The old party line of the Communist Party USA was to not only not support charity, but on some level to work against charity. As Europe and North America shift

The old party line of the Communist Party USA was to not only not support charity, but on some level to work against charity. As Europe and North America shifted from farming and feudalism, a new group came into existence, the "reserve army of labor" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_army_of_labour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_army_of_labour ), also known as the unemployed. As the people who control production want this, trying to fight this charity and whatnot is considered a waste of time - the people who control production want unemployment and poverty to be at a certain level, and if the working class makes a massive effort to relieve it one place, the controllers of production will just increase it elsewhere. You can see this in its modern form by reading the Wall Street Journal, Businessweek etc. in the year 2000. There were worries the unemployment rate had gotten "too low" (<4%), i.e. it was a problem too many people looking for a job could find one. Talks of inflation and so forth, basically the WSJ-speak way which can easily be translated into Marxist terminology. If the powers that be were openly seeking to increase unemployment in 2000, what is the point of devoting a lot of effort to charity? The communists thought charities contributed to this problem, by prolonging the agony. It seems the problem is more structural.