Estimates range from 10 to 30 million.
And yet none post here....other than Hong Kong,
which has English as its official language.
Socialism is not the only affliction a country might have
that prevents free speech. Theocracy can too.
You mean there are capitalist countries without free speech? How shocking. (I'm being sarcastic, in case anyone is wondering.)
Political anti-communism is different from opposing
communism as an economic system with political
conseences.
Should I say that you obviously embrace the views
of Mao, Stalin, & Pol Pot?
Well, you've already said as much, numerous times - or at least associated me with those historical figures.
Of course, I could also be just against capitalism just on that basis alone, without necessarily bringing up socialism. Since we live in the United States, it seems more relevant to look at the system
we live under, rather than focusing on the systems of other countries. You're the one who always brings up other countries, but many Americans' perceptions of the outside world are often skewed and riddled with ignorance and brazen propaganda.
Honestly, I'd rather just talk about our system here, the one we live under and which has far greater influence over our lives than NK or Cuba.
Which party won the voters' favor?
(It's hard to believe that voting matters
when only the Communist Party is legal.)
It was the late 1980s, and little did I know at the time that they were just about to unravel.
But voting can still matter. I've heard many people say they vote for the individual not the party.
On the other hand, what have you heard people say about how much voting matters in America? A lot of people don't have faith in the system, thinking it's rigged (and this attitude has been discernable long before this past election).
And its in the nature of socialists to criticize capitalism
as unsalvageable, while ignoring the misery of socialism.
The difference comes in its intentions. Capitalism is, by design, meant to increase as much misery to the population as profitable (although that's been ameliorated in the West by liberalism and progressivism designed to rein in capitalism, but those ideals have been under heavy attack since the Reagan years).
Socialism, by design, intends to bring about equality, an equitable distribution of resources, and an adequate standard of living for all. And as I said, I've been there, and it wasn't really as bad as people think it is. It's not luxurious by Western standards. People who are spoiled and used to instant gratification and living in luxurious mansions with servants waiting on them - I can see why
they wouldn't like socialism. But for most average people working average jobs and living in average homes - life is just what it is.
I see recurring patterns in socialists too.
The worst is to claim that only capitalist countries are socialist,
eg, Denmark....yet deny that socialist countries are socialist,
eg, N Korea. Very strange.
Actually, for most of my life, I've heard of right-wingers, anti-communists, and other armchair Cold Warriors make proclamations that all of Europe is socialist. Most of the time, those kinds of inaccuracies can be attributed to the capitalist side of the spectrum, at least when looking at America's political culture and the attitudes it fosters.
Capitalists pick arguments out of a hat whenever it suits them. They argue against economic programs that they have in Scandinavia, because "that's socialism." It's the capitalists who seem woefully confused on this particular point.
But as far as denial goes, let's talk about Pakistan again. They're capitalist, you know. In fact, most countries in the world are capitalist, even if they exist as puppet or servant states of capitalist regimes. You're so quick to compare NK or Cuba to the United States, but what about comparing Cuba to South Sudan? That would be comparing a socialist country with a capitalist country, yet neither you nor anyone else in the pro-capitalist seems willing or able to address the existence of countries like that.
Your constant refrain of painting capitalism as paradise and socialism as hell might play well in Peoria, but it's just not good enough to pass muster in anything other than an 8th grade social studies class.
And I addressed the naive trust & faith
that socialism must replace capitalism.
It's not really a matter of faith or trust. It's an understanding of history and its causes and effects. There's only so much abuse a population is willing to take before they rise up and fight their oppressors. When one can see the same recurring pattern throughout history, then one might see it as an inevitability and a consequence of human behavior.
Some people understand it; even capitalists have understood it in the past, which is why many of them supported the Keynesian policies of FDR all the way up to Nixon (who was also a Keynesian). I just recently posted an article from Time from 50 years ago discussing Nixon's price controls and other government regulations on free market capitalism - much of which was opposed by conservative capitalists and by many Reaganites later on.
That's the problem we have now, because capitalists don't think like that anymore. Now they're more of the Trump or Gordon Gekko variety.
Aye, too many people allow corruption, environmental degradation,
needless war, over-regulation, intrusive surveillance, etc.
Exactly, so why are you criticizing my idea that people should be vigilant and aware of the dangers of capitalism?