This is not meant to be a comprehensive list of all the potentially evil ideas in the world.

If you think that none of these ideas are dangerous, please say.

Well said.

That said, I'd say that communalism (religious communism) is more dangerous.

Wrong.

Saying that communism is responsible for those deaths is simply ignorant. What is true though is that the insatiable need for expansion that comes with capitalism has already caused the extinction of thousands of living species and will, if it goes on at this rate, eventually make life on Earth impossible.

DoctorD wrote: Q: What has lifted the most people out of poverty in the last 100 years.  A: Capitalism

Try again.

Capitalism may have enabled a few hundred thousand people to have acceptable living standards but it led to more than half of the human population to live with less than you and I could possibly imagine. The West  earns more capital at the expense of the East (less and less true; also a Northern/Southern Hemisphere divide).

They sure do but with true communism you cannot just buy a new car each year because you feel like it and can afford it. That's just one stupid example I could go in further details but you seem stuck on the idea that communism is evil. No offence but I bet you are an American who lived through the Cold War.

DoctorD wrote: Read your history...Stalin and Pol Pot killed/jailed/starved MILLIONS.

There you have it. Stalin and Pol Pot may have done it but you sure as hell wrote that communism was responsible for it.

ermm.... how many? Give me others man....... most of these examples by no means are 'de facto communist societies'.

 

Venezuela under Hugo Chavez was a socialist totalitarian state, much like Cuba. And for whatever it's worth, the 'authoritarianism' aspect was largely in response to U.S. aggression.....  No country with a weak government can stand up to the U.S. Government; and now they have Maduro trying to install a military dictatorship. Remember - history tells that countries like that typically become more authoritarian in time of war, and the U.S. has been at war with Latin America for generations...........

North Korea was a peninsula of people who got invaded by the modern, massive and advanced US army simply because they were in a advantageous geographic location for politics and imperialism.... And, further, simply because the US government hated Communists with extreme passion.

This sad war led to thousands upon thousands of bombs and mines dropped on what was essentially nothing but a small, very poor area where stuff didn't even grow well......

The only thing they really had of any value was some amount of industrial equipment and a few mines that Japan built for them a few dekcades before the Korean war. They were impoverished from the beginning but the carpet bombings and land mines everywhere made them hundreds or thousands of times poorer! There simply wasn't much left after that war was over... It was pretty much just a guerrilla government and peasants fighting, and they eventually had to rebuild practically just everything, including tons of villages that the US soldiers razed while they were also murdering tons of innocent villagers..........

As a matter of fact, nearly all "communist" countries that emerged in the 1900's were modeled after the Authoritarian Soviet model, following the Leninist-Stalinist ideology which was inherently authoritarian. The Arms race also had a massive drain of the resources of the Warsaw Pact, and trade with the west was limited. This led to a situation in which these countries, which were only recently industrialised, had to spend almost half their revenue on ensuring that the west did not attempt to invade and halt the evolution.... which inexorably led to impoverished conditions within the country... 

You're right in fact, religious communism is NOT commonly mentioned as communalism ;)

 

And if you want to consider the Soviets as a "communist society" (which is a stretch), they did have quite a few inventions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_inventions" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_inventions

 

Other:

>Show me a good car developed under a socialist/communist regime.

None of them are really dangerous right now, unless one lives in a war zone. Some religious doctrines (also some non religious) provide a superb encouragement for otherwise desperate people to kill "infidels", but regular casualties and diseases will kill more people.

 

Capitalism will cause the lesser damage in a world of moderation and sobriety. The less capable to cope with our surroundings, the more independance we need, therefore, the more likely we'll have problems with money. The more in need, the easier to corrupt. If we all think about whom we give our money to we'll also contribute to limit damages.

 Capitalism too often fall pray to greed and generally favors a select few .

 Religion is probably responsible for the most deaths of any force in history.

 That's not to say there aren't good things that come from these but when people are 

granted too much power through any of these institutions bad things tend to happen. 

Premature optimization is the root of all evil.

What do you mean by that? You claimed yourself that "communism", as you call it, killed 94 million people. And although that's not nearly enough to counter the birth rates, don't you think it's pretty decent start compared to the pathetic numbers of capitalism?

Ive owned both Russian Lada cars and Ural/ Dneiper Motorcycles; both were rugged and reliable and could be fixed at home using basic tools; They came with their own extensive tool kits and were designed to cope with extremes of climate. Even during the 70's and 80's cars in Europe, Japan & America were being manufactured to be more and more complex and less and less accessible for the home mechanic, thus creating a monopoly amongst the dealerships to force even the simplest jobs to be done by them at inflated prices and make us less and less able to do these things for ourselves. So one thing Capitalism certainly aims to do is make us individually less reliant on our own skills and initiative. Another fantastic initiative that came out of Soviet Russia was a breeding programme for Potato varieties that are highly disease resistant and highly productive in extremely low input systems (water, fertilizer etc) which may not seem very exciting but looking at how important the humble potato is in the world diet and how just about every other breeding programme has relied on either genetic modification combined with higher and more chemical reliant inputs.

 

Just another BIG fallace ... or, better saying, an appalling assumption....

For capitalism, in order to work much better, it shouldn't imply neither exploitation nor strong wealth concentration. However, it is a system based on wage labour - that is, exploitation - where one class is exploited by another. 

Capitalist stability is not only based on endless expansion of the world market, but also on intensifying exploitation..... and to a large degree the burden, here, is passed on to the working poor and the 'developing' economies - with dumping of excess produce, and ever-intensifying rates of ...exploitation!

And don't get me wrong.....the Eastern Bloc (*) was more 'economically level' than the West - and our Western prosperity has been due partly to exploitation of the 'third world', ...and ....dependence of a layer of 'working poor' within those capitalist economies.  

(*) Okay, let us put apart appalling examples such as the place of Roumania in the Eastern Bloc.

Capitalists have, however, killed numerous strikers over the years during labour disputes, like in the Ludlow Massacre or the Homestead Strike.

I think we can all agree that as long as less being born isn't going to happen more being killed is the second best option.

 

Don't forget, they're also good at making "America Great Again."

Indeed, it is nice that for once the two great nations stand united for one cause. :)

Anyway , just an observation ... I'm OK with that, you know, everything today boils down to a matter of taste - whether you like or dislike anything.

Lets See, uhmmmm...Holy wars in the middle east (past & present), The Crusades,The Inquisition, Salem Witch trials,The IRA, The Holocaust and other genocides targeting religious minorities , persecution of Christians by Iran, China , North Korea,.... 

You want some more?

It's by far more ironic as far as no killing is concerned .... and sooner or later people die by their own fates caused merely by exploitation  lol.......

A truck is a truck till you put a religious fanatic in it

A gun is just a mechanical mechanism until you put it in the hands of, say, a right wing extremist..

Both capitalism and communism are mechanisms, systems for constructing society until you put an egotistical nut job in charge of either.

It seems to be the human element that is the common denominator here and of course a 'dyed in the wool Capitalist' will accuse anyone who doesn't agree with him as a communist or hippy or whatever. And it seems the same with all the established religions.