I am a bit sketchy on the idea of wealth redistribution, and personal accumulated wealth (such as in real estate)

name a better term for seizure of property

As Marx put it, in a classless society there would never be wealth redistribution because the society would be formed without wealth inequality in mind. That's how I remember it.

Wealth redistribution is a bourgeois term. Capitalists are the ones redistributing wealth for themselves.

Owning houses alone doesn't really make you bourgeois unless you're using them to extract rent or are simply holding them until the property can be sold.
There is a difference between private and personal property. Personal property is going to be the things you use on a day-to-day basis for function and security (your house, your car, your toothbrush, etc). As long as you're making use of the property and are not turning it into a tool for extracting surplus value from others labor, it can be considered yours in exclusivity.
Multiple houses beyond maybe a second tend to be in the category of "not being used" by most practical definitions. In that case, assuming that property could be put towards subsequent public benefit, it may be subject to expropriation.

Considering most people nowadays would not be even able to afford the dirt farm in the first place to build up that property/capital, the fact that your family was in the right place at the right time to get that foothold in the puts you marginally ahead of others in terms of ability to accumulate capital and property. There isn't really much precedence why you would automatically be the sole inheritor of value you did not create in the first place either, as there is no real point where the productive process can be wholly reduced to being because of the effort of any one individual.

sounds to me like you're petty bourgeois so probably nothing bad would happen, unless you turn into a counterrevolutionary or something

Depending on the circumstances you might actually get compensated for it but ultimately communism is going to be more concerned with ending landlordism and homelessness than whether you consider their actions "fair."

Yes we're coming for your cat, your toothbrush, your animu figurines and your industrial sized lube canister.

Might will make right when I finally come for your ass.

Primitive accumulation?
No? Ohhh, you meant stuff that's already owned. How about expropriation?

I do think you have a real point here though, I don't know if it's possible these days

caveman pls

No one should be allowed to own multiple homes so they can rent them out for profit like a fucking pig. In a true communist society you would be forced to turn one of the homes into a communal living environment.

I find it hard to belive a family made enough money to buy several houses without employing/exploiting anyone. What happens with excessive property is divisive question among leftists. But in any case, in a moneyless society why would you need several houses you won't use. As far as i am concerned you can keep them unless someone finds abetter use or is in necessity of a house. But be aware that you will be responsible for taking care of them which can become nearly impossible without hiring anyone.

Google "land-value tax".

All but one house will be seized from you, because absentee property to rent to people is private property and thus not allowed under socialism.
What your ancestors were is not relevant. There are dirt poor people today whose family 100 years ago we're rich cunts. We do not care about your family, we care about the individuals and their property.

There is your problem. Not actually yours.

You retards need to shut up if you have never read theory.

´There is no clear formula for how society will organize itself post-revolution, it's dependent on too many variables and factors. For example:

If there was a housing crisis and your community was desperately in need of housing? It's likely the space you occupy would be claimed by the community so they could house people there. If you're lucky you get compensated.

If there was an abundance of living space, likely nobody will really care and nobody will be coming for your houses.

When people need a roof over their head they won't care what's fair and what's not.

Yes and no. Generally nobody is coming for your house and garden (personal property), but land is part of the distribution cycle of capitalism and one way through which capital is generated, the proletariat exploited/controlled and of course every industry must stand on a piece of land.

How retarded do you have to be to think you deserve something that your PARENTS worked for?

oh thanks, heaven forbid that your own family should be worth anything

fuck off

alright asuming this ideology how do you motivated people to produce surplus
working to give your children a better life is a pretty fine motivator to avoid stagnation to whatever level of development existed when the revolution occured

I assume you gladly accept punishment for any crime your parents or grandparents commited then

lets look then

grandad smoked too much, grandma crashed a car and died

great grandad was a carpenter

looks like there's no criminals you autistic fuck

I was talking on a general basis. If you think one is entiled to the fruits if your parents labour, do you think one should be punished for any crimes of your parents/ancectors?

How this applies to you is besides the point.

you're combating the concept of longterm gain itself

why should anyone even try under your system if they're ultimately punished on death by not being allowed to afford their earnings to their own children

without that you're basically orcs

If this was the case, why do people without kids work?

why indeed

to sustain themselves until they die if you wanted me to answer your stupid question

>>>Holla Forums

Real life isn't like your fantasy books faggot. Why can't right retards actually engage with reality and instead retreat to children's books?

Wow you really are retarded.

the true fucking idiot has emerged

what have i said now that makes what i'm saying unrealistic to you?

i've 8 houses to lose in a communist revolution. i didn't hurt a single person getting them and under a revolution i'd be punished

you of course are such a fucking idiot you'd never give a thought to anyone who'd lose out in your neverhappening revolution so enjoy batting yourself off on this board in this nothing forum that is itself a meaningless parody of 4chon.

what'd i get wrong son

My uncle lives in Norway, got no family and could've lived well enough off welfare till he died, yet he works fulltime at a fork lift. There are people who spend their life accumilating more money than they could ever need, without any children to inherit the money. And there has been great philosophers who have dedicated their life to the bettering of themself and other humans, whitout any children who can enjoy the book revenue.

There is a multitude of reasons to work, not just survival and leaving something fir your kids. That being said I hardly see the problem in inheriting the house of your parents, I just think that even if you accept that billionares are just rewarded for their hard work, I don't see how one can justify that the son of Bill Gates is going to live in obcene amountsbof wealth.

Why should I care about your 8 houses when there are millions of homeless people? Only orcs live without empathy for their fellow man and would let the homeless freeze while they protect their unused homes.

thankyou for a reasoned reply, i agree

oh dear sounds like you don't even have a target audience when your target is the entire world. how will you cope without my money to fund your autistic 'everyone is the same' ideas you have

KEK

Also, why do you think anyone would give 2 shits about wether or not you harmed anyone in the process of getting those houses? If there is a shortage of houses and you got 10 laying around, they will be used by those who need it. Btw, if you live in the US this 100% wont be a problen as there is like 7 houses per homeless person.

you are right about revolution never happening tho

You got it 100% right. Our power and appeal comes from the fact that 95% of the world population is just like us (broke, toiling, miserable slaves with nothing to lose). Communism is not an ideology for those with a comfortable position in capitalist society.

"You have nothing to lose but your chains"
-Karl Marx

If that statement doesn't come close to describing your situation, youre not from the class we are trying to liberate.

Thank you for proving that you know absolutely nothing about leftist theory.

I wouldn't seize private property. I would just direct the state to stop defending it. This would eliminate private property.

All private land ownership is derived from an initial illegitimate claim of property that was once owned by everyone. Only with the state's backing are people able to own property that is not for personal use.

probably this.
Some bits of the Philippines work this way. My bro-in-law divorced my sister (I don't blame him she's really clingy and needy, at least someone not related by blood can get a divorce.) and married a flip land heiress from Cebu.
She owns 6 houses and a condo complex but all the rooms not rented out are basically "everyone's" and poor kids wander in, get food from the maids, or watch TV or play vidya or internet, before heading on their way home.
First introduced to it when I accepted his invite and came over and there was a whole roast boar on the table and I'm like "wtf that's way too big for only 4 people to finish" then a jeepney pulls up and lets off all the schoolkids, and they wandered through and started taking hunks off it.
I have no idea what you'd call that sorta thing. Laissez-faire communism? It was so bloody informal and out of nowhere. Unfortunately they neglected to mention the local culture so all the candy I picked up at the market on the way in also got nicked.

Capital, natural resources and profit-wielding estate will naturally be ceased.
Things like jewelry, family relics, luxury even mansions and stuff are up to debate, although they'll likely be threatened by the interruption of bourgeois order. There's no philosophical justification for taking them though, so a more orderly and virtuous Revolution should abstain from it, although anarkids, stirnerfags and thugs will do it for revenge and indulgence.

expropriation.

forgot pic.