Flipski,
Communism as the "classless and stateless" society has never really been practiced. That is, if you exclude primitive communism and much of the egalitarian communities of the Native Americans.
What has failed is the attempts of it. Though, to generalize the statement that "Communism attempts fail" as a law, requires much more complex analysis. Each socialist country fell to different causes and of different circumstances. I don't see any principle that would lead any communist revolution to be inevitably fail. However, the natural anti-communist tendency of states like the US do play a role in their downfall.
Though I still view Cuba as a positive example of a socialist state.
Looking at the world's situation right now, and the existence of massive poverty, capitalism seems to be easily refuted for bringing prosperity.
I also fail to be conscious of the notion of "free markets". Under capitalism, the means of production are controlled by a few individuals compared to the massive numbers who live only as long as they can find jobs.
In this way the market activity only consists of less than 1% of the population, the bourgeoisie.
Corporations do not follow the needs of people, their motivational drive instead is profit. While arguably profit is earned through meetings the needs of the people, it is important to make the distinction because a several factors play a negative factor in this relationship.
1) The "needs of the people" is not determined by the amount of people, but rather the amount of money. Thus, if 100 individuals wanted things like health care, food, shelter, etc but each only had a $1 each then their "vote" would be vetoed by a single individual who has $200. Relatively, 1% of the population owns 40% of the wealth. In this way, the poorer individuals (Which now constitute the majority of the population) are thrown out of the equation. Their needs go un served by the market and are only be able to be met by welfare programs. Though unfortunately, only the poor in more industrial and richer countries are able to enjoy this welfare.
Corporations, then, become obligated to only serve those who have the wealth to purchase their products. What is profitable is not serving human need, but serving the want of the richer individuals.
So if you look at this page and scroll to the bottom you will see the major outbalance of luxury goods to the basic needs.
$11 billion is spent on ice cream every year in Europe, and another $12 billion on perfumes while only $9 billion is being spent on water and sanitation in the developing countries.
More shocking statistics are $780 billion dollar military spending in the world compared to $13 billion in developing countries for basic health and nutrition.
2. Imperialism. There is much differentiation in the global aspect concerning wealth and poverty.
Imperialism is the direct intervention in foreign affairs, whether politically, militarily, or economically, for the self interest and expansion of the committing country.
We find that the economically and industrial developed countries tend to have a long list of imperialist crimes. The United States for example, has been involved(in an antagonistic way) with more than 20 countries in the last century. This includes, many Latin American countries, Indonesia, Spain, Congo, South Africa, Philippines, Haiti, Albania, Greece, etc.
Even now, the United States poses an economic blockade against Cuba and is fighting 2 wars in the Middle East!
The earlier history of the United States also places it at an economic advantage. It a history of the genocide of Native Americans, slavery, imperialism and massive and harsh industrialization.
Britain similarly, owned at one point in time 1/4 of the World's land, much in the form of colonies and slavery!
In recent news we also hear about Haiti, and what a miserable poverty its in. Though its never mentioned that it was a slave to the French and later subjected to much American sabotage.
It is no wonder than why these countries are prosperous. Capitalism plays no role in this development. Feudalism too had created a few prosperous and strong countries while it left others weak and poor. This is the same situation we have today. If you look at a map, you notice how different parts of the world are rich, while others poor.
The only way right wingers can explain this geological mystery of poverty only through the addition of racism. Blacks, then are not poor because of the slavery and imperialism but rather because they are un-civilized.
The increase in living standards in the last century can be credited more to the anti-capitalist movement! It is thanks to the labor unions and their fight against the brutal tyranny of capitalism as a whole that the minimum wage, environmental protection, worker safety, woman's rights, civil rights, and child labor laws were introduced.
I think it's pointless to argue one side or the other. Because no government is essentially one way or another, they are all mixtures of ideals. The problem relies on what the best mixture is.
Communism calls for a new method of production, a society in which the workers own property commonly.
It is hard to imagine a mix of capitalism and communism, you either have the means of productions owned privately or you don't.
However, you might want to look at
market socialism.
About the war comment. Communist countries in the past have mostly been run by dictators. Thus they could force the whole country to fight. In democracies, many people decide not to fight if they disagree with a war. You can start a draft, but even then, you don't have the type of full commitment and propaganda that was created by communist countries.
Not that I approve of dictatorships, but that's a simplified view.
And I'd love to argue on how the US is nothing close to a democracy.
But to keep it short, the current wars are opposed by the majority, yet it is still being fought.
People would never approve the Iraq war if the US said "we are going there to establish a military presence and profit our Oil companies." instead, to gain support they had to lie about WMDS, women's right protections, bla bla.
The propaganda has been huge in the United States as well btw.
And I'm actually living in the United States! Haha
