Virus made a good point, which I'll echo:
Would the Germans have exterminated the Jews and socially undesirable people of their conquered neighbors had the Nazis not come to power?
Most likely not; however, your argument ignores the fact that China and Russia most likely would've still been locked in decades of conflict and chaos had the communists not got into power anyway. Africa is a prime example of this. One regime would've been western supported and the other would've been anti-western and these two regimes would've duked it out for decades regardless if the opposing side would've been communism or not. If this were the case, the argument would no longer be against communism, but against other cultures.
If you wish to support your claim that the deaths attributed to the Great Leap Forward were inevitable (due to collectivism shown in Russian and Chinese history and their general disregard for their civilians), you have to show where you think those deaths would come from. Did Chiang Kai-Shek plan to implement anything at all related to the GLF?
Chiang Kai-Shek was incompetent and could not handle the task of feeding 500 million people, so was Mao Zedong, Mao however made it worse. There still would've been mass starvation in China. They had a deficit of grain supply and they were one of the poorest countries on Earth. I doubt that the nationalists would've done any better. GLF increased deaths not perpetuated them. There is no evidence to support that China would’ve had the means to feed these people regardless of who came to power, seeing as the grain shortages stem back to the end of Imperial China.
Most of the world does. What is your point?
No other nations have come close to the death toll of these two nations. If you want to ignore this fact, fine.
It is the direct cause of all the deaths in the Great Leap Forward.
Again, GLF exacerbated the situation, eliminating GLF still doesn't eliminate that famine would've happened in a rapidly growing post war china.
Except you don't see such numbers of deaths or Communistic regimes in places like India and Japan that also favor the "sacrifice for the collective" mentality. Why?
What is your excuse for India and Japan whose culture was similar to China and Russia in that respect? Why did Communism not to come those countries, and why aren't there a great number of deaths attributed to a redistribution of resources via Communism?
While it may be true that Japan and India have a collective mentality they have drastically different cultures to China and Russia. Even in regards to Japan and China, Japan has a drastically different world view than China does.
Find me evidence that suggests that India and japan viewed human lives as disposable body bags and I’ll drop the case. Find me rebellions and civil wars in India and Japan which have consumed more lives than power struggles in China and Russia, then I’ll believe you. Until then I see no reason to believe why communism, modern technology, and Chinese/Russian thought didn’t all play a role in the massive killings that took place in the 20th century. I am almost confident that India and Japan wouldn’t have had nearly as many death tolls if communism had been implemented in those countries. In fact, India has communism in many of its counties and communism in India has a fairly good track record. So I see no validity in your argument. It was definitely Chinese and Russian culture which exacerbated the situation and caused more deaths.
