Ah, so, Yoda Troll showed up today. Never know who I'm gonna get.

Do I crave your respect? That's an open question.

Part of my challenge is that Marx seems to be discussing granular externalities, e.g. classes. These are conceptual handles for swaths of people. Yet people remain individuals, from birth to death. Thus, societal alteration would seem to require some kind of internal renewal, not just a fresh set of labels. There's something of a top-down "Rousseau" flavor to Marx's ideas.

Again, I'm sort of rolling with "one class of people has unchecked dominance over another and the dominated class has close to no opportunity to change it on their own". One has to suspend disbelief, and allow Marx his say.
". . .what made the idea of communism so revolutionary as it hadn't been done before (and arguably still hasn't been done)" gets at the challenge of moving from some abstract ideas in Marx's head, and allowing first contact with reality. My opinion is that the success of the ideas varies inversely to the size of the population in question. You can make the argument, for example, that the early church in Acts lived communally. That seems the thrust of the evidence. But they figured they were in an apocalyptic time, and they'd see the triumphal return of Christ any old moment. Which leads to several epistles in the following decades, as Paul has to explain that God's watch doesn't conform to human planning.
I just don't grasp how any empirically valid model of secular human behavior can ever deliver on "arguably still hasn't been done". Ain't got that kind of faith, boss.

. . .for the simple reason that, whatever else is stupid about our system, it's got a vast inertia component.
This means that, for example, a disaster like ObamaCare, or Prohibition, takes massive effort both to insert and extract.
I find cheer in technology allowing a remnant of non-statist thought to cling to life. The lies are not without power, but they are certainly mortal.
Or maybe I'm just incapable of despair.

You're right: I should do more to defend the rights of those who insist on snorting Drano.

You're saying what we're all thinking when we read your opinions.

Fascinating. Do break your handwaving down to specific actions. WTF is "unbiased advocacy" in a subjective existence where absolute bias-freedom is just impossible?
Ever charge you level is symmetric, by your own rules. I see your laughter, and return a guffaw.

You don't think that I grasp that the people who show up at Davos every year, and their lackeys running governments around the world, substantially operate as a clique?

I mean, hydrocarbons? Religious hatreds? But hey, its YOUR show; reality need not apply.

A good comic doesn't blame the audience for limp schtick.

I'm sorry, I thought that when you typed 'oven', you meant 'oven', implying some amount of heat above room temperature.
God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly, and the default meaning of words is the obvious one. Occam razed!

I rejoice that you didn't, I don't know, oversimplify matters, or something.

DNA de-natures rapidly under heat. Good thing life isn't depending on *you* to get anywhere, sir. :-)

Wait, so, are you trying to argue that, like ObamaCare, as long as Soviet Communism helped at least one person, it was OK?