The basic association between financial communism and political dictatorship is a leftover of the Cold War. Our principle perspective is the Soviet Union (however this might be shallow), where one could concede that political opportunity was intensely quelled. In any case, it doesn't take after that the absence of opportunity (especially thoughtful and political flexibility) in the Soviet Union was because of its financial framework. Rather, it was likely its tyrant single gathering political structure. While I might act naturally misrepresenting, this dread of communism for the sake of common and political opportunity is a noteworthy piece of the American ideological account. In any case, it is not necessarily the case that we ought not be stressed over the structure of communism. Similarly as with private enterprise (majority rule government, progressivism, and so on.)
You are very far from the mark. It does not take examples (although they are plentiful) to see that communism is inferior to a system of common-law private property, profit, and markets—it only requires simple logic. Central planning is far less efficient and effective than decentralized planning—from markets to computer processors.