"I generally do not debate issues with people who wade in with a personal (unfounded or otherwise) insult." Please show me where the "personal insult" was. "As a student of history, unfortunately mostly written by the victors, even I couldn't show you such a society..." Well, that was my point to mamamia. Capitalism has provided the most opportunity and the highest standard of living to the most people who live by it. Essentially all collectivist societies (communist, Marxist, fascist, etc.) have been implemented by authoritarian regimes. The people of those societies were not free to rise out of their condition, hold real wealth, and gain individual liberties. Collectivist societies have to be regulated by an oppressive government in order to stifle natural human desires - such as the want of freedom. As a "student of history," you should understand that. "I can look back at the experience...of children working 16 hours days and being killed in the process. Exploitation beyond comprehension but in line with the capitalist creed to buy cheap sell expensive." Sure, you can look back to those days, but you're basing your argument on the critiques of capitalism by the very people who wanted to see it fall. Marx and Engels used this type of argument to push their communist agenda - capitalism is evil, it exploits children, it concentrates all wealth into the hands of a few...but the facts of today prove otherwise. Capitalism has done more for those who would otherwise be living in abject poverty than any collectivist ideology pushed by people like Marx. Your unwillingness to accept the overwhelming success of capitalist society does not make capitalism any less successful than it is. "I suppose I could argue that the historical Christ and Christianity can be read as SOCIALISM but I wouldn't like to be argumentative for arguments' sake." You can argue that all you want...and I may even agree with you. But what does that have to do with my comments? *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Show me a society where collectivism is voluntary (not forced by government), has resulted in a higher standard of living than a capitalist one, and where the people of that society enjoy a comparable level of individual liberty, and I will concede that collectivism works. And you're right...I probably shouldn't say "we." There are too many idiots that want to believe in the collectivist ideologies that Marx epitomized in his communist philosophy. I guess I figured it was a given that capitalism was understood as being preferable to a society that has thrived under it. I thought that perhaps reason would trump fantasy...but who's reasonable these days? *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

Saying that Marx "predicted" the end of capitalism is like a serial rapist "predicting" that he will have sex in the near future. Marx formulated his philosophy with the intent of destroying capitalism. The problem with his philosophy is that it tries to destroy a system that has been proven to work when applied correctly. Europeans apparently haven't figured that out yet. On our side of the pond, we understand the benefits of capitalism and many of us still, and always will, despise those who seek to destroy it by peddling the collectivist nonsense that has a well-documented history of resulting in poverty and death. *If you're interested in reading my articles, Click Here.

She's a fresh face (and a god looking one), and talks about cleaning out corruption and solving problems in the country. It's similar to the appeal of Sarkozy in France, or Berlusconi in Italy (except that the latter was very corrupt and won the election because he owned most of the media. Oddly enough, Italians decided to put him back in office *again,* despite all the controversies in his first go round).