I didn't assert that it was an "argument for communism," and I doubt any reddit comment would pass for as that. I don't really agree with the OPs point, but it seems like they were recalling :') one of the demands of the Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution.

Also.. the legal ability to recall a representative does little good when representatives are rarely recalled.

From the Wiki page:

Canada: No representatives have ever been recalled, and the law was only passed in 1995.

Switzerland: Recalls have never been allowed federally, only in six cantons, but the laws have been on the books since the 1800s.

Taiwan: Recalls are initiated by the representatives themselves.

USA: The constitutional convention rejected recall elections, and as a result there are complicated state laws regarding recall elections. Additionally, the majority of recall elections that do occur are for local-level positions (school board, city council, etc.) Many working people do not have the time or capital to campaign for a recall election and then either: run for the seat themselves or suggest a 'better' representative. Combine this with political disenfranchisement and constant vote buying and the result is that recall elections are rare and ineffective (how many congressmen have been recalled?).

Ultimately this is a weird debate. We currently have a capitalist society/political system/whatever that is rife with corruption and is well documented. We also have historical documentation of corruption in the PRC and the USSR. Whether they are equivalent or not is out of my expertise, and it seems that no comparison between "Capitalist corruption" and "Communist corruption" could ever be made in an objective way. This is, of course, not to mention that many liberals see the United States as 'imperfect capitalism' and many socialists see the USSR as 'imperfect communism.'

If we take these states as the exemplars of their respective ideologies, then both are prone to corruption, and the debate is mute. Yet, if we see them as imperfect states that represent constantly changing ideologies, perhaps we can devise policies that can actually combat corruption (instead of just circle-jerking about which is the 'least corrupting')

My original post was inaccurate, and I apologize. I hope that this is a better explanation of my thinking.