Rich, don't be all backpedaling now. Your original premise was that communism didn't kill 100M people. Now you want to discuss nuances of different kinds of Communism. And put it on some sort of sliding scale with Communism on one end and Capitalism on the other. I find that to be kind of ignorant. What kind of nuanced Communism worked in each of these different approaches to it?
explanation of terms, table
The notion that Capitalism and Communism are in contention for being able to provide for the citizens sorta died in the late 80s/early 90s when we learned that all the worst right-wing rumors about the U.S.S.R. were in fact true. The notion that we kids had when we were in college, that the U.S.S.R. was just a misunderstood grand experiment/hidden utopia? All that shit was wrong. Maybe you haven't been paying attention since college?
The war is over, Capitalism won. In fact the current controversy isn't whether it can provide enough for its people to live on, but whether it actually provides
too much and becomes "unsustainable".