Yeah but different people are different.

Every country is nuts with the media. It just looks different when you're talking about an empire vs a struggling nation like NK.

Sure. I think the main issue here is that there will probably never be an accurate accounting of the effects of any system, especially communist ones when empirical powers are extremely capitalist. For example, historians don't even agree that the holodomor was intentional, but most people assume it was and count that as a black mark against the USSR.

And that's without even mentioning that communism has never been given a proper chance because of the fact that capitalists have a vested interest in knocking it's legs out from underneath it at every step. So even the most accurate analysis of a communist country would not allow us to really compare the results of a capitalist world with a communist one.

If the argument is "communism bad because people died" and the alternative is a system that also leads to people dying, then it is a defense against the notion that the current system must be maintained.

Now, if there are other systems that are even better, great. But usually when people trot out the "communism killed 27 kajillion people" argument, they are using it to argue that capitalism is better.

Centrism will do that to you

It's always weird when people get out the calculator for ML deaths but then when capitalism has people dying from lack insulin and wars for oil, that's just the way things be

I just subjected myself to that thread you linked. What a fucking idiot. Pardon my French.

You put in a lot of effort and other people will benefit from it even if that guy won't.