SolarCross wrote:Marx would have disapproved of Stalin only because Stalin did not go far enough, Stalin's fault was that he was a relative moderate.
In historic terms Marx does get a raw deal actually. He was more a philosopher and a political predictor rather than a revolutionist. He was born in an era that being part of a new movement was deemed cool. A impressionist for the working class perhaps.
Nonetheless being a stateless German why wouldn't the 'League of the just' or Communist League' appeal to him? A stateless society that regarded everyone equal regardless of class during a period of history where money was to be made and workers could be replaced by machines. Marx, just like anyone, was looking for his own personal interests. And that was for a new order.
Also I think it is a naive reading of the manifesto to say it was "created to address equality for workers and a share of wealth in the industrial age when workers rights was none existent and poverty was high."
Naive? What else could it be? The manifesto was a pamphlet of a new idea that could be distributed throughout the continent. Its purpose was to appeal to the working class because they were the numbers. Many people have analysed the manifesto and made their own interpretations of what it stood for. To me it was created to bring down the establishment through the uprising of the poor and unite Europe into one entity. And this would have been in Marx's interests. So in order to do this he had to dangle a carrot in front of the working class. And that was a society of total equality and the removal of poverty by eliminating capital and giving it to the state to share out fairly.
The likes of Marx were just attempting to decieve the workers into being their (unpaid) zealot army that would put them into control. You should read Marx with the same cynicism you would have while reading Ron Hubbard, Joseph Smith junior or Mohammad.
Communism (and by this I mean real Communism not the bullshit that Soviet Russia created) is flawed for three reasons. Two of which were addressed by your link. Firstly it goes against human nature. Humans natually look for self interests before that of others. You are asking people to defy human instinct. Two, Communism doesn't reward. And this too goes against human instinct. Who in their right mind is going to invest in progress or new ideas for no reward? More importantly who is going to do more difficult or challeging work when someone else does less work but has equal benefits? And three, the power goes to the state. And unfortunately would go corrupt without any form of competition. As proven over and over again with dictator governments throughout history.
Marx's has already been proven wrong. Capitalism still exists today and will never be removed unless there is a major catastrophe (WWIII or a meteorite hitting the earth for example). The way money works, it's value only decreases during a financial crisis and adjusts to fit its new climate. It is forever resetting itself. The capital model is quite efficient actually in terms of longevity but it will always create bubbles due to it being a model of imaginary wealth. But not only that, another thing Capitalism has going for it to keep it alive is it is a reward based system and this goes with human instinct.