Memes

The author of the black book of communism tended to write include even people who stubbed their toe as “victims of communism” yea.

That is one of the more honest examples of what they do.

You want dishonest?

They count the difference between expected birthrate and actual birthrate.

War causes people to have less babies? Each baby not born = 1 death caused by communism.

Worse then dead, they never were.

Also the people killed by the Nazis

Every death by Dutch capitalism (death from the slave trade, Colonialism/Colonial wars (Oceania, Africa, ...), ...)

plus

Every death by British empire's capitalism (Irish genocide, Bengal famine, Slave trade, Colonialism/Colonial wars (India, Africa, North America, South east Asia, Oceania, Middle east, ...) , Opium wars, Massacres against independence movements (India, ...), ...)

plus

Every death by French capitalism (Colonialism/colonial wars (North America, Caribbeans, Africa, South east Asia, ...), Slave trade, Massacres against independence movements (Algeria, Haiti, ...), ...)

plus

Every death by Belgian capitalism (Colonialism/Colonial wars (Congo, ...), Slave trade, Massacres against independence movements, ...)

plus

Every death by United States' capitalism (Colonialism/Colonial wars (Cuba, Hawaii, Philipines, North America, ...), Massacres against independence movements (South east Asia, Oceania, Cuba, ...), Slave trade, ...)

plus

Every death by German capitalism (Nama and Herero genocide, Holocaust, Slave trade, ...)

plus

Every death caused by preventable starvation, lack of access to water, healthcare.

List very much non-exhaustive.

If you add it all up you easily get over 1 Billion.

If we are to be 100% objective, the Chinese Revolution also saved millions. Life expectancy doubled, and hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty. We also know that the Black Book of Communism has long been debunked, it included made up numbers, Nazis killed during World War II as victims of Communism, and non-births as deaths.

Meanwhile in the real world

Between 1950 and 1980, China experienced the most rapid sustained increase in life expectancy of any population in documented global history. We know of no study that has quantitatively assessed the relative importance of the various explanations proposed for this gain in survival. We have created and analysed a new, province-level panel data set spanning the decades between 1950 and 1980 by combining historical information from China's public health archives, official provincial yearbooks, and infant and child mortality records contained in the 1988 National Survey of Fertility and Contraception. Although exploratory, our results suggest that gains in school enrolment and public health campaigns together are associated with 55-70 per cent of China's dramatic reductions in infant and under-5 mortality during our study period. These results underscore the importance of non-medical determinants of population health, and suggest that, in some circumstances, general education of the population may amplify the effectiveness of public health interventions.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25495509/

Should do an AMA on what it's like to put those clown shoes on every morning.

A certain Mr. Lenin would like a word

I think you're quite dramatically misinterpreting what the solutions put forward by Communists are, or at least Marxists. Marxists are not believers that there is some perfect form of society we can implement today that will also be perfect 100 years from now. Rather, the Marxist assertion is that different forms are best suited in different conditions and different levels of development.

China is a good example. The PRC is headed by a Communist party over a Socialist economy, one that has public ownership as the principle aspect, but nonetheless heavily relies on markets. This is because the CPC believes this to be the best form of society right now, and that as markets coalesce into fewer firms, they can be more efficiently publicly owned and planned. The long term belief is that eventually abolishing the value form will be possible and necessary, but we aren't there yet.

I think that because you haven't engaged with what Communists are actually trying to do, you've ended up inventing a strawman to argue against, even though you'd likely agree with us. Marxism is a scientific approach to economic development. There isn't an "in-between" of Communism vs Capitalism, because we are either taking control over Capital, or it has control over us.