It’s more that the basis of private property is material relations and development giving rise to it, and the state exists to protect that. In collectivized society, where production and distribution are planned, there’s simply no basis to create a new state or new private property, there’s no utility in it whatsoever and no underlying basis for it.
In another wording, present levels of development suit private property more than public property for many industries, and in some areas cooperative ownership works well for agriculture. Building up productive forces ti higher levels of complexity and larger scales makes public ownership and planning more effective. In communist society, these lower levels of development simply do not exist, and thus the basis for earlier property relations doesn’t exist. It’s like asking why feudal kingdoms don’t crop up anymore.
It’s more that the basis of private property is material relations and development giving rise to it, and the state exists to protect that. In collectivized society, where production and distribution are planned, there’s simply no basis to create a new state or new private property, there’s no utility in it whatsoever and no underlying basis for it.
When you ask a marxism question and the answer is material conditions
In another wording, present levels of development suit private property more than public property for many industries, and in some areas cooperative ownership works well for agriculture. Building up productive forces ti higher levels of complexity and larger scales makes public ownership and planning more effective. In communist society, these lower levels of development simply do not exist, and thus the basis for earlier property relations doesn’t exist. It’s like asking why feudal kingdoms don’t crop up anymore.