Time to refute Marx

It is summer so I end up reading all sorts of stuff. Last week I read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. You'd have to be a real uneducated, desperately oppressed worker in a 19th century sweat-shop to buy into this stuff. Marx gets high...er...marks for his accurate picture of the nasty face of capitalism. He also does a terrific job of illustrating how capitalism itself does a better job of destroying private property rights. Where he falls down is in his simple minded view of human motivations. He seems to think that all aspects of a human being can be molded by philosophy. This very flaw in Marx's thinking caused the USSR to fall far behind the west in modern biology and genetics, but that is a different story.
Basically I can refute 100% of the foundation of the Manifesto by saying that human beings, by and large, and like all animals, act out of self-interest 99% of the time. Oh they may throw themselves on the odd grenade now and then, but during the long boring days of life they usually act selfishly.
So in a communist state, where the STATE owns all the property, those in the government tend to get richer while the masses, who have no property rights anymore, and don't have time to manage the the government who is supposed to represent the people, tend to get poorer. Marxism is really Super Capitalism. The culminatioin of the consolidation of capital into the smallest number of hands and inforced by the STATE. Human nature cannot be molded by philosophy. It is the survival instinct at work.
According to Marx the STATE must control property, communication, and education. The more the STATE attempts to force adherence to the philosophy, through its over arching power, the more tyranical it becomes since the vast majority of the government is really beyond the reach of the average joe-communist. So the average joe is made a pawn again, ruled by unaccountable super-capitalists, and forced to accept propaganda for news and told to accept by-faith the STATE's actions as legit.
America's form of social organisation, though far from perfect, is still more able to keep what Jefferson called "a due degree of Liberty" since the power, both social and financial, is still scattered. Basically abosotule power, even in the hands of the people, still corupts.
The communist may try to retort by saying that it is in the worker's self interest to adhere to communistic life. I counter that the argument just made is false since the worker will never see himself as the STATE. Particularly as long as he is told where to work, where to live, and what to think by the STATE. Unless the STATE's agenda constantly matches the agendas of the worker. This will never happen. So the worker will set himself in opposition to the STATE, like capitalist workers in opposition to management, and clandestinely work to undermind it.
So you end up with a STATE that is corrupt and workers who pay the state lip service and increasingly are at odds with the corupt STATE. Since there is no real unifying power in such a society, other forces fall into the vacume and you end up with a nation that may look unified by is really a bunch of disaffected partisans ready for another revolution.

Sorry Karl.