> You're essentially saying that no significantly different system can stably replace the current system, which is of course an ahistorical claim.

I'd say most times it happened in history, significant bloodshed was incurred during a system change. Systems change as the result of revolutions and wars. People die, during those.

> What about modern China?

Modern China killed tens of million people during the Great Chinese Famine, which was caused entirely by communist policy, so I don't think your argument is working as well as you were hoping. And if that's too old for you: the jury is still out on how many Chinese died during the covid lockdown, but it's likely to be substantial. In the West, a lockdown meant you weren't allowed to leave your home. In China, it meant they welded you into your apartment, with whatever food you had available.

> You're cherry-picking of facts to focus on and facts to ignore.

Whereas you are completely blind to the inevitable outcome of the policies you pursue.

What facts do you think I'm ignoring? Is it the fairness of Stalinist Russia? The freedom of North Korea? The economic progress of communist Ethiopia? The intellectual prowess of communist Cambodia? The equality of China? What am I overlooking that turns murderous communist regimes into great places to emulate?