5ha99y

Thank you, very thoughtful:D

It's fine. I am a early carreer scientist and especially when writing a paper you often recognise what is actual hearsay and what is an actual fact. When writing I often recognise that I kinda fall into the pitfall of "woops, this thought of fact is actually hearsay... the more you know", because I didn't find a proper sourceanywhere making it essentially a myth. (Which is btw why I LOVE proper scientific sourcing)

The hearsay argument I followed here especially as a german is the argument of "In communism everyone is equal but there are people that are more equal.", which in the end would make a two class society again, where wealth is one sided. This is what is often said about DDR here, which also tried to follow socialist traits.

Alright thank you for your input, you are right. No, I have never looked deeply into the inner workings of communism. I am just arguing on surface arguments I have catched up and logically appended them. Will read up on that and come back :P

Well, the post tries to deliver a fact, which is not representational. I see the opinion that philosophically communism might be defending human rights better but the post tries to back it by facts, which are inherently not representative.

Capitalism is dominant and longer used than Communism. The total amount of deaths is naturally higher. It doesn't tell anything about the actual amount of deaths communism could have, if it is active in the same capacity and amount of time, this plot would be more interesting.

And just to make things clear, I am not taking a position for any of the two. I just think this argument is not representative.

This do be true but is the common goal then to reach ideal communism at the end of the spiral by your argument?

But also the people of the future won't be perfect and will generate an imbalance again. The cycle continues in the end.