[coffeecrazy1]

[ QUOTE ]
They would argue that communism as practised in the USSR and elsewhere was never proper communism in the way that Marx describes it. Russia was not an industrialised nation and was still semi feudal. It was therefore not at the right stage of history to be able to make a move to communism. Developed industrialised nations were the likely candidates in Marx's theories. Of course the welfare state put any chance of that happening on hold because it gave something back to the prole's. Marx was also unaware of the effect gloabisation would have in sustaining the capitalist model and communism couldn't compete against states that embraced gloablisation and free trade. Those are just a few thoughts on it. To fully understand why it may have been a failure you'd need to read up on Marx and other alternative communist theorists.
I would support communism if I felt it was atainable. It suffers to much from being too utopian. It is also not possible at present to have a global revolution (another thing Marx thought neccessary). In Russia this model was ignored believing single state communism could flourish.
Small scale and communal communism is possible if you reduce the standard of living and find a niche that is self sustainable, but the world the way it is makes this unlikely to ever develop to anything more.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, basically, your contention is that communism is conducive to a subsistence environment, but not a competitive one, or am I misreading?