Inclusion at the end is fucking stupid. A baseball game where random people are playing is not the same thing as a pro game people are watching. Someone who has one arm trying to hit a major league pitch is going to be completely destroyed and it won't be fun for anyone. This naive and stupid understanding of inclusion is what makes random morons think they're experts on vaccines despit what the elite scientists think because they watched a video on YouTube. Not everyone can do everything, and they shouldn't be expected to. People have different skills and strengths and the rest of the meme acknowledges that and then at the end it just becomes completely stupid. You can even tell that some moron, probably an HR drone, tacked this on at the end and probably felt smug about going above and beyond the original comic without actually understanding what it was saying.
Marxism is anti-utopian, it's based on analyzing how societies evolve over time. What is deemed "authoritarianism" is the need for the proletariat to exert its control over the bourgeoisie, rather than the reverse, yet bourgeois rule is more authoritarian.
I lived in post sovier counties with USSR time ages,so I know pretty well what it was actually.It's awful and never should happen again,but I didn't say that I like capitalism too they both authoritarianism in extreme limits
This echoes my concerns every time someone (especially under the age of about 40, especially American) praises "communism" (as if it were one thing) with some kind of absolute adoration.
In this case, OP: how did that justice work for the political dissidents sent to gulags?
The vast majority of people sent to prison by the soviets were criminals, thieves, murderers, rapists, etc. The political prisoners were largely members of the White Army, fascists, monarchists, or were active terrorists against society. For a country that went through a revolution, resistance from the older owning classes is expected, other revolutions were similar in use of force against the monarchy and other ruling classes.
system of government and system of economy are two different things though. They influence each other, but communism isn't and wasn't causing authoritarianism. You can get authoritarianism in every type of economy, as well as you can have communism combined with every type of government.
This isn't quite correct. Governance and economy are too interlinked to be considered distinct, systems aren't recipes picked out on a page but a material, physical thing. Further, "authoritarianism" isn't really a thing in and of itself, it just describes the phenomenon where one class oppresses others. In Socialism, the proletariat oppresses the bourgeousie, in Capitalism the bourgeoisie oppresses the proletariat.
Sounds like it's saying "or maybe this isn't real equality?", which is very counter to what I assume is its intended message, an attempt to convince the reader that equality isn't the epitome of human fairness.