Why should communism get a leash when the real world examples have consistently shown that they lead up to corruption as well as unregulated free markets ?
>when the real world examples have consistently shown
There are many valid critiques to be made of governments which have attempted to implement Communism or Socialism, I'm not here to defend them, merely to propose that their failure does not, at least necessarily, implicate Communism. Furthermore by the same logic, I cannot see why capitalism ought to be get a leash when the real world examples have consistently shown that it leads to exploitation and recklessness or active harm to the environment globally and locally, and the resulting inbalance of wealth leading to poverty.
Capitalism is no meritocracy. It's better than feudalism, and that's about it.
I am not saying either one should get a leash. Almost everyone who is against capitalism point to the real world problems with it but talk about an "ideal communist society" as an alternative.
If comparisons are being made, they should be done so between "ideal capitalist society" and its alternatives.
> Almost everyone who is against capitalism point to the real world problems with it but talk about an "ideal communist society" as an alternative.
Almost everyone I encounter that opposes the slide back toward 19th century capitalism from mixed economies favors maintaining mixed economies with basically capitalist property rights, with very minor additional compensatory measures to treat some of capitalism's failure modes. You can find people supporting classical utopian Marxist ideas (or the divergences from it rooted in Leninism) but they seem to be o creasingly rare even as a proportion of critics.of capitalism.
