Unlike the communistic system where the political leaders use the system to enrich themselves?
An actually communist system would not have leaders that could enrich themselves, because communism entails the absence of private property. (including money, owning means of production that aren’t directly from solely your own efforts, etc)
I wouldn’t call myself a communist, but even I know this.
Actual communism cannot exist at the level of a nation state. You could maybe get to about the size of a small village before it starts breaking down fundamentally.
They said “communistic” when they likely meant “socialist”. People who haven’t read leftist theory run socialism and communism together. We should educate them on the difference between socialism (i.e., a transitionary stage) and communism (i.e., a classless/moneyless/stateless society).
An actually communist system would not have leaders that could enrich themselves, because communism entails the absence of private property. (including money, owning means of production that aren’t directly from solely your own efforts, etc)
I wouldn’t call myself a communist, but even I know this.
Actual communism cannot exist at the level of a nation state. You could maybe get to about the size of a small village before it starts breaking down fundamentally.
They said “communistic” when they likely meant “socialist”. People who haven’t read leftist theory run socialism and communism together. We should educate them on the difference between socialism (i.e., a transitionary stage) and communism (i.e., a classless/moneyless/stateless society).
You miss the point on purpose, or you didn’t read the rest of my message.