Originally Posted by oddlycalm";p=&quot

Communism, like all utopianism, tends to ignore human nature and natural social function in favor of social engineering, and is thus doomed to failure. This was intriguing social thought during the late 19th century, and it remains the perennial darling of many students and young people that have yet to fully grasp how the world works, but it's simply not a practical model and it's day has passed. History already shows that it's purpose was to act as a counterpoint to unfettered capitalism, and to that end it succeeded.

While social democracies strike a fair balance between social wellbeing and capitalism, and thrive widely around the world, undiluted communism with communes and work collectives by government directive will never happen again. Communes and collectives do exist within capitalist countries, and in some cases thrive, however this is a function of a conscious choice by the participants, not the action of government without mandate.

My personal view is that undiluted and unfettered capitalism is similarly doomed within the next 50yrs. While the US has achieved great economic success, that success is not broadly shared among it's citizens, and the distance between the haves and the have nots grows every year. At some point it will reach and untenable situation.... again. In reality there is very little class mobility in the US contrary to all the rosy oration one hears.

Further, the unrestricted flow of capital inflow is always welcomed by the 3rd world, but disasters like the aftermath of the currency meltdown/capital flight from Asia in the late 90's shows how destructive sudden capital flight is. Millions of middle class families were thrown into abject poverty, which has given fuel to previously harmless subversive organizations in that region. I suspect that the first step will be aimed at large multinational business when the US re-imposes some the restrictions implemented in the 1930's, like Glass-Stegal, as it recognizes the error of repealing them during the 1990's with the Financial Services Modernization Act. I also imagine there will be international rules ratified over the next decade that regulate the international flow of capital to a small, but necessary, extent in order to prevent the kind of disruption that occurred when traders put pressure on Asian currencies.

As is often the case, neither extreme offers a long term practical solution, and the middle ground is where the future is. Americans love to tout unfettered capitalism, and have phobic reactions to socialism, however at the end of the day, nobody wants to see granny living out of a shopping cart under a highway overpass, so social security was implemented, however it's future is doomed. Sooner or later, the US will be forced to address the failure of social security and a national discussion will ensue that will eventually lead to more socialism than many currently imagine. Even the arch conservative Bush administration forced through prescription drug legislation for the elderly rather than face the anger of that demographic at election time. It was a horrible first attempt due to the influence of pharmaceutical lobby, but that is often the case with first attempts at anything. It will get fine tuned as the years go by. And, it's huge cost will hasten the day when social programs must be further rationalized.

Regardless of whether that change is bringing democracy to Iraq or socially humane government to another country, real long term change happens in an evolutionary manner with the consent of the governed, not wholesale change by directive at gunpoint. While it's not impossible that a country would freely elect a communist government in the future, I don't see that happening. The inefficiencies have been adequetely demonstrated, and the real advantages over a social democracy are few.

oc