| Well, you're right but it's think that despite the definition Marx coined, or the government he imagined, Communism has evolved and so has the definition. The countries that tried Communism did so differently but with many similarities and all still had/have social classes. A classless society only works theoretically - those that have tried to implement such societal changes have been unable to realize that goal practically. Practical application matters most. It may not be so much that modern Communists have failed to implement Marxist government but rather that Marx failed by focusing so solely on social class. Inequality is the problem - it eats away at a society and its people. True equality is impossible and honestly not even desirable. Absolute equality doesn't mesh well with individuality. I don't need to own the same things that everyone else does, live in the same size house or drive comparable cars - it's OK that people have nicer things than I do. It's not OK that everyone I know works hard their entire lives and others don't have too. It's not OK that I know several people that have died bc they were avoiding medical care they knew they needed due to the expense. It's not OK that everyone I talk to under 25 all seem to want to skip college and go work wherever - they are not lazy, they are certain that our future is uncertain. Why have goals that can't be reached? I'm fine with classes as long as all classes have the same MINIMUM quality of life. Society should never limit the individual but should rather empower them to live well, as such, the only limits on maximum wealth I would impose would come after several billions have been added to an account - it does the society that generated that wealth no good if it simply sits an account and gets bigger. Gates, Zuck, Mush, Bezos and other super rich are examples of our societal failure to regulate OUR economy well enough to prevent the greediest of us all from taking all of OUR collective wealth. This is what Marx missed. This is why his definition/ideology didn't work out - also why so many have failed. There will always be owners and workers, rich and poor, good and bad people - this is why government exists. How can a government eliminate the reason it exists? To be frank, it was kinda stupid to think that paying everyone the same, trying to treat everyone the same, taking away ownership and attempting to equalize access to possessions would transform society into a paradise. tl;dr: The definition of Communism has changed since Marx because everyone that tried Marx failed miserably and had to make due - today Communism is what they are doing now and isn't at all like Marx proposed. |