I was saying she wasn't communist, and saying there is no such thing as society and the government shouldn't do much doesn't sound very communist to me.
she was saying that as society does not exist, the role of government isn't to uphold society, but instead to uphold family; ie, the government acts as an extension of the family, which when combined with increasing measures to dissolve and break up the family unit is one of the most trotskyist positions that you could possibly have. She's essentially saying that the government is your family.
communists aren't for wealth redistribution, if that was the case you would have seen wealth distribution within China, the Soviet Union and places like Venezuela, what communists /are/ for is wealth consolidation. The trick is that if you tell people that in order to attain wealth redistribution, they have to pay into a government money pot that then gets spent on 'social projects', then you can attain consolidation of wealth without ever having to tell anyone that's what you're doing in the first place. Trotsky and Lenin both talk about this in depth.
So now you take a look at the west, and this time focus on all of the consolidation of wealth done by increasingly large firms and governments, and you'll start to see why people are worried about the growth of communism at the expense of liberties; small, homegrown and free enterprise gradually gets erased and replaced with controlled arms of a larger entity, be it the state or a big corporation, there's not actually much difference between the two in functionality, even though many useful idiots will claim otherwise.
not posting anymore on this because we're getting off topic again, but I've linked a video on this subject in the deep thoughts thread on communism if you're interested.
