why do millenials like communism so much

The Communist Manifesto. Download here for anyone who wants to read it.

https://www.fulltextarchive.com/pdfs/The-Communist-Manifesto.pdf

The main points of the manifesto is to do away with ALL private property, with the intent of abolishing all class, and to forcibly overthrow ALL existing social conditions. Karl Marx ideas were not new, they can be traced back to the Levellers of the English Revolution and even to Lollards such as John Ball in the English Peasant War of the 14th century. The manifesto did not deal with the real social relations that make up capitalism. He did state that ""the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law," indeed, that "its existence is no longer compatible with society.”

The winter of 1847-48 was still the inception of the bourgeois epoch, not its high point, let alone its end, and the words globalization and multinationalism were unheard of, even as The Manifesto described similar phenomena. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class, and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible. However, the question that always presented itself, even to Karl Marx was "How could an entire class, the proletariat organized as a "movement" that would eventually speak for society as a whole, institutionalize itself into a "political" (or state) power? By what concrete institutional forms would this class, whose revolution in contrast to all previous ones would represent "the interest of the immense majority, exercise its economic and political sovereignty?" They probably assumed a "republic."

Anarchist critics of Marx pointed out with considerable effect that any system of representation would become a statist interest in its own right, one that at best would work against the interests of the working classes (including the peasantry), and that at worst would be a dictatorial power as vicious as the worst bourgeois state machines. Indeed, with political power reinforced by economic power in the form of a nationalized economy, a "workers' republic" might well prove to be a despotism of unparalleled oppression.

Apart from their writings formally in support of the Paris Commune, neither Marx nor Engels ever resolved the problem of the political institutions for proletarian rule that they set for themselves in The Manifesto: the problem of how a class, still less the mass of the people in bourgeois society, will take over the reins of power as a class or a people.

The question of the institutions of political and social management by a class as a whole, and eventually by citizens in a classless society, has no easy resolution. Plainly it is not answered adequately by Proudhon's system of federalism, which is too incoherent and vague and retains too many bourgeois features, such as contract and individual proprietorship, to provide a truly revolutionary solution. The solutions that later anarchists, more collectivist than the Proudhonists, offered many possibilities, but they too suffer from a lack of definition and articulation.

For their part, anarchosyndicalists have offered workers' control of industry as the most viable revolutionary alternative to the state, adducing the takeover of factories and agricultural land as evidence of its feasibility. But as social elements for a liberatory society, workers' control has basic problems, not only their parochialism (narrow scope) and the highly visible decline in numbers of the manufacturing working class but most especially their tendency to turn into competitive collectively owned capitalistic enterprises.  The latter is why Marxist communism has never worked.

With regards to the Frankfurt School Institute For Social Research), it initially was based upon Marxist and Hegelian premises of idealist philosophy. The School’s sociologic works derived from syntheses of the thematically pertinent works of Immanuel Kant, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, and Karl Marx, of Sigmund Freud and Max Weber, and of Georg Simmel and Georg Lukács.

It was founded as the first Marxist Research centre, by Carl Grunberg, who was born in Focșani, Romania in a Jewish-Bessarabia German family, and originated through the largesse of the wealthy student Felix Weil a Jewish German-Argentine, who’s father was a wealthy grain merchant.

Carl Grunberg – studied law and political economy, Grünberg was one of the founders of Austromarxism. Among his students were Otto Bauer, Rudolf Hilferding and Karl Renner. 1912 he got the chair for history of economy at the university of Vienna. Austromarxism is a theory of theory of nationality and nationalism, and its attempt to conciliate it with socialism in the imperial context, by using the “personal principle” developed by Otto Bauer (one of the leading thinkers of the left-socialist Austro-Marxist grouping. He was also an early inspiration for both the New Left movement and Eurocommunism in their attempt to find a "Third way" to democratic socialism). in his 1907 book Die Nationalitätenfrage und die Sozialdemokratie seen by him a way of gathering the geographically divided members of the same nation to "organize nations not in territorial bodies but in simple association of persons", thus radically disjoining the nation from the territory and making of the nation a non-territorial association.”

Note: these men alone, who started the Frankfurt School and the influences they had and the wealth, are well worth looking into as it shows their thinking from the beginning, once you do that you will see the influence on not just todays countries but on the globalist, multicultural idea in general, to eradicate individuality for collectivism.  The scope of this is far too great to cover here.

“"Let us consider the case of a country composed of several national groups, e.g. Poles, Lithuanians and Jews. Each national group would create a separate movement. All citizens belonging to a given national group would join a special organisation that would hold cultural assemblies in each region and a general cultural assembly for the whole country. The assemblies would be given financial powers of their own: either each national group would be entitled to raise taxes on its members, or the state would allocate a proportion of its overall budget to each of them. Every citizen of the state would belong to one of the national groups, but the question of which national movement to join would be a matter of personal choice and no authority would have any control over his decision. The national movements would be subject to the general legislation of the state, but in their own areas of responsibility they would be autonomous and none of them would have the right to interfere in the affairs of the others".

At university, Weil’s doctoral dissertation dealt with the practical problems of implementing socialism. In 1922, he organized the First Marxist Workweek (Erste Marxistische Arbeitswoche) in effort to synthesize different trends of Marxism into a coherent, practical philosophy; the first symposium included György Lukács and Karl Korsch, Karl August Wittfogel and Friedrich Pollock.

After Max Horkheimer took over as director in 1930, this focus widened. Leading members, such as Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, and Herbert Marcuse, influenced by aspects of existentialism and even psychoanalysis, developed a version of Marxism known as “Critical Theory.” Critical Theory set out to challenge all previously accepted standards in every aspect of life from a Marxist perspective. They saw much within Marxism which could be employed to form a new foundation for a post-Christian society.

Georg Lukács was born Löwinger György Bernát, in Budapest, Austria-Hungary, to the investment banker József Löwinger (later Szegedi Lukács József; 1855–1928) who was knighted, and his wife Adele Wertheimer (Wertheimer Adél; 1860–1917), who were a wealthy Jewish family. As son of one of the Hapsburg Empire's leading bankers he was a baron, and he trained in Germany and already an important literary theorist, Lukacs became a Communist during World War I, writing as he joined the party, "Who will save us from Western civilization?"

Korsch and Lukács were members of the communist party, a communist party is a political party that advocates the application of the social and economic principles of communism through state policy. The name originates from the 1848 tract Manifesto of the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

 Theodor Adorno - His mother, a devout Catholic from Corsica, was once a professional singer, while his father, an assimilated Jew who had converted to Protestantism, ran a successful wine-export business. His writings—such as Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), Minima Moralia (1951) and Negative Dialectics (1966)—strongly influenced the European New Left.