Given that we never saw at scale other than soviet style communism, communism and soviet style communism is being used interchangeably.

“Soviet style communism” quickly became authoritarianism, especially under Stalin. He was communist in title only imo, with a focus on genocide and foolhardily believing that eliminating people with actual education in their fields and replacing them with “the commoners” was somehow good for the country because it looked communist.

Every communist regime becomes authoritarian; none has proven otherwise. But we can see many examples of successful capitalist countries with democracy and freedom, even though they aren't perfect.

An argument I’ve seen is that we haven’t seen a truly communist country yet. The most promising ones (imo) were smaller countries who’s communist ambitions were stifled by American-backed coups. Many of the earlier communist leaders like Lenin and Mao also knew that their countries weren’t communist in practice, as you can’t slip a switch and suddenly you have working communism. Their goals were to establish governments that could lead their populations to eventually being communism in practice instead of just as an ideal. Obviously, this depends on having a government that is actively trying to make itself obsolete, and most politicians don’t want that.

Capitalism may “work”, but it’s definitely not sustainable without checks and balances and limits on wealth accumulation and influence. Allowed to roam free, it’s disingenuous to say they “aren’t perfect”, they’re destroying the planet and its people.

> Capitalism may “work”, but it’s definitely not sustainable without checks and balances and limits on wealth accumulation and influence. Allowed to roam free, it’s disingenuous to say they “aren’t perfect”, they’re destroying the planet and its people.

I don't see how this wouldn't apply to so called working communism, if there is any

There isn’t any that I’m aware of - most governments fall victim to the rich and powerful, one way or another.

So why not change Capitalism to just government including Capitalism, Communism or Whatevernism?

Oh yeah, the old and tired argument that we haven't seen "true communism". I'm still waiting for it but till then, the ideology can be deemed invalid. I wonder if people that give this argument realize that they sound like religious cultists saying we haven't reached the true promise land...let's push harder! (despite all evidence being against them).

Oh I’m not pushing for them to “keep waiting”. I personally am of a mind that if you’re going to do “real communism” then just do it - don’t know how that works or looks, but we inevitably end up with governments like China when going the stop-gap route.

Personally I’d be more in favor of socialism. Even that requires a lot of retooling, and most countries would have an easier time with more regulated capitalism backed by more socialist governments.

It's just as old and tired as the defense of capitalism: "That's not capitalism, that's corporatism (or cronyism or anything other than capitalism)."

Communist theory may not imply those things, but it always comes down to them in practice.

I have a theory that if you jump of a tall building and wave your hands really hard, you can fly. This theory does not imply you falling to your death. And if you do, it just means you weren't really following my method.

> Communist theory may not imply those things

Then just don't mix up the words, I guess? Otherwise you end up saying nonsense like this:

> I have a theory that if you jump of a tall building and wave your hands really hard, you can fly. This theory does not imply you falling to your death. And if you do, it just means you weren't really following my method.

That's what happens when you still listen to the theory which has been disproven by a lot of very bloody experiments.