Despite the best attempts of some people to blur the concepts involved, there is no difference between someone killed by overtly intentional means, or someone killed by covertly unintentional means (or any other possible combination), they are still dead. This is referred to as dead by pretty much everyone.

That’s a pretty big number, so I assume it includes famine, disease, etc. In which case a similar argument could be made against the western powers via colonialism, neo colonialism, globalization etc. It is important to note that the colonial period only ended 50 or so years ago (which says nothing of neo-colonialism or globalization), so to attempt to dismiss it as past history would be more than just a little erroneous.

I also would not attempt to defend, justify or in anyway dismiss the crimes committed by the “socialist” or the “communist” powers you refer to. Yet, while I would question the appropriateness of the political labels, I would not question that the mass killing are absolutely unjustified, and unjustifiable.

Given that both socialism and communism require worker controlled systems of government and economy to be defined as such, and given that these things did not exist in anything but name in the Soviet Union past, as well as in China now (both maintained an elite ruling class), the designations are misnomers at best.

Conversely, this is not too surprising, as what is often hailed as the greatest representative democracy in the world is neither representative, nor hardly democratic. It is, however, very powerful.

So, what we may end up with is an argument over which system is more corruptible.

Try to be more specific in what you’d like to see, I’m not going to write a thesis for ya.