>> People say communism is worse, but the problem is that communism was a response to capitalism.
Capitalism of a sort, but not how we understand it today. If we're talking about the Russian revolution of 1917 that wasn't really "capitalism" as we would describe it today. It was closer to feudalism with a very small aristocracy controlling all the resources, while treating the "workers" with extreme brutality.
Even then it's arguable that the 1st world war was the spark that made the revolution possible. Partly because the extensive mobilization allowed for "worker leaders" to become visible (ie at NCO levels) while at the same time swelling the army numbers (and it was those conscripted army folk that provided the back-bone to the revolution itself.)
While it's fair to say "the workers had no access to capital" - and that was certainly a part of the problem - the underlying factor was the aristocratic system.
Bear in mind that Russia at the time was still very much in the "monarchy" stage, unlike France (French Revolution) or the UK (English Civil War) which are much clearer as being "against the monarchy". The Russian revolution lead to Communism (more accurately described as Authoritarianism) than some form of elected parliament. (The English and French systems had elections, but voting was limited in lots of ways.)
The problem with Communism was less about the political ideals, and more about implementation. China is communist today, and doing really well. But the system is unlike Leninism or Stalinism. (Or indeed different to Mao's China.) "Communism" works best when there is a lot of local control and less central control. Central control (Lenin, Stalin et al) failed for much the same reason the Tsars failed - too few people benefiting from the system as a whole.
Ironically what we're seeing now (in the US) is the consolidation of wealth to the few. The tendency to authoritarianism in govt. I'm not sure that the US form of Capitalism (as we see it today) is "worker friendly".
I would suggest that Europe is on a better path - a broad mix of democracy (ie multi-party voting), socialism (an understanding that a society does better when looking after the bottom) and capitalism (the ability to start your own business, make profits and so on.) Allowing, but then tempering, the rampant greed for ever larger piles of money, and social control, seems like a win.
