/b/ Siberia

Marx's theory of developmental succession? I know it's called something else officially, but you know the progression of -isms I'm talking about, including the contention regarding which are most ripe for transition into communism.
So if the White man raped the continents until about 1945, doesn't that affect material conditions? Is Marx right, then, about which countries are closest to communism? Did history bear his ideas out? As far as his ideas, would he then say the third world is less close to communism? With the possible exception of indigenous African villagers who still share as in his idea of primitive communism, something I saw a YouTube video about (i.e., communal farming and food-sharing).
What about scale? Many individual families function in an essentially communist way, with each contributing as they can and taking as they need. Scale that up to get communes, then communism in one country, then world revolution after that. If communism within one family is no challenge to the state, and maybe even to the state's benefit, then is communism in one country really a threat to global capitalism?
If we're worried about hierarchies even within non-market sites of material exchange, such as exploitation within a patriarchal family structure, shouldn't we also worry about hierarchy within state-managed non-market sites of exchange, such as in communist countries, with government bureaucrats and party officials being privileged as if of a noble lineage? Especially when there's a singular leader whose successor is hand-picked or even a family member.