You can't. And to say that Capitalism hasn't succeeded is absurd. The wealth might not be evenly distributed in America, but it is deserved. Those who work will get paid and rewarded, those who don't won't. It's not the fault of those who produce that there are many in our society who can't make anything of themselves. If you call that a fault of capitalism than I will say it is not a fault that communism has ever been able to fix.

It failed to compete with the west because Communism does not acknoledge human nature. It does not provide an incentive for people to advance. That is why they could not compete with the West.

The reason for the pressure is that they cannot advance without adopting Capitalist practices themselves.

There is no blockade in Cuba. Any other nation can deal with them if they want to. Canada and Mexico do. There is no moat of American ships surrounding Cuba.

Please provide evidence of this. This is the first I have heard of it.

Any threat to us justifies American hostility. Oppression justifies American hostility. Non-democracies have no right to exist.

And Communism is different because...?

After all, they didn't know any better. But now we do. Communism doesn't work, and it never will. I tend to think that modern day communists are either some of the dumbest people alive or the most dangerous....

Those who work will get paid? Look at China, or these other third world countries that are run by U.S. corporations that outsource, for a tax break on top of it, I may add. These people work 12 hours a day for about 5,000 dollars a year at the most gluing together shoes that Nike and other corporations can sell for about 80 dollars a piece, and afterward, when these workers find out the glue and other substances are health hazards and a cause of birth defects, the aforementioned corporations simply get around what little local law there may be by bribing public officials and such. Inequality of wealth is far greater on a global scale, I am not simply speaking about the people in this country that lose their job to outsourcing and afterward go on welfare, which is still relativly better then anything the actual workers in the third world make. It is easy to ignore the true manufacturers and workers of goods and simply look at workers of Capitalism in accordance to what occurs within the United States (i.e. the bottome of the barrel here working in McDonalds still makes about as much as a software engineer over in India.)

And I can forgive most Capitalists today...I mean, after all, those Chinese would starve if it weren't for the measly sum they make gluing together shoes and dissasembling the mercury lined arcane computer chips for slivers of gold that you exchange out every three and a half years in order to speed up your Internet just a little bit faster. I for one think that we should just have outright slavery for these people--it will make them stronger as individuals, and therefore, it is a benefit for them. They should thank us for that, for Indian philosophy even teaches that work is a path to enlightenment. We can make them stronger people!

The U.S., Hong Kong and much of the Pacific Rim, as well as Western Europe (to the extent to which each individual nation has adopted capitalism).

Uh, Utopia? What's your point?

Why do you define "success" as "equality in wealth"? Equality of opportunity is success. Equality of outcomes? Never.

Ah, capitalism... what a bad thing for the Chinese! They adopt it and suddenly they have the fastest growing economy in the world! Suddenly their people have more money than they have had in a very long time. Man, what a failure capitalism is in China. Their move from socialism to capitalism was obviously a bad choise..

Wealth=form of power-->power=opportunity-->opportunity=success.

Simple forumla. Democracy itself is simple an attempt to equalize power through the force of an "equal" force outside of a fiscal good that inherintly draws more of such until you have a centralized dictatorship. Top ten people in the world have more wealth then the bottom 3 billion people combined. Ah, but this is not feudalism anymore....it's simply dialectical materialism.

The only sure path is to let go of any outcome.

Their move from socialism to capitalism? Who ever said they were socialist? Japan is socialist, China is a dictatorship. Did you know that Iraq was a "Democracy" before we invaded? lmao. Yes, I commend Capitalism with giving per capita wealth in China a two thousand dollar a year increase while helping promote increased world instability. Bravo. Or wait...if the Chinese are not our enemy, as they are like us, and neither is Russia any longer...uh...why do we need to spend 500 billion a year on defense? Contradictions, contradictions, either way, you will put your foot in your mouth, so I suggest you simply not open it next time.

Unfortunately, it's also an incorrect one.

1. Wealth may be a form of power, but it is far from the only one.

2. Power does not equal opportunity.
For example, JK Rowling was on government assistance when she wrote her first Harry Potter novel. How much "power" do you suppose she had to create an opportunity for herself?

3. Opportunity does not guarantee success.
The "riches-to rags" story is hardly an unfamiliar one.

So I'm still wondering: Why do you define "success" as "equality in wealth", when equality of outcomes simply reduces everyone to the lowest common denominator?