The reason I could never be a straight-up Marxist is that type of society will always necessitate the system being enforced by the barrel of a gun from an authoritarian government imo. I would like to believe in the stateless society Marx envisioned but I can't see it. Not without some drastic change in the human condition...maybe one artificially engineered like A Brave New World.
That's the thing about Marxism, the very tenants of it (especially its economic tenants) are rooted in the type of capitalist society that it wants to deconstruct, therefore it will always have some of that ideological residue within it. As much as I study it and find it useful despite that, it's really nothing more than capitalism's mirror in some respects.
Because of this (if it's the mirror of something you're trying to deny, you can't exactly change the society, it's base ideologies and philosophies and its economic methods in THAT radical of a way), you get reductions to the highly bureaucratic and hierarchized methods of something like the Third International and its successors.
If socialism/communism is going to manifest itself, its going to have to do so in a form similar to that theorized by the Situationists, the Autonomists, or Paul Lafargue (who had a very, VERY different interpretation of work than most Marxists). This would require a very radical reconstruction of the very philosophies upon which a society constructs itself.
But maybe that's just my beliefs bleeding in there
. All I know is that most Che-deifiers don't exactly think of something like this.