Morality doesnt exist. It is not a material thing, it doesnt refer to anything that exists in the real world. Morality is in the same class as god, religion and human rights i.e human inventions, human fetishization of abstract concepts. Abstract concepts have no effect on material reality any more than we will them to. For example, religion is a thing only because people believe in it.
So I never use morals and morality as an argument in anything. The struggle for a better world doesnt need it at all. Exploitation is ended when workers pursue their self interest, no morals involved here. Veganism is achieved only when you make people empathise with animals (a bio-chemical reaction) or when you physically ban meat, not because of any morals. I can give many more examples.
In fact, it is precisely morality that is one of the tools of the oppressor. Notice how worker ownership of profit is bad because "the capitalist deserves his share". This is a moral argument, not a material argument. When the ruling class enforces laws that harms millions, it is justified because the law is just. This is another abstract moral argument. When workers fight back, or when you just shoot a billionaire or a politician, it is said to be immoral, because reasons. You can make up any bullshit reason, and any bullshit argument because you are not dealing with material things, so there is simply no way to be correct or wrong.
Marx is said to have laughed when people used to make moral arguments with him. Stirner completely destroyed morality as an idea, Nietzche revealed the psychology behind morality etc.
EDIT: Looks like this sub is thoroughly spooked. I guess I should have expected it considering you're all liberals. Don't worry, I will keep posting Stirner memes until morale improves.
This argument is beside the point and kinda silly. You can advocate just that we argue for communism or Marxism along non normative lines (which is true, arguments of 'just' distribution or the like are bad socialism and thoroughly critiqued by Marx), but even Marx had implicit normative goals of his own envisioning of freedom and liberty from the weight of commodity exchange as domination by numerous other persons applied to all, the innate tendency towards overwork due to surplus value extraction, and the resulting alienation, if he viewed it them as social scientific facts. Why waste the time arguing morality is a spook?
Abandoning morality does not mean abandoning normative goals. It's just that we base normative goals on things like material self-interest, rather than appealing to abstract concepts.
You're running into the issue of thinking materialism in terms of a very mechanical materialist framework. Ideology itself for example is an abstract concept that has a heavy weight on the way people act because of how it roughly overlaps the material base underlying. These abstract concepts hold a lot of weight, and ideological concepts and the superstructure can impact the base.
I don't wholly disagree that we should prioritize material self interest as our primary organizing approach, material self interest has way more power when organizing on the ground, but to eschew morality doesn't actually help the organizing necessarily. A good example was sharecropper black communists in the Southern US organizing around their direct material interests of not getting murdered, but still holding strong to moral concepts of the Bible rather than a Marxist strict understanding of economics, combined with Lenin's techniques. My argument is not "we should base our stuff around self interest", it's "why do we need to prove morality nonexistent to do such, that doesn't help most of the time".