Sure, I’ve explored a bunch of other ways. I wound up agreeing that communism is the correct path, guided by Marxism-Leninism, which has various forms in real life such as the former USSR, Cuba, PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, and Laos.
Capitalism has been in power a lot linger than 30-40 years.
The only one to have “failed” is the USSR. Cuba, the PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, and Laos are all still here today, and all are still socialist. China and Vietnam are absolutely Marxist-Leninist still, not sure what you mean by saying they aren’t.
As for Reagan/Thatcher style neoliberalism, that isn’t something brand new but a further evolution of existing capitalism and liberalism. There’s no such thing as a static, unchanging system, nor one disconnected from its roots.
Sure, I’ve explored a bunch of other ways. I wound up agreeing that communism is the correct path, guided by Marxism-Leninism, which has various forms in real life such as the former USSR, Cuba, PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, and Laos.
Capitalism has been in power a lot linger than 30-40 years.
Its interesting you’ve picked those as examples when most of them have failed. PRC/Vietnam aren’t exactly Marxist-leninist these days.
Well an ideology can’t really hold ‘power’ but you’re sort of correct. The reagan-thatcher flavour of capitalism gained popularity in the 80s.
The only one to have “failed” is the USSR. Cuba, the PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, and Laos are all still here today, and all are still socialist. China and Vietnam are absolutely Marxist-Leninist still, not sure what you mean by saying they aren’t.
As for Reagan/Thatcher style neoliberalism, that isn’t something brand new but a further evolution of existing capitalism and liberalism. There’s no such thing as a static, unchanging system, nor one disconnected from its roots.