It actually IS true that Communism has never been attained.

Not in a national sense.

The problem is, that it has been tried TONS of times

and always ends the same.

it always enslaves nation and ripps off everything they have.

You're right.

The real question, though, is why?

You've got the 'What' correct.

thats the whole point of communism.

No.

Communism, in it's truest sense, is anarchism.

And yet, every time communism is tried, you get a murderous dictator.

Why do you think that is?

The answer is, in order to obtain that stateless society, everyone has to be on board.

because that leadership is always jews. and not the people of host naiton.

No.

USSR leadership was over 90% jews

Chairman Mao. Pol Pot.

Are you going to tell me that they were Jews?

revolution was also jews.

Just squnity eyed jews?

I disagree about communism's intentions being bad. While most people do have a tyrant in them, I do not think they set out to unleash it. The problem is that once they have committed to revolution it cannot be wrong in their own mind. They've simply invested too much in being right. But then things don't work out. Rather than accept their failure, their minds begin to warp. It cant be their fault. They're well educated, they've studied and planned. They know that this is the way to prosperity. How could it be going wrong? They cannot bear the thought that they were wrong. It must not be them, it has to be someone else. And that's when the monsters come out.

You're in large part right, Zuhayr.

What you're missing is that the goal of Communism is a stateless, classless society.

but relvolution was made by jews. and enslavement was the plan

That's enough gas out of you, man.

During the revolution, in order to get the world they've committed to, they put people in charge willing to make the decisions necessary to attain that goal.

That leader is given a monopoly on force.

I think that just adds to the problem. They believe that they're right, so any means is justified.

Part of the same feedback loop

Any time you give one person that much power, the power over life and death, they get drunk on it.

There have been exceptions, George Washington famously was one.

That was a different type of revolution.

Definitely

But he was a man who could have become a king and chose not to

The American Revolution was fought in rebellion to an outside force.

well, vaguely inside.

I know what ya mean

A war for independence is different than a communist revolution

Just wondering

because a communist revolution requires you to eliminate anyone incompatible with that revolution.