Umm...I think that the point that John's trying to make is that a nation that uses communism as a economic system doesn't necessarily need to be a totalitarian dictatorship. It's true that just about every government that has attempted to make communism work thus far has been a totalitarian dictatorship (USSR, China, Cuba, etc), but what if there was a nation that used communism instead of capitalism as an economic system? Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean that it's an impossibility. Or, better yet, a mix of communism and capitalism that would allow people who want to work and succeed to "make it big" yet wouldn't leave people who are in a bad way out in the cold to fend for themselves (regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so). My single biggest complaint with pure capitalism (and why the Libertarian mind-set truly frightens me) is that, from what I can tell, it's a brutally Darwinian system in that the strongest survive and those who aren't quite strong enough are completely on their own, have nowhere whatsoever to go, and thus die out. I suppose that, as long as you're one of the strong, it doesn't affect you, but I don't think I could live with that on my conscience, particularly since I know people who are physically incapable of fending for themselves and would probably die if the Libertarian/pure capatilist mind-set were ever implemented in full in this nation. BTW, I'm not talking about lazy couch potatoes here, I'm talking about people who are physically disabled to the point of being unable to work and having nowhere else to go. IMHO the biggest problem with the government assistance system is the couch potatoes who are abusing it. They need to be removed without negatively impacting the people who actually need it...so far, the only solutions I've seen are simplistic ones like "abolish it completely" or "let it continue exactly as it is". I wish I could offer a more feasible solution...

Sorry for going off-topic...OTOH, this whole thread has been off-topic Nothing personal meant, and keep on dieselin'

{on edit} I thought I had said this; just realized that I didn't. Mike, of course you're right that every government that has used communism as an economic basis has failed. However, does that mean that any form of communism is pure evil? I would venture to guess that the failures of the "communist" governments were due to the fact that they were run as dictatorships more than anything else. Any dictatorship will fail; it's just a question of when. I think that the USSR lasted as long as it did solely due to luck in that they had a series of powerful leaders (Stalin and Khrushchev come to mind). I'll bet that Cuba falls as soon as Castro dies. I have no idea why China hasn't fallen yet

Regarding someone saying that communism's goal is to become global, where did that come from? I can't remember if Marx himself said that, but if he didn't, I'd guess that that's Stalin's influence...and that goes back to the totalitarian dictatorship factor, and sounds to me more like a power-hungry individual than a collective mindset.

Also, lastly, before I get accused of being called an extremist liberal, I think the liberals are just as nuts as the conservatives. I'm not registered with any party, and vote for the person who I think can do the best job. I actually voted for a Republican in the last state governor election (no I did NOT vote for the buffoon that got nominated; IMHO he's just as dangerous as Grey Davis I did a write-in vote for one of the two that lost the Republican nomination, but that's for another thread)...