Actually the guy that invented tetris moved to america using the money he made off of tetris. He programs small games and reads books now. Thats what the recent history of video games tv show on the discovery channel said.

Pajitnov is a genius and a g-d. Sadly he's owned by Microsoft now. He made Hexic, which is amazing. You might know it as Hexic HD on the 360.

(OH MAN LOOK AT THE 2-D PUZZLE GAME WITH HD GRAFFIX!!!)

Man I hate it when they put HD into the title of a game. It's so stupid and insulting.

I don't know about you guys, but I don't like seeing people starve to death blocks from my house. Some real communism would kick ass if it could save their lives and provide for everybody.

The problem, unfortunately, is reality. I don't say that to be mean. To give you an idea, my undergrad was in philosophy, particularly political philosophy. In my political phil intro class the professor put the target communist world and heaven side by side.

It was a pretty powerful move, but it proved a point. What they're trying to attain is equally impossible, and putting it side by side with this idea of paradise really drove home just how pie in the sky it is. It pretty much shut all the bearded hippies from other majors up.

The real question (at least to me) was what kind of government would work that deals with what human nature is instead of some ideal of what we want it to be. It bothered me a lot until I went into Constitutional law. The cool thing about the US Constitution is that is takes into account the natural power struggle. Sure Bush is a destructive idiot, but it's designed to weather people like him, and there were worse ones before him.

If you want to build the perfect government, US Constitution and a long, hard look at the history of Constitutional law is a nice place to start for pointers as it's one of the oldest and least fiddled with over time. Sure, it has its flaws, but a hell of a lot less than others.

Edit: And this level of homelessness and starvation didn't come about until the industrial revolution, and what sealed the deal was the coming of the idea of the conscious manipulation of the minds of the masses.

Want to read something that will make you want to puke? Keep in mind that this still is the public relations handbook:

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html (don't mind the Chomsky intro, he's a bit crazy, but his raw information is correct)

Opening paragraph:

"THE conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."

This isn't some crazy villian writing while twirling his mustache, this guy was practically worshipped and held government and corporate positions as an advisor.

CLEANING BUMP !!!

"Some real communism would kick ass if it could save their lives and provide for everybody."

would could should. The problem is it doesn't. Capitalism has made billions wealthy and rich. There may be huge social problems in China and India but for hundreds of millions who had to ask "What will I eat today?" two decades ago the question now is "Will I get fat when I eat this and which mp3 player should I get".

Even the ones loosing out in China and India are better off than 20years ago, childhood deaths are down. Access to clear water and education is up, life expectancy is up etc. pp. Yes theoretically China is communist but the economy is more capitalist than anything around.

The only thing you can hold against capitalism is that its not fair becuase some people have more than others. The solution of communism is that nobody has anything.

Capitalism, it is the better system, Mind you I also believe that governments should be autocratic and thier should be a large dicide between rich and poor (however the poor need enough money to live comfortably and able to afford luxuries) and we shoud have no state religions, that will stop wars.

Either way in a communist country a site like this would have a firewall put up by the government, thats if the masses can afford computers. It doesn't work because people are naturally violent and greedy.

When you say "the problem is it doesn't" you mean "the problem is it hasn't."

Communism and censorship may be historically linked, but that's a coincidence. Tell me where Marx demanded censorship to rule the ignorant masses. Stalin and Mao maybe, but not Marx.

Capitalism has not made billions wealthy and rich. There are about 6.5 billion people on the planet. Not a single billion are rich.

"Communism and censorship may be historically linked, but that's a coincidence."

A coincidence that has happened in pretty much every communist country? That's a pretty strong statistical anomaly. The problem with communism is that people WANT to possess things. Because of this the communist approach often consists of changing people which just doesn't work.

"Capitalism has not made billions wealthy and rich. There are about 6.5 billion people on the planet. Not a single billion are rich."

Depends on the definition of rich. if its not true now then wait a decade or two. Two hundred million chinese have been catapulted into "I want a car" category which is my definition of rich. China is booming, India is starting through, Vietnam is on the way. With the exception of Africa no continent will be really poor anymore in 20 years. If you mean American lifestyle with rich, yes then not many people are rich.

GDP is a very bad measure for how strong an economy is (it's maybe the best measure we have, but it's not good). The reason is, it is counted in units of the used currency. So the simplest way to increase the GDP in a great way is inflation. If the next year the currency is worth only the half, but the same amount of products is produced, then the GDP has doubled. But in reality the economy hasn't changed. Another point: If a new production scheme can reduce the cost of producing say a car to the half, and so the price for cars drop, what happens. People do not buy much more cars, if you have one you're ok. If the people save the money they spared, then the GDP has reduced, but everyone has more wealth as before and economy is stronger through innovation. Thrid example: if people do some work for nothing. That's usual in non-governmental-organization, political parties or in the open source scene. This is called 'ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit' here in germany. These people often produces values for the societies, often services (for instance many caring services are made by organisations like the red cross). That makes the life in modern societies better. But because this work doesn't involve money, it isn'T counted by the GDP. So looking at GDP alone doesn't say anything about how strong an economy is. That's not all. A strong economy doesn't guarantee for good wealth for the people or a good system. In the times of the industrial revolution the economy of Great Britain really growed very, very strong. But back then the life of most people get worse. Many starved, was ill. The environment was destroyed, the air was thick from burning coal. So, a good economy alone doesn't make our life better. Most countries accepted this, no single country in the world uses pure capitalism.