i read the definition of communism, but i just don't get what it means. Can someone help clear that up for me? thanks.
it was an attempt by a guy named marx, to solve some of the problems created by capitolism. it was based on the socialism that what every revealed religion has ever endorsed. it makes the mistake of clinging to a couple of capitolist concepts that are not inhierently natural nor required, specifically money and a work ethic and connecting them together. it is mostly non, even anti, hierarchal, even as hierarchy, while existing, is none the less more the exception in nature then the rule. well at any rate, when people say communism, what they are really meaning is marxism. there is something called communALism, which is another matter entirely, though the two are often undersandably, confused with one another. there is also some confusion between marks and socialism. to make it simple. communism usually means marxism. socialism simply means government, regardless of form, earning its keep, without becoming tyrannically oppressive in order to do so. stallin called himself a marxist. the former soviet union was called marxist. to any degree of detail they were not. again to keep it short, there has never been a marxist government. it may be quite impossible for there ever to be. governments that call themselves marxist are generally labeled communist by governments that call themselves capitolist. all these names really, are completely mythical concepts, that exist for one reason, and that is to manufacture consent. the only one innocent is when a government gets labeled socialist, for trying to earn its keep. but if you really want to know what marx said, read marx. personally i remains somewhat fonder of kropotkin. and sun yet sen.
Communism: The dialectical antithesis to capitalism used by wealthy bankers to confiscate personal wealth and consolidate it in the hands of the state, under the guise that money would then be used to create some kind of utopian system where everyone is equal under the auspices of the said state, and nobody is rich or poor. In reality, it's simply another tool of enslavement where the people are made into subservient peasants under rule of an all-powerful state. Karl Marx was a fraud and nothing more than an employee of the Rothschild family. Communism, like capitalism, is a product of the central bankers.
communism is am economic theory in which the people own the means of production collectively and the benefits of said production is distributed evenly. communism will always remain a theory because it is not actually possible except on a very small scale.
Communism is a societal control theory, in which all ownership is claimed to belong to the people collectively in the sense that those who govern will distribute the production of the society equally to the masses. A government large and strong enough to wield power over defenseless masses could eventually emerge on a very large scale.
From what I understand actual communism would have to consist of a classless society, if there is a power weilding government than that would create two different classes of people the ruling class and masses.
That's about as close to correct as possible: Marx questioned the long-term existence of an economy of owners of means of production v. the wage-earning operators of those means. But if you know anything about the history of communism & its bible, Marx's (& Engels's) Manifesto of the Communist Party (February 1848), you might wonder (Marx would too) how communism could possibly be a topic of discussion 160+ years after its publication. For not only did the Manifesto have little effect on the various rebellions & revolutions in the spring of 1848; as one historian pointed out, its publication did not even result in Marx's arrest by authorities, altho he was a well-known rabble-rouser & had already been jailed on several occasions. Moreover, the Manifesto was written at the behest not of Marx & Engels but of the British Communist League. It was a homework assignment.
