Sophistry and personal attacks wont help your argument Snark.

Don't worry though I am not purposing in any way that we suddenly adopt communisim, I only was pointing out the fact that comunism never really got to be applied in actual practice in the manner in which it was philisophically presented by Marx to function. The only way it as a system of philosophy can work is if everyone involved with it can remain hionorable and not take advantage of their fellows.

Which is something we as a specieis are apparently unable to accomplish as a whole as yet.

The "Communists" failed to adjust for a criticall flaw in their choosen system of thought and didnt develope any checks or balances to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of ambitious individuals who became just as bad if not worse than the tyrants they revolted against initially.

Our own Founding Father's were acutely aware of the possibility existing that our new governemnt would need some way of vigilently monitoring the people in charge to prevent this phenomena from occuring for as long as possible or failing that set the diferent governing bodies in a state of cooperative opposition to one another, hence our system of checks and balances with the "church" being set to one side with no direct role in governemnt and making allowences for the people to have freedom of speach and the means to protectect themselves from said governemnt if neccesity arouse by means of arms.

They knew that if they didnt set things up just right that greed and corruption would become the norm once again as it eventually did with every other form of rule they knew of in history.

It's also one reason they modeled their new governemnt to a large extent on the longest lasting republic in history.

They knew that humans have an apparent natural inclination (no matter what type of government system) to become docile under prosperous conditions that allows for those individuals who are more explotative to rise to the top and manipulate things to their own advantage over that of the peoples.

When we eliminate our middle class in favor of concentrating wealth in the top 1% and allow gross misconduct to not only go unpunnished by our wealthy but reward them further for their misdeeds as is directly eviedenced by the entire bail out situation and its aftermath... its surely a bad sign of the handwritting being on the proverbial wall. For students of history it directly harkens straight back to the corruption that brought the Roman Republic to it's own demise.

Fortunately we can still do something about it, we have an elastic cluase provided for us by our wise progenitors that allows us to grow and change as needed, we just have to be willing to do so.

And examination of new ideas like "Personal autonomy" isn't something that should automatically be tabled as being off limits, unless your proposing that we only do and think or even discuss what our "beloved corperate masters" would approve of?

Legalization of drugs hasnt hurt the fine people of Portugal and the Netherlands has it?

The reduction of "moral" laws governing peoples behavior in the bed room (ie legaliztion of prositution, allowing gay marriage, removing laws against the mixing of races, ie granting more personal liberties so long as they dont directly harm anyone) hasnt turned the people of Europe who have adopted them into monsters or anything has it?

Heck with this being America, the land of the free and all, one would think we should have came up with the idea to begin with huh?