commiunism

I literally didn't say anything you're arguing against, so I'm kind of confused.

I'm unsure you know anything about economies either given how you only scream about hierarchies - sure, some economic systems support hierarchical structures such as capitalist market economy supporting itself and the class society that comes with it.

However, regardless of whether hierarchy exists or not, there will have to be an economic system in place, so we know what to produce and how much of it, else you either overproduce and create a fuck ton of waste or underproduce and have people starve.

Under both communism and anarchism, things would be produced to satisfy needs, rather than for profit that is seen within market economies. There would be no commodity exchange, things being distributed to whoever needs it and during production, you'd have a set amount of goods you need to produce to satisfy those needs AKA planned economies which is something you think is worse than hitler given your response. Of course, there's also niche anarchist sects that are mutualist/ancom or voluntarist (which are the laughing stock within Anarchists themselves who actually read), but that's another can of worms and really besides the point.

Whether you have a centralized unit managing the production and distribution of everything or if you have each commune manage their local production and communicating with other communes to get what they can't produce, it's still a planned economy - it can be both decentralized and centralized, organized in different ways.

Maybe don’t make onboarding new people to the left any harder than it has to be?

I'm not here to onboard people, but rather educate on topics I know something about.

Yeah, there's mixed economies too and other models, forgot to put an etc in there.

Yeah, apart from the voodoo magic such as finance and whatever economic models economists talk about, which when failed they use more voodoo shit to justify why.

Economy in terms of distribution and production, that's real and will exist from mercantilism to communism and maybe beyond given our globalized economy.

Economy is very much real, and it's funny to see Anarchists say shit like this, can't beat the stereotype. Production and its distribution is global, you have to know what and how much to produce either via the use of markets (capitalist) or planned economies (socialist/communist) or via other modes of production and distribution.

You could previously make most things locally so these concepts didn't exist, but that's only because people were mostly living the life of a peasant, but now you have tech, advancements in medicine, and not every state has these kinds of resources.

However, the mainstream economics and its models are bullshit, the more complex people make them the more de-attached from reality they are

My god, stop putting words in my mouth that I'm some kind of anti-communist as a whole due to not recognizing China as being Socialist. Sorry for viewing things through historical materialism and it not passing the sniff test I guess.

That comment was referring to the private model which, you're right, is not the exact same in execution but it's remarkably similar in principle given both systems' state dominance in key economic areas with the co-existence of private ownership.

Fascist Italy did hold a significant portion of state ownership in heavy industry/shipbuilding/banking/infrastructure by 1930, so it wasn't entirely driven by private ownership. China economy isn't necessarily public either (at least depending on who you ask) given how it's state owned with state acting as the surplus-extracting capitalist and having the final say rather than collectivized and owned by the workers.

Relax, it's just a joke given how the image essentially is "communist is when many trains, capitalism is when one bad train". Making a reference to Mussolini, one of the most famous liberals of all time is always gonna be funny

pretty much how I got into my first relationship lmao

It's not even that, given how there's a decent chunk of their economy owned by private individuals

It's not a stretch, it's outright false to call it communism or socialism, systems which necessitate the abolishment of capitalist mode of production (commodity production, private ownership, markets) and money. China, meanwhile, literally has billionaires, still produces things under capitalist mode of production and the only oddity it has compared to other Capitalist countries is partially nationalized economy (which Mussolini has also done, it's not socialism by itself).

It's just a social democracy.

Communism is when trains run on time

yes it is

"Trad" likely refers to legal guardianship of the past, where women were essentially the property of men with no legal autonomy.