Previously on “Hammer and Sickle”:
Marxists argue that we have an inherent responsibility to help our fellow man. Regardless of personal conviction, Marxists argue that you should be forced to help your fellow man. Many times, Marxist revolutions would result in property confiscation at gunpoint. As opposed to Nazis, who hated a race of people, Marxists hated a class of people: the rich class. In the current economic market, wages have never been higher, working conditions have never been better, and benefits have never been better. This is all thanks to inter-company competition. 
In the United States, if an employer does not treat me with the utmost respect, I have the right to seek employment with a competitor. This competition forces companies to have high wages and standards of work, regardless of government intervention. Government intervention that claims to help the workers, often does the direct opposite. Increased minimum wages in several states have led to a number of terrible unintended consequences. Small businesses are forced to shut down if they are unable to pay their employees, and without employees, they are unable to fulfill customer demands and thereby run out of business. 
For larger corporations, human employees are now rampantly being replaced with robot employees that do the job better, and at a lower cost. Although this was inevitable in the long run, increased minimum wages have incredibly quickened this process. Forbes reports, “The authors of the new study—Paul Beaudry, David Green, and Ben Sand—create a framework to account for the effect an increase in the supply of labor can have on the demand for labor in order to isolate the effect of wages on employment. They find that increases in wages have a negative effect on employment over 10-year intervals. In terms of magnitude, they find that a 1% increase in wages leads to a 0.3% to 1% decrease in the employment rate depending on whether wages increase citywide or in only one industry.” Furthermore, large corporations such as Amazon are now advocating for higher minimum wages as a way to phase out competition. (This is a byproduct of “crony capitalism,” something I hate as well)
On the contrary, Marxist economics run on a planned central economy. This means that products have a price set by the government. This constantly leads to shortages and subsequent famines. These governments set prices, and discourage innovation and increased productions of products, because entrepreneurs know that they will be taxed and regulated. Marxist governments discourage, and even confiscate methods of increased or alternative income.      
So if intention is all that matters, why should the Hammer and Sickle be considered taboo and socially unacceptable? The reality stands that the Hammer and Sickle is, at its core, an evil and perverted symbol. It stands for the violent confiscation of wealth and property as seen throughout history with nations such as East Germany, Cuba, the USSR, North Korea, and Cambodia. The reality stands that although people may brandish this symbol on a flag to show understanding or at least acceptance of this political movement, the huge majority of people are completely ignorant to the ramifications associated with implementing policies associated with the Hammer and Sickle. 
I present a question to all those who support the Hammer and Sickle: are you prepared to defend the evil borderline genocide seen throughout the several attempts of communism? If so, I encourage you to wear your communist paraphernalia and prepare to be treated like someone wearing a Swastika. As you can see from my series of articles, I despise any display of both the Swastika and Hammer and Sickle, in presentations of support. While the Swastika was rooted in white supremacy and racism, the Hammer and Sickle is a symbol rooted in envy and true despise for the rich. While some rich people have caused harm in the past, it is the wealthy that hire the huge majority of people, and for that I am immensely grateful (such a subject matter will have to be discussed in another article).