Marx's ideas were perverted by Lenin and the totalitarian mess we saw last century derived from that.

Also, I'm not advocating the destruction of the status quo but its transformation, its transcendence. I'm non-violent and I don't believe in forced societies. My hope is that we will outgrow the old ways.

"Totalitarian" is exactly the right word for this. This is a vision of the state giving and the state taking away, where all belongs to the state and personal property is to be justified by a plea of need.

There might be some terminological confusion here. To expand on what you've written, totalitarianism doesn't necessarily describe repressive or ultra-nationalist governments, though historically totalitarian governments have often been highly nationalist and have almost always been repressive. Instead, it describes governments which claim total identity of state with society; or, to put it another way, where citizens' behavior is accepted as legitimate by the government to the extent that it's directed toward state goals and ideology.

I can think of some (more or less stable or scalable) societies which don't include notions of private property as generally accepted in the modern First World, but which are not totalitarian. But if some state-defined utility function is governing resource allocations, that's pretty hard to square with any other alternative.

You are talking about a state that takes everything from everyone beyond what they "need".

I never said anything about the state taking.

"Totalitarian" is exactly the right word for this. This is a vision of the state giving and the state taking away, where all belongs to the state and personal property is to be justified by a plea of need.

Again... you are projecting your vision of what I said but you did brought up an interesting idea... the idea of personal property. I don't think land should be owned by people. If people don't own the land, then it follows that houses should not be owned by people.

Do you see any way in which this could be implemented without totalitarianism?

I don't agree with caps on individual wealth, and were I Swiss, I'd have voted against 1:12 even without seeing any of the so-called FUD.

Why not?

The only reason capitalism works is that the losing experiments run out of money.

That brake on failure is really important. When someone decides to Do Something and commits their resources to it, if it doesn't work out, they have to stop. A government's ability to carry on regardless is in comparison almost unlimited.

Is the defence budget of USA for the past 60 years an experiment that ran out of money?

We were talking about a new society, one that runs on rationality. Experiments in this kind of society could have very clear parameters for a brake.

I look at capitalist societies and what I see is oligarchies masquerading as capitalism. The game is rigged and people are too afraid to even dream of changing it because, in most cases... this is the only game they know OR... the other games are just as bad.

Is really capitalism the best way to handle education? Healthcare? Public transportation infrastructure? Defence?

To me, the stories with happy people "finishing paying their college loans" are horror stories. Stories with people getting charged thousands of dollars for simple medical procedures are insane. People maximising PROFITS out of selling weapons and military technology/services... is not the mark of a sane and healthy society.