Speaking of the absolute abolishment of private property was the communist theorist's mistake.
For example any food is produced to become private property. So it nearly seems as if the communist is intent on ending humanity.
The theoretical abolishment of private property is within context of abundance, but still.
Is this problem the difference between intent of the writer and perception of writing?
Does this problem come into being because of the writer's conditions?
In any case, context of course clarifies intent is improving the human condition. (Interpretation of these writings are heavily abused to display "evil communism".)
I understand. I've lived around people who didn't understand, growing up.
It is meta only because it's in the sign up "captcha".