The question is: should a Nation adopt exclusively one culture and value system. America is divided because it accommodates multiple cultures that each try to rule with their own exclusive value systems. For example: Should China's Atheistic Communist system be confined to China and not interfere in other countries? Should India be confined to Hinduism? Should Pakistan be exclusively Islam. Should America and England be retained as Christian? Should Israel be retained as Jewish?
The problem now through open borders given to multiculturalism, finds Christianity being despised and Islamic Socialism combined with BLM violence is rising as acceptable by those that can easily murder others lives, starting with publicly funded abortion.

According to a 2017 study done by the Institute for Social Policy, “American Muslims are the only faith community surveyed with no majority race, with 25 percent black, 24 percent white, 18 percent East Asian, 18 percent Arab, 7 percent mixed race, and 5 percent Hispanic”

I don’t expect those with communist views to change their views but at least others should be aware of the arguments and determine if these are in their best interests.

The subject of why Locke Liberalism and Communism are related is a big question but hopefully I’ve some of the reasons below.

http://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/hobbes-locke-and-social-contract

English Civil War 1640’s (Puritan Parliamentarian Cromwellian’s vs King Charles I Royalist’s), Man is naturally good vs bad. Locke’s Principles – Life, Liberty, Property- equality.

http://sites.google.com/site/dofiar99/what-were-john-locke-s-ideas-beliefs

http://www.history.com/topics/british-history/john-locke

“Locke also developed a definition of property as the product of a person’s labor that would be foundational for both Adam Smith’s capitalism and Karl Marx’s socialism. Locke famously wrote that man has three natural rights: life, liberty and property.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emile,_or_On_Education

“a treatise on the nature of education and on the nature of man written by Jean-Jacques Rousseau”
“Emile was banned in Paris and Geneva and was publicly burned in 1762, the year of its first publication.[2] During the French Revolution, Emile served as the inspiration for what became a new national system of education.” “Emile attempts to "find a way of resolving the contradictions between the natural man who is 'all for himself' and the implications of life in society"” ”every society "must choose between making a man or a citizen"[9] and that the best "social institutions are those that best know how to denature man, to take his absolute existence from him in order to give him a relative one and transport the I into the common unity"”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9%2C_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9%2C_fraternit%C3%A9

French Revolution Principles- Liberté, égalité, fraternité 1793

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Emile-Durkheim

“The left-wing Commune of Paris, which took over the French capital in 1871, led to senseless destruction, which appeared to Durkheim’s generation, in retrospect, as evidence of the alienation of the working classes from capitalist society.”

“He perceived around him the prevalence of anomie, a personal sense of rootlessness fostered by the absence of social norms. Material prosperity set free greed and passions that threatened the equilibrium of society.”

“the crisis of 1886 over Georges Boulanger, the minister of war who demanded a centralist government to execute a policy of revenge against Germany, was one of several events that testified to the resurgence of nationalism, soon to be accompanied by anti-Semitism.”

“In Durkheim’s view, ethical and social structures were being endangered by the advent of technology and mechanization.” “He did, however, endeavour to formulate a positive social science that might direct people’s behaviour toward greater solidarity.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_Communism

“During the early 19th century, the effects of the Industrial Revolution inspired utopian socialists to theorize improved forms of social organization based upon cooperation, as opposed to free market competition... sought to overthrow the existing European social order ... One such organization was the League of the Just, which formed in 1836 by splitting off from an ancestor, the League of Outlaws, which had formed in Paris in 1834 ... to bring about their own ideal society ... referred to as the "new Jerusalem"... the League was not composed of industrial wage labourers or proletarians in the Marxist sense, but instead of journalists, political radicals, and craftsmen ... structured itself in chapters divided into local cells, typically of five to ten individuals."
"In November 1842, Engels and Marx met each other for the first time in Cologne, at the office of the Rheinische Zeitung, a newspaper that Marx was editing at the time.[6] Nothing came of this first encounter, but during 1842-43, both had separately contacted the League, though neither joined."

In the history of politics there have been stages- Tribal, Feudal Monarchy, City State Democracy, Representative Locke Liberal National Democracy, Global Liberalism, Communism- they loosely reflect the increasing scale, complexity, population, and technology. They each have their systems to manage society but in a way that is unique and usually limited to their civilisation. There are other influential systems that have developed alongside including taxation, economics, business management (eg. Taylorism), democracy.

Liberalism is about 500 years old- Communism is about 150 years old- and parallel the impacts of the Renaissance (1400-1500’s), Enlightenment (1600-1700’s), and the Industrial Revolution (1700-1800’s)

John Locke (Liberalism, 1640’s) tries to clinically separate government from traditional society and it’s bottom up evolution from extended families. Locke similar to many was a man of his time- living through the English Civil War- a period of notable unrest due to long standing conflict between the English monarchy and the parliament.

John Locke’s ideas were fashionable during the 1700’s and probably led to the French Revolution.

Communism (1800’s) tries to address issues of inequality highlighted in Locke Liberalism (1600’s) by codification and aggressive idealistic tactics in the Industrial Revolution. In a sense Communists are impatient Locke Liberals. They see the economic and social benefits of mass production but convince themselves that destruction of traditional society is necessary by revolution- rather than the necessity of Traditionalism and Mass Production being a paradox of nature to be balanced by community.

The literal meaning of liberalism is “freedom”- in a Lockean sense- is not free in detail. In history there has been two main understandings of freedom- the first is the Aristotelian (300BC) then in the 1600’s John Stewart Mill created the concept of “negative freedom”.

There are two types of liberalism- social and economic.

In a sense “Social Liberalism” is a sort of “weak communism”- uses the state as a vehicle to bring about communist ideals of equality. Jordan Peterson says “value creates hierarchy creates inequality”- so equality is unachievable especially in mass culture.

Economic liberalism- believes that everyone should be able to use their money and their labour in a way that best benefits themselves. This is related to the “Efficient Market Hypothesis” in Economics. Stiglitz in his Nobel prize winning paper “disproved” both strong and weak forms.

Both communism and liberalism- are against culture and traditional communities.
Communism- Cultural Hedgemony, Blank Slate “Tabula Rasa” Theory
Liberalism- (Patrick Deneen/ Alexis de Tocqueville) Liberalism fosters a sort of anti-Culture, Blank Slate “Tabula Rasa” Theory. Liberalism requires a sense of upward mobility to motivate participation that is predicated on continuous growth- but this doesn’t necessarily achieve the objective of equality- it may even reduce equality- even at the cost of freedom

Both communism and liberalism- Global universalist principles, equality of outcome (strong form of equality)- rather than equality of opportunity- (weak form equality)

Both communism and liberalism- Global Academic top-down (perscriptive) solutions to problems and causes. Rather than bottom-up (Traditional forms of government).

Both communism and social liberalism (new left, Marcuse- Trotskyite)- From those with the ability to those with the need.

Both communism and liberalism- industrial based systems treating global society as a soulless factory.

Communism- Saw culture as the way that elites control the masses- they believed that to create equality- it was necessary to destroy culture. (Cultural Hedgemony). Contemporary Liberalism doesn’t say this explicitly but it seems implicit in Blank Slate Theory. This is embodied in Liberalism’s relationship with religious, national, cultural, ethnic, family, gender identity.

Both Liberalism and Communism- Try to create a global order so that those against such an order will have nowhere to escape and will be forced to comply or die.

Both Liberalism and Communism- There is a tendency for a very small minority of the population in government in both systems. In tribalism a relatively large proportion of the group is involved in governing the group. In US Democracy there are/ were measures to keep power at the local level- though these aren’t perfect- in a sense these localist principles contradict Locke’s attempts at universalism- despite his inspiration of the Declaration Of Independence and the US Constitution.

“Before Liberalism” the view seems to be that the role of the state was to protect the state from external forces- “after Liberalism” the role of the state is seen to be protection of equal rights due to the rise of representative democracy through “mass” “democratic” institutions such as the English Parliament. Aristotle talked of “a tyranny of the masses”- Alexis de Tocqueville talked of “democratic despotism”. Equality and Freedom??

Too many people is the problem. In the past the industrial revolution required many people- production has been delinked from people but consumption hasn't. Equality is a problem when the mass of people create scarce resources. The mass of people is also important for defense of the nation- maybe this is no longer the case.