There are some very good posts in this thread and a plethora of good points. The problem with arguing this kind of topic is that everyone thinks they're right, and unless they say something extremely stupid, there's no way to prove them wrong. You run into the same problem when arguing about fluff, which is, let's be honest, mostly based on WMG
; much like this particular topic. The shining example of communism that most people cite is the USSR, or sometimes, North Korea; whereas the pinnacle of the free market everyone flocks to is the USA. Such arguments as "Since it failed in Russia, it can't work!" and "The USA is doing fine! Capitalism works!" abound, and neither really has any relevance to them. Communism failed in the USSR because of how few resources they were trying to distribute amongst such a large population in addition to Stalin and others thinking they were above the laws their own government dictated. Capitalism doesn't really exist in as pure a form as many people think; the USA is much closer to socialism than true capitalism with all our government regulations and retarded work unions, etc.
The two opposing philosophies can be summed up thusly:
Capitalism: Bust your ass to make someone else a profit.
Communism: Bust your ass for no reason.
Communism assumes that everyone is a direct descendant of Superman and will work simply for the betterment of his fellow man with no incentive needed. Capitalism assumes that everyone has been lobotomized and will work for a disproportionately sized reward. Of course, neither is true, but capitalism is much closer to being true (albeit still very, very far from it) and that's why we can put some form of it into operation, as opposed to communism.
Any system of resource redistribution is going to piss a lot of people off, be it the rich minority or poor majority. Capitalism pisses off the poor majority because they have to work, usually at jobs they don't like, for a small paycheck. Communism pisses off the rich minority because they wouldn't have their cheap labor force.
Not sure what you mean by 'pure anarchy' in your last answer. What we have is 'pure anarchy' - competing gangs of violent and disruptive lunatics who happen to control large enough armed forces to call themselves 'states'.
And we always will. That's in every animal's nature, my friend; no matter how sophisticated our society becomes, we will always keep trying to screw each other over.
Still, why should we give in to warmongers
Because they are willing to kill you and you aren't willing to kill them. That, Red Orc, is power
, something that every single human being craves. Some of us are willing to kill for it, and others aren't. In the end, it's the warmongers who win. That's human nature, neigh, animal nature and anyone who denies it needs to take Anthropology 101. War and violence have been in our history much longer than "love" and "equality," and everyone's existence is concrete proof. I'm not going into too much detail about it, but do you think there were rape laws back in the caveman days? Your biological great (to the power of four thousand) grandfather probably wasn't a "law abiding citizen."
Wow, a whole post without Godwin's Law! Lololololololol!