>>5657
(continued)

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was stated by Marx in the Critique of the Gotha Programme (a rather short writing which scathingly criticized a Social Democrat party in Germany). It's taken out of context and misrepresents the actual contents of the text. This particular quote is only a sliver of what Marx said, and it refers explicitly to the so-called "higher phase" of communism, long after any remnants of capital have been phased out.
"To each according to his contribution" was put forth as the basis for a "lower phase" of communist society, directly following a transition from capitalism.

Regarding the "lower phase," Marx states that "the individual receives from society exactly what he gives to it" and advocates for remuneration through labor vouchers instead of money, noting also that collective collaboration on labor with no surplus value extraction would also mean that one's labor put forth would directly benefit them and their peers instead of a hoarding higher-up.
>The means of production are no longer the private property of individuals. The means of production belong to the whole of society. Every member of society, performing a certain part of the socially-necessary work, receives a certificate from society to the effect that he has done a certain amount of work. And with this certificate he receives from the public store of consumer goods a corresponding quantity of products. After a deduction is made of the amount of labor which goes to the public fund, every worker, therefore, receives from society as much as he has given to it.

>In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

Marx explained his belief that, in such a society, each person would be motivated to work for the good of society despite the absence of a social mechanism compelling them to work, because work would have become a pleasurable and creative activity instead of something which exists only to make some greedy bastard's pockets fatter, like what happens with wage labor.

Communism has no blueprint or guided path to installation. Time and time again, Marx stated that communism is a movement to abolish the present state of things. Having witnessed the world's changes triggered by industrial revolution, he understood that material conditions change and whatever he wrote on actually bringing about communism would be rendered totally irrelevant down the line. So really, communism is not a question of "what will it be like" rather than "what will it NOT be like?"

Marx was first and foremost a philosopher with a deep interest in breaking down economics and dispelling myths. The key is that he was anti-economy in general. He saw capitalism as unsustainable and constantly requiring governmental intervention simply to keep itself afloat and that, naturally, it would bring about its own demise, either with the help of people or not.