Something Russian Marxism had right was the impression Modernism had. Which was communism. With modernism we can live as a commune.

 Russian Marxism went wrong in Communism, however, because Communism became Stalinism. Stalin had no grace. He was the man of steel. I've made hard decisions myself. For example, with Caucasians having their emergency rights, there's nothing I can bargain with them with. Because I am not an individual that is animated. Racism is fraternal & regressive. Things I am not. The only people that will prosper under a fraternal-order, such as nazism; are the people that are animated. You would be animated because you take onto a life that's predisposed to favor. We don't judge things by popularity contests. There's real adult matters & issues to take into consideration. Not whether or not we like or dislike someone, merely based on appearance. 

Communism said that with modernism's technological & scientific advancements to mankind, that we could live in a 'commune.' This word is highly debated, however, though. I would hearken unto the impression that it meant that you were in a village/town where everybody had enough, was friendly, & was happy. A 'Commune.' Stalinism had something to do about state authoritarian control. Everything was to be controlled by the state. That's utterly wrong. American-Capitalism, albeit highly unpopular & unjust, was truer due to the fact that human-beings have to find their own way. You can think & believe about something all day, but it does not make it happen or does it make it true.

So, the people that figure out how to think, are actually highly unprosperous, because they think too much. The people that learn how to act or do, are very prosperous & always have enough for themselves. The only problem is that our lives are bottomless pits when it comes to want & need. So, those that act or do, do not have enough to share. The brilliance in American-Capitalism was that a barter was reasoned in exchange. Then the thinkers have to be doers & innovate how we retain personal property & still have a distribution (or what was then seen as a redistribution) of wealth to those that did not have personal property.