3 ms·

I think it doesn't fit, but for a different reason. Communism was considered scientifically superior by its proponents. Those who disagreed with it were often l

I think it doesn't fit, but for a different reason. Communism was considered scientifically superior by its proponents. Those who disagreed with it were often labeled luddites and anti-science. Communism absolutely was considered a scientifically provable method of managing societies. But that's not the reason it shouldn't be grouped with the others. The fact that the others only resulted in a few hundred deaths while communism resulted in hundreds of millions. People still die today from the after effects of communism's heyday, killing more people than anything ever before it besides old age.

andrepd 10y ago
>killing more people than anything ever before it besides old age. Wow talk about hyperbole. Well I guess that's true if you discount malaria, bubonic plague, typhus, AIDS, dozens other diseases, religion, nationalism, fascism, european colonialism...
- merpnderp 10y ago
  To put communism in perspective, it killed as many people as were alive in 1 C.E. Or roughly 15% of the population at the time the cultural revolution ended. This is also roughly the number who died from Malaria in the 20th century.
  - andrepd 10y ago
    Again, it's an irrelevant comparison from which you can draw no conclusions. If you want to be honest, at least compare with the number of people killed by European colonialism, or US foreign interference, etc.
    - merpnderp 10y ago
      You ask for a comparison to malaria and then say I'm being dishonest for comparing it to malaria? FYI, by my rough estimates, Communism was around ~20x more deadly the N. America colonialism.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]