント)
Communism expects us to deny our desire for proper compensation for our labor.
This is what I'm talking about.
Arguments of human nature by definition do not allow for any divergence. That's a problem right of the bat considering the principle that you highlight doesn't exist in all societies at all points in history. That, as it happens plays into Marxist analysis, which asserts that human nature is remarkably flexible and consequently adapts itself to the existing conditions. It's amusing that people like to comment on the subject of human nature in relation to Marxism without being aware that Gattungswesen plays a fairly important role in Historical Materialism.
Incidentally, that human beings are products of their environmental conditions rather than subject to some vague ontic state is largely accepted within an academic context, including by those who are called upon by existing political institutes in order to solve social issues, which makes your criticism even more idiotic.
[–]RsonW -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 24日前 (3子コメント)
To change persons' nature from where it is now, however malleable it may be, to the point that either communists or libertarians would find palatable would take a concerted effort, which most persons valuing personal liberty would find abhorrent. In this way, and this way alone, libertarians are better than communists because they're only misguided to think that persons have no need to raise their children differently to fit their worldview. Whereas communists have historically demanded that children be raised to espouse communist ideals, usually through coercion.
The philosophy is nothing I haven't heard of and discussed at length years ago. But I'm a grown man, I've had my fill of navel gazing. This has all been discussed at length a century ago and the history has all played out. Philosophy is an interesting distraction, but it's got as much to do with life as sports or video games. History has shown what works and it plays out in reality. What's left to be discussed is nuance and that's politics.
I've got work tomorrow. I'm out. Good luck with your communism.
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 24日前* (2子コメント)
To change persons' nature from where it is now, however malleable it may be, to the point that either communists or libertarians would find palatable would take a concerted effort, which most persons valuing personal liberty would find abhorrent.
This is a meaningless criticism. Marxists, Communists, Socialists, Anarchists, what have you, are not liberals. They do not operate under and they explicitly reject Liberal Normative views. At best, all you are doing is pointing out that they aren't liberals and at worst you are presenting a circular argument.
Never mind the fact that you've moved to goal posts from "Marxism ignores human nature" to "Marxism is morally wrong in it's attempt to manipulate human nature", this kind of shit is why your comments get downvoted.
The philosophy is nothing I haven't heard of and discussed at length years ago.
Which is funny, considering how much of it you get wrong.
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-12ポイント-11ポイント-10ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
I am through being civil.
Because I was arguing from within a Marxist perspective to meet you halfway, you fucking child. Do I need to add the "assuming Marx is correct" because you need every single goddamn thing presented to you on a silver platter?
Jesus tittyfucking Christ. This is what pisses me off about know it all children. Get off your parents' pay and realize how pointless this fucking navelgazing is, you worthless shit.
Even if I did, so motherfucking what? Literally not a thing about this matters. That was my point from the start. It's pointless goddamn navelgazing. It seems important to you because you haven't discussed it with self-righteous cunts like yourself for years on end.
When (if, really) you start drawing a paycheck instead of suckling on your parents' teat, you'll realize this has been discussed, at length, by people far, far smarter than you (I know, it sounds unbelievable!). And that the history has already been made, the answers are already known.
If you really want to make your own philosophy instead of parroting what you've read, do it. But be warned, no one will give a flying fuck because it's as pointless as sports, video games, or TV shows. But y'know what? At least those entertain people instead of making them scan for the nearest exit like your hair-pullingly irritating, half-baked philosophy.
I'm done with you, thank you for proving my point. This shit is only believed by people without any real world life experience.
[–]HolaHelloSalutNiHao 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
I'll play devils advocate for both sides, just to be fair.
Of course humans will make "bad" economic decisions. However, if they put too many wrong feet forward, they'll inevitably lose out by market forces. The example of the starving brother; can one person really change the health of the entire economy? And even if all employees were hired that way, the firm would run out of business as its competitors are making more efficient decisions. The same reasoning applies to racial discrimination, but with the added factor of social ostracism. If you know that a given firm is actively excluding certain applicants from a job because of their race, you can form a protest group or boycott.
*switches to communist*
Which is why most socialists have maintained that the final stage of a communist society is only able to be implemented with high amounts of automation and productivity. But the phrase has a double meaning, and the one most people take--the one of distribution--is really not relevant at all to the idea of communism. Not at all. The more relevant meaning of the phrase, and the one which many communists employ, refers to production for utility and directly to be used by society rather than for market exchange and profit. Most socialists actually hold that items should be distributed through a system of notes representing hours and efficiency worked, which can be used to purchase items which require the same amount of labour to produce.
Neither of them are really the best examples (they definitely don't fit the Marxian definition of socialism) and even if they were, over fifty percent of adults in Russia see the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Socialism as a bad thing.
A 55%-majority agree with the statement: “It is a great misfortune that the Soviet Union no longer exists.” Views on this question have been relatively steady since Pew Research first asked it five years ago. In 2009, 58% described the collapse of the USSR as a great misfortune, and 50% expressed this opinion in 2011.
*switches to libertarian*
The increasing monopolization of industry and the abuses suffered during that period were largely due to corruption and influence in the government, allowing the government to grant monopolies to certain companies. The antitrust laws to break up monopolies would not have been necessary if the U.S. had not facilitated monopolies in the first place--inequality and monopolies are in the first place the result of government intervention.
For most things, let the market handle it. Keep fiat currency, though, and provide a progressive income tax, universal basic income, and subsidies to education industries. These are completely useful, and don't interfere largely with the free market as long as they are restricted. The market will move towards equilibrium--for wages, which will adjust usually to the marginal product of labour, so don't worry about them dropping towards substinence level. Wages are controlled by supply and demand, and price controls like minimum wages will generally cause an inaccessibility of the labour commodity, which results in unemployment and will make the economy less productive as a whole.
The economy should be organized in a federated way and shouldn't be controlled by the state, but by the community. The state will simply become a new capitalist and rob the working class of their surplus labor (hence the derogatory "state capitalism" for the USSR and Yugoslavia.) Each individual workplace should be controlled democratically by the people who work there. They should be able to elect and remove managers, and they should be able to decide how their workplace splits any earnings. The local commune or town should elect a board which will more or less arbitarily set prices--maybe by the amount of embodied labour in a commodity--and adjust the price up or down depending on shortages or surpluses. Then, the individual firms should produce what goods they democratically decide to, and receive credits for that which can purchase other goods.
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
I'm just gonna hit the highlights.
The fact is that nepotism has existed in business forever, and as far as I've seen, zero businesses have failed due to it.
Racism is only ostracized in business, in the US, since the 1960s due to the Civil Rights Act of 1965, which as Rand Paul will tell you, was anti-business. Racism is still informally practiced in many industries, which are not suffering either fiscally nor in the eyes of the general public.
The ideals of high productivity are naturally stifled by the lack of incentive for innovation due to the prohibition on private ownership of the means of production. "If I made what people wanted, I'd have made a faster horse." Similarly, when workers own the means of production, they have no reason to collectively risk their necks for an unproven product, especially when there is no such thing as capital. It works if everyone's making … nails and bread and the like, but what a fucking dreary existence that is and for anyone who's been raised in a MME, it'll be a step backward. The notes are interesting conceptually, but they seem a lot like US dollars with all the problems thereof (define efficiency, now that's the question instead of raw $/h.)
That's the exact thing I addressed before. When your argument's "it hasn't been done right yet," you're already far behind. The times it's been tried, it falls into dictatorship? Well, that's no good, is it? Of course it'll be different this time.
Same thing, different side. You mean when it's been tried before, the first companies to market bought out the governments? And we're just gonna ignore the abuse of workers and fleecing of consumers under that era, I suppose.
Listen, this has all been argued to death. The only reason it's even interesting to people is that they're new to philosophy. Which are the high school and college students whom I've mentioned before. The reason these philosophies aren't discussed in the real world is that these discussions have been had, the attempts have been made to implement those philosophies, the history has been made. You wanna navel gaze, go on ahead. But don't expect anyone else outside your bubble to care.
[–]skt_t1_swigglet -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 24日前* (0子コメント)
>>> /r/classcuck
[–]Hhtura 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 24日前 (5子コメント)
they clash with basic human nature
Every political theory clashes with "human nature." This claim means nothing by itself.
Both are defended by their proponents with the phrase, "Well, it's never been done right! If it were done right, it'd work."
Well, first, there's nothing wrong with saying the implementation of your system could be improved upon; it's essentially just a way of saying that no system in the past has been perfect. But most importantly, both groups you're speaking of advocate for theoretical systems that haven't yet materialized, thus if some liberal keeps confusing what either of them are talking about with some other, fundamentally different system, due to an overlap in the colloquial language, which is actually the nature of the situation you're trying to describe, then yes, that is does indeed seem like something that's worth clarifying.
it's horseshoe theory in its finest
That's not a real thing.
Marx's manifesto was an interesting prediction when he wrote it in the 18-fucking-40s, but shit was dated within twenty years. Wanna know why communism failed? Because the Russians were working off a seventy year old prediction
It sounds like you just read some pages of The Communist Manifesto and somehow got the idea that that's all there is to Marx. If you want to explain why you think materialist dialectics is flawed or what parts of Capital have grown outdated, be my guest, but I get the sense you aren't familiar with the subject matter; that your critique of him would be limited to vaguely drawing a line between his work and the Soviets, and then reciting to us how many babies Stalin personally drowned in a river.
The problem with Ayn Rand?
Most libertarians I know don't actually care much about Ayn Rand. If anything, they found that one book of hers inspirational. She's a bit of an odd ball even on the right, and a person could certainly be a libertarian without even having read her.
Both sides are for are fools. There's no convincing us adults that your foolish philosophies aren't foolish.
Well, I can reply by saying there's no convincing an infantile liberal like you that liberalism isn't foolish. Do you see that I, too, can make baseless appeals to age and maturity? (As if it were needed, of course – the world has no shortage of old fools.)
[–]RsonW -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 24日前 (4子コメント)
I've been arguing against both sides for too long and I'm tired of the fucking navelgazing.
So I'll make you deal.
You show me the historical evidence that shows your philosophizing isn't pointless, self-aggrandizing jerking off and I agree to give a shit.
Sound good?
[–]Hhtura 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 24日前* (3子コメント)
You've been dismissing both sides, you mean, since you think anything that doesn't already exist must be bad, and that the truth must always lie somewhere between two extremes – also known as boring, uninspired liberalism.
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
So history's a worthless means by which to judge the efficacy of a system. Looking at the records that show those extremes have been bad is boring and uninspired; the exciting way is to try them again and hope for the best. It'll be different this time!
In other words, yes, this is self-aggrandizing jerking off on your part.
[–]Hhtura 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 23日前 (0子コメント)
Which you say as though communists today just want to copy and paste the exact systems that existed in the past onto modern society and call it a day. Perhaps true, if your view of those systems is so reductive that simply "being socialist in some way" is enough to be considered exact replicates of them. It'd be like if somebody said the American revolutionaries were saying "let's just try again and hope for the best" to the idea that is "having a government," as though because not every component of the prior system changed, nothing did. Not all communists were supportive of the Bolsheviks from the beginning, much less by the period Stalin oversaw, and much less for other countries whose leaders were less admirable than Lenin; Cambodia, say.
[–]TessHKM 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
Ah, good ol' "human nature." Marxism, and all the fields of study it has spawned over the past 150 years, and all the intellectual work and research, just happened to ignore “human nature.” It is amazing how this is presented as an intellectual critique, and the Marxist dialectic presented as anti-intellectual, when the human nature counterargument is based on the assumption that human motivation is monolithic, simplistic, and in no way influenced by external or personal factors that differ from place to place, person to person, era to era. It is intellectual laziness at its finest, because it relies on no research, or even personal observation beyond the behavior of a few extremely wealthy individuals.
The idea that human nature is greedy and selfish and that these are thus primary motivating factors that are ingrained in the way we behave has been debunked by studies performed by the University College of London, M.I.T., the University of Amsterdam, the University of Princeton, the University of Berkley, Washington State University, Emory and Carnegie Mellon [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. They're artificial, and exist as a by-product of our survival instinct. Under our current economic system, as well as its previous two exploitative iterations (feudalism and slavery), money equals survival. The more you have, the better your chances are.
This is supported by the works of evolutionary biologist John Maynard Smith, anthropologist Robert Trivers, political scientist Robert Axlerod and Primatologist Frans De Waal, and economist/zoologist/evolutionary theorist Peter Kropotkin.
All of these go into detail into why human beings are much more cooperative, altruistic, reciprocal, mutualistic and empathetic with one another than they are selfish, greedy or egocentric. None deny that these latter aspects of behavior exist, but simply hold that they do not account for the concepts of emotional contagion, targeted helping, cultural transmission, consolation, game theory or self-recognition. If you can explain these with 'human nature is selfish and greedy', by all means I'd love to learn how.
Source #2, particularly, which is Dan Pink's seminar on Mastery, Autonomy and Purpose, reveals that once people earn enough money to satisfy their basic needs they become motivated by having a sense of autonomy (ie. the desire to be self-directed), mastery (ie. the urge to get better at things), and purpose in their work and life. Money is simply a means to those basic needs, and if you were to eliminate it altogether, and provide those means to the people another way, or for those means to be guaranteed/readily and freely available to them, people would no longer engage in the kind of behaviour you call "greed".
The need for food, water or shelter is biological -- a lack results in death. However, human society has changed how and why resources are gathered. The biological necessity is the same: humans need to eat, drink, sleep, stay out of the rain. But society has developed a way to transport current resources into the future for use in that future -- money. Thus, humans seek money.
[+]Ishmael_KingOfTheSea スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント 25日前* (12子コメント)
Libertarianism was definitely more successful than communism. There's this one country called America that was pretty big on it for like, two hundred years, but it didn't collapse like the communist countries.
edit- TIL Reddit is full of communists.
[–]RsonW 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 25日前* (10子コメント)
The Gilded Age and Antebellum Period were a hot mess of financial instability with constant depressions and market crashes. The United States has been a mixed market economy for over a hundred years, during which time it's had the most growth and stability of its history. Even including the Great Depression, the recessions that have taken place are nothing in comparison to the depressions of the 19th century. We're talking about one global depression with a multitude of factors worldwide compared to a systemic failure to ensure a stable economy due to political philosophy over the same amount of time. Which is more successful?
And that's ignoring the on the ground abuse of the workforce and fleecing of consumers that was rampant in that era.
Both communism and libertarianism are failures. That's why they're fringe philosophies. Communism's failure is 20th century history and libertarianism's is 19th. Libertarianism's was so long ago that people who've lived through it are long dead. But we still have the records that tell us what a shitshow it was.
[–]Braver_Incident 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 24日前 (7子コメント)
Lol, the socialist economy actually was on par if not better than the capitalist economy. Why do you think the USSR was a threat to the US? They were like the US in power, economy, and military, with the addition of having an ideology that was so popular and infectious. Why? Because it made sense, and it was working.
That's why we had McCarthyism. That's why the US stigmatized socialism and arrested CPUSA leaders who did nothing.
They were scared because they knew they could be beaten.
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 24日前* (6子コメント)
Which is why the Soviet Union's economy didn't collapse under Brezhnev and Gorbachev. And why the PRC never turned to capitalism. Wait…
Both communism and libertarianism fail under the magnifying glass of history. We're well over a century deep into mixed market economy here in America and each decade has done better than the last. Hiccups every now and then, but the recovery more than makes up for any stumble.
I expect to have to argue against libertarianism because its failings were over a hundred fifteen years ago, but you can talk to living persons about why communism is a shitshow.
[–]Braver_Incident 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 24日前 (5子コメント)
The USSR collapsed because both tried to create liberal reforms, and Gorbachev had the goal of separating the USSR and getting rid of communism, AND significantly increased funding to keep up with Reagan's Star Wars program and other wasteful spending he had. The USSR economy was extremely good, but not good enough to fund ridiculous military projects with no application.
PRC turned to capitalism because the only socialist super power fell... They had no more support.
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 24日前 (4子コメント)
The USSR hadn't supported the PRC since the 50s. There was a major rift in communist theory between Maoism and Marxism-Leninism. And the USSR had no more interest in helping the PRC than they did helping Tito's Yugoslavia.
Swing and a miss.
The USSR was doomed because they produced more in sectors that didn't have need and workers weren't as easily transferable as they'd assumed. That's why they would have an excess of tractors but not enough toilet paper. Too much wheat one year with too little cotton; only to see the reverse five years later. Planned economies don't work as well as following supply and demand.
[–]Braver_Incident 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 24日前 (3子コメント)
That's not the point, the point is that there is no superpower socialist country to spear head the worldwide revolution, to abolish capitalism, and to provide trade.
No, they were doomed because of matching Reagan's spending. If this was such a problem, why did socialism spread to a third of the world and raise a super power in 20 years, huh? Explain that.
[–]RsonW -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 24日前 (2子コメント)
Didn't stop Cuba, Laos, or North Korea from sticking to their guns. Fuck, didn't stop China or Yugoslavia before the USSR's collapse.
No, they were doomed because of matching Reagan's spending.
They were doomed well before that. Their economy was slipping in the 70s under Nixon, Ford, and Carter. They invaded Afghanistan in the late 70s, which cost them even more.
why did socialism spread to a third of the world and raise a super power in 20 years, huh? Explain that.
Because of the massive size of the Red Army. Because of human rights violations that are often mentioned in the same breath as the holocaust.
You're willfully ignorant of history. That's the problem of both communists and libertarians.
[–]Neuermann -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
So they down vote you when you say communism is bad, but they upvote you when you say libertarianism is bad, when all you are arguing is that neither work in their purest forms, but rather a mixed market economy has been proven time and time again?
[–]RsonW -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
What's funny is that this was downvoted earlier. Now that I've got communists arguing with me, it's upvoted.
Libertarians have given way to communists.
[–]Braver_Incident 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
The US isn't libertarian, and socialism has shown to be as successful, if not more than capitalist countries. Socialism brought a feudal society to a superpower in 2 decades. It took a century for even industrialization to occur for capitalist countries.
[–]mrmushbrain 20ポイント21ポイント22ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
The kid looks like a white version of Jordan Peele
[–]TotesMessenger 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
[–]Helium_3 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 17日前 (0子コメント)
You forgot the "(insert communist regime here) wasn't real communism."
[–]SistaSabuda 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 25日前 (9子コメント)
http://i.imgur.com/20lYtUy.jpg
[–]h3lblad3 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
Move back a bit to early Soviet history and homosexuality wasn't criminalized under Lenin. He also believed in equality between the sexes.
[–]technoguyx 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
Heck, some of the first things legalized after 1917 were homosexuality, abortion, secular marriage, and divorce to be requested by either of both parts. Things seemed to change from the 30s and onwards.
[–]YourNitmar 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 24日前 (4子コメント)
It's hilarious because it's so wrong.
[–]TheOnlyOtherRedditor -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 10日前 (3子コメント)
Why?
[–]YourNitmar 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 10日前 (2子コメント)
Well, the person in the picture being labelled as 'Liberal left' talks for itself and this picture doesn't belong here.
Anyway, I'm all for a good joke but when you make shit up, it's not funny, it's pathetic.
Here's what's wrong with the picture:
hates nationalism/patriot of soviet motherland
Communism, at its core, opposes nationalism. A stateless society where everyone is equal can't exist when there are people considering their nationality above the rest and taking pride in it.
is pacifist, hates militarism/proud of his nation's military
The military is there to protect the state and fight for the interests of the bourgeoisie. The USSR's army protected the revolution from Capitalist countries that wanted the USSR's downfall.
is against nuclear arms/strong supporter on nuclear arms
No true Communist supports weapons of mass destruction created for the sole purpose of destroying entire cities. The USSR's nukes were a protection against the US during the cold war.
thinks 'the cops' have too much power/believes in a strong police force
In every society police is necessary but it's undeniable that in our society the cops are not professionally trained, in most countries are too militarised and sometimes have too much power. The problem doesn't lie in the cops themselves, but the police force as a part of the state and the current laws the state orders the police force to enforce.
LGBT activist/supports soviet criminalisation of homosexuality
Homosexuality became legal after the USSR was established but became illegal again when Stalin got in power. It doesn't necessarily mean people supported that, especially considering that people, even the government, were rather pro-LGBT after Stalin's death, even though homosexuality remained illegal.
thinks drugs should be legal/thinks drug users/dealers should be shot without trial
Shot? More like a few years in prison. It is also worth noting that until about 1974, possession of drugs or use of drugs without intention of trafficking were legal.
is feminist/thinks feminism divides the nation and working class
I didn't know Russians were Brocialists, lmao. Anyway, in the USSR, women and men were equal and the concepts of marriage and traditional family were weakened. Sounds pretty feminist to me.
opposes 'imperialist' wars in the middle east/supports the armed invasion of islamist territories
What invasion of Islamist territories, lol?
Anyone who doesn't oppose Imperialist wars on resourceful 3rd world countries is no true Communist.
[–]TheOnlyOtherRedditor 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 10日前 (1子コメント)
Invasion of Afghanistan?
Also the joke is that actual communism is very different from what this guy thinks. The USSR was very patriotic and pro military.
[–]herobounce 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 6日前 (0子コメント)
The USSR wasn't actual communism though...
[–][削除されました] 22日前 (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]isReactionaryBot 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 21日前 (0子コメント)
sistasabuda post history contains participation in the following subreddits:
/r/srssucks: 43 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 320.
/r/conspiracy: 2 posts (1, 2), combined score: 56; 78 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 227.
/r/subredditcancer: 4 comments (1, 2, 3, 4), combined score: 8.
/r/murica: 1 comments (1), combined score: 3.
/r/imgoingtohellforthis: 9 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 166.
/r/shitstatistssay: 28 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 180.
/r/undelete: 16 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 60.
/r/tumblrinaction: 5 posts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), combined score: 622; 172 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 2480.
/r/darkenlightenment: 2 comments (1, 2), combined score: 10.
/r/conservative: 2 comments (1, 2), combined score: 4.
/r/punchablefaces: 30 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 374.
/r/sjwhate: 1 posts (1), combined score: 29; 18 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 114.
I am a bot. Only the past 1,000 posts and comments are fetched. Questions? Suggestions? Visit /r/isReactionaryBot!
[–]rexrex600 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 24日前 (2子コメント)
/u/isreactionarybot Repulsive_Anteater
[–]isReactionaryBot 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 23日前 (1子コメント)
repulsive_anteater post history contains participation in the following subreddits:
/r/monarchism: 3 comments (1, 2, 3), combined score: 2.
/r/thathappened: 2 posts (1, 2), combined score: 1945; 5 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), combined score: 111.
/r/sandersforpresident: 7 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7), combined score: 12.
/r/conspiracy: 1 comments (1), combined score: 9.
/r/punchablefaces: 1 comments (1), combined score: 1.
/r/murica: 17 posts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 2499; 68 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 717.
/r/im14andthisisdeep: 4 comments (1, 2, 3, 4), combined score: 149.
[–]DLFHTLR -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 9日前 (0子コメント)
/u/isreactionarybot rexrex600
[–]Ratute -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 25日前 (32子コメント)
I can't believe it, that in this century there are people, who thinks communism is good.
[–]mittim80 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
I can't believe it, that in this century there are people, who thinks capitalism is good.
[–]MuzzyIsMe 53ポイント54ポイント55ポイント 25日前 (22子コメント)
I think there are people who are misguided in thinking communism as it has been established, such as in the USSR/China/Cuba, is good. I don't think someone like Marx would have looked at the USSR and supported or even recognized what they were doing.
However, communist theory is good. It's probably never achievable due to human nature, but again, as a thought experiment it makes sense. What is not to appreciate about a society that shares in everything and supports all?
... I am discussing political theory on /r/starterpacks. I expect to show up on /r/iamverysmart soon.
[–]Celestina_ 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 25日前 (7子コメント)
It's probably never achievable due to human nature
Laziest copy-paste critique of Marx there is, so well done.
[–]MuzzyIsMe 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント 25日前 (6子コメント)
Should I draw it out and write some overly complex statement? It is only "copy paste" because it is such a commonly held belief.
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
Human nature does not exist, there is no such thing. Not in the way you are speaking about it. People act in certain ways due to the environment they develop in. If society teaches the individual to be selfish and mean, the individual will grow up to be selfish and mean.
A species has a better chance of survival and is more efficient if they co-operate, rather than compete. Our current society teaches individuals to compete against each other. Nations compete against each other, companies compete against each other, different political parties compete against each other. Imagine how easily problems like climate change, poverty, and homelessness could be solved if we decided to co-operate rather than compete.
[–]Surreals 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
It's a commonly held belief because it's propaganda that's taught in american public schools.
[–]armin199 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
it is such a commonly held belief.
It's a commonly held belief that god exist and people have souls, does it mean that god exists and humans have souls?
[+]Celestina_ スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
You can start out by telling us what human nature is (ps. good luck!)
You can't look at how people behave in our culture and extrapolate across all human history, it won't fly anywhere beyond reddit.
[–]MichaelPraetorius -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
LOOK, A COMMUNIST!
[–]deHavillandDash8Q400 -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 17日前 (0子コメント)
Communist theory is objectively wrong. True successfully policies come from the right, not from the left.
[+]DCanon スコアが基準値未満のコメント-36ポイント-35ポイント-34ポイント 25日前* (2子コメント)
communist theory is good
no its not
edit:so reddit is full of commies, fucking disgusting
[+]Ishmael_KingOfTheSea スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
I'm not entirely sure why people down voted you... I mean if they understood that everything you've ever owned would be taken from you and put into a collective pool for others to draw from, they might not have. Then again, a lot of people on Reddit aren't exactly rich so I guess the prospective gains from switching to a communist model are greater for them so they're willing to overlook the principle that the model is based on.
[–]idonthavearewardcard 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
It's because "no its not" adds nothing to the discussion.
[+]The_Matt_Squad スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
Nevah been tried before
[+]RasslinsnotRasslin スコアが基準値未満のコメント-28ポイント-27ポイント-26ポイント 25日前 (2子コメント)
Remember everyone, whenever your idea fails denounce it. It's always someone elses fault that your political theory leads directly the the mass murder of millions.
[–]Seattle_man_123 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 23日前 (0子コメント)
Exactly why I don't support capitalism.
[+]Neuermann スコアが基準値未満のコメント-34ポイント-33ポイント-32ポイント 25日前* (5子コメント)
Alright guys, I get it. Comment not welcome.
[–]FloZone 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
First, in Capitalism there are also enough useful idiots.
Second, do you believe that Cultural Marxism exists?
and third, if you think Political Correctness is all there is to modern leftism than inform yourself on Slavoj Zizek.
[–]Rhys345 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
The Frankfurt School invented ideas like political correctness in order to disrupt the Western ways
Hahahaha
[–]idonthavearewardcard 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
The Frankfurt School causing the decline of Western civilisation is a Pat Buchanan/Tea Party tier conspiracy theory.
[–]D4nnyp3ligr0 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
"There was a kgb officer talking in the 80's..."
How can you you argue with well-sourced irrefutable argumentation like that?
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
he Frankfurt School invented ideas like political correctness in order to disrupt the Western ways
> Isn't considered a field of study in the Frankfurt School
> Isn't commented on in any systemic way by figures of the Frankfurt School
No, the jews are not comming to take you away.
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 24日前 (2子コメント)
Well yeah, the Paris Commune, Revolutionary Catalonia, and the Free Territory of Ukraine were all pretty good.
Every time communism has actually been implemented its worked beautifully, and only failed due to capitalist aggression.
Unless your talking about the USSR and other such countries, which never claimed to be communist in the first place. They claimed to be working towards communism. Remember: communism is a stateless, moneyless, classless society.
[–]Surreals 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 24日前 (1子コメント)
communism is a stateless, moneyless, classless society.
Sure that sounds great, and even works great on a small scale, but how do you organize something like that? Money and government are more than anything means of organization.
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
Direct democracy and workers councils. Catalonia is a pretty big region in Spain that was communist.
[–]Since_been 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
I am going to presume you know absolutely nothing about communism that you have learned for yourself? Or are you just going by what you've been told your whole life?
[–]FloZone -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 25日前* (2子コメント)
"Those who don't miss the Soviet Union have no heart, those who want it back have no brain": Vladimir Putin.
Take that quote for what you want, but I know enough people from the GDR who say that the regime really sucked, especially the Stasi, but that life was generally easier more uncomplicated and that your basic needs were fullfilled.
Is it the Putin quote or why? Just look at election results, our main leftist party is still strongest in the former socialist regions.
[–]FloZone 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 22日前 (0子コメント)
I don't get why there's so many Stalin apologists and Mao apologists on the communist subs.
I am not actually active on that many commie subs, only FULLCOMMUNISM, which is kinda more like a meta-satire. They are all communists there or leftist from all denominations, but celebrate communism in its full variety or so.
But when you take every country and every leader and judge them solely by their fuckups or evils, every country starts looking pretty bad. Almost every regime can be looked at in a good or evil light depending on what you look at. Almost none are objectively demonizable or idolizeable. I say almost because the CSA and Nazi Germany were pretty objectively shitty.
The first part, absolutely. Really most great civilisations of the past are build on conquests and most great powers which have survived untill today are full of massacres and similar. My personal opinion is also that Capitalism is shit, main reason it is an unstable and unfair system. Especially on the unstable part Capitalism has to get into a crisis regularly to stay alive. The free Market cannot stay free and with time monopolies form and it has to collapse to become free again, this both the monopolies and the crash are bound to cause a lot of suffering to the people. Thats why I would favour a state controlled market, tough I personally would allow smaller businesses, but then again that might be idealism.
Either way, I don't know much about the CSA daily life, but Nazi Germany wasn't in war from the very beginning and my Grandparents both grew up in Nazi Germany (both germans tough). Of course they thing the Nazi party was abominable with what they did, but as children they didn't notice it and untill the end (the war) they had a relatively normal childhood.
Concerning Mao and Stalin apologism or North Korea apologism. Honestly the biggest apology most of the time is that they converted a backwars aggriculturian society into an industrial one. But yeah if you read Zizek he says that Russia was already before communism the 5th most industrialised country in the world and what Stalin did was basically just a continuation of Russia's natural economic progression, not his merit. I don't buy all this, Stalin and Mao hated the people and wanted to deliberately starve the peasants, Russians, Ukrainian or Chinese or whatever. Actually the most dangerous place to be wasn't being a peasant at the time, but being politically active in the Party itself. Around 80% of central commitee were killed between 1930 and 1933 or so. Also Stalin was likely not the sanest person to run a state, the show trial the dissenter got were more like musicals. Extremely stages to the point everyone had their text to say and if not it was rehearsed. btw Stalin was an avid fan of musicals, Hitler was a passionate fan of Wagner. I also don't look on North Korea subs, but apparently they have lists about "myths about the DMRK busted", but seriously even without the worst myths being true, it is still faaaaar from the communist utopia some make it out to be and really I wouldn't want to live there.
What I meant with the Putin quote is, what I think he says is, it is okay to have nostalgia and it is a part of their/our history and really it wasn't all bad like some people make it out to be. Yet one should realise that also your nostalgia betrays you. The state is gone and to honestly try to bring it back would be insane. I mean really if you were happy with a modest life and didn't need 50 varieties of one product which are essentially the same and didn't expect there to be strawberries in store at christmas (or tropical fruits en masse), life would have been great if it weren't for the surveillance, but yeah the Staatssicherheit was basically childs-play to what the NSA is capable today. Really if your demands were modest you could have had a great life and really compare to how you would live with similar wages today, it wouldn't be like that. (Honestly I am really impressed that my Grandfather was the sole breadwinner and they had their own house and five children, basically impossible today).
[–]Daario1 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 6日前 (1子コメント)
/u/isReactionaryBot[1] leadback
[–]TheGhostProofBlanket 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
Oh my god you even had the terrible acne right
[+]Lyqu1d スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント 25日前 (2子コメント)
Better dead than red.
[–]YourNitmar 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 24日前 (0子コメント)
Your wish shall be granted soon.
[–]HowDo_I_TurnThisOn 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 23日前 (0子コメント)
[+]Creep3rkill3r スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
You missed a tumblr logo.
[+]atlasing スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 25日前 (1子コメント)
**internet tankie
[–]ComradeSomo 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 25日前 (0子コメント)
IRL tankie starter pack
π Rendered by PID 31544 on app-14 at 2015-10-08 23:01:19.273404+00:00 running 48a4a52 country code: JP.
[–]xtromp 91ポイント92ポイント93ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]PUBLIQclopAccountant 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]hoppierthanthou 71ポイント72ポイント73ポイント (40子コメント)
[–]wasteknotwantknot 46ポイント47ポイント48ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-49ポイント-48ポイント-47ポイント (38子コメント)
[–]x_glo 53ポイント54ポイント55ポイント (4子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]x_glo 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント (1子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]PainusMania2018 28ポイント29ポイント30ポイント (11子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]PainusMania2018 19ポイント20ポイント21ポイント (9子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント (8子コメント)
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]RsonW -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (2子コメント)
[+]RsonW スコアが基準値未満のコメント-12ポイント-11ポイント-10ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]HolaHelloSalutNiHao 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]skt_t1_swigglet -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Hhtura 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]RsonW -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]Hhtura 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]Hhtura 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]TessHKM 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]Ishmael_KingOfTheSea スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント (12子コメント)
[–]RsonW 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]Braver_Incident 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]Braver_Incident 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]RsonW -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]Braver_Incident 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]RsonW -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]Neuermann -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]RsonW -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Braver_Incident 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]mrmushbrain 20ポイント21ポイント22ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]TotesMessenger 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Helium_3 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]SistaSabuda 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]h3lblad3 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]technoguyx 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]YourNitmar 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]TheOnlyOtherRedditor -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]YourNitmar 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]TheOnlyOtherRedditor 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]herobounce 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–][削除されました] (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]isReactionaryBot 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]rexrex600 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]isReactionaryBot 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]DLFHTLR -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Ratute -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (32子コメント)
[–]mittim80 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]MuzzyIsMe 53ポイント54ポイント55ポイント (22子コメント)
[–]Celestina_ 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]MuzzyIsMe 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Surreals 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]armin199 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]Celestina_ スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]MichaelPraetorius -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]deHavillandDash8Q400 -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]DCanon スコアが基準値未満のコメント-36ポイント-35ポイント-34ポイント (2子コメント)
[+]Ishmael_KingOfTheSea スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]idonthavearewardcard 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]The_Matt_Squad スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]RasslinsnotRasslin スコアが基準値未満のコメント-28ポイント-27ポイント-26ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]Seattle_man_123 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]Neuermann スコアが基準値未満のコメント-34ポイント-33ポイント-32ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]FloZone 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Rhys345 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]idonthavearewardcard 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]D4nnyp3ligr0 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]PainusMania2018 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]Surreals 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]PoliticalPrisonGuard 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Since_been 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]FloZone -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (2子コメント)
[–][削除されました] (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]FloZone 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Daario1 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]TheGhostProofBlanket 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]Lyqu1d スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]YourNitmar 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]HowDo_I_TurnThisOn 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]Creep3rkill3r スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント (1子コメント)
[+]atlasing スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]ComradeSomo 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント (0子コメント)