Communism is mainly an economic program of collectivizing the means of production and abolishing private property. Marx portrayed himself as an economist and talked almost exclusively about economics.
There is an egalitarian anti-traditional social dimension to it, like Fredrich Engels’ attacks on the nuclear family (a theme many Marxist socialists today still hold to) and the abolition of religion (“opiate of the masses”) and with it many social norms. But social issues were never a huge focus among orthodox Marxists (in contrast to the Cultural Marxists who put more emphasis on social issues) and there was disagreement among them. Communists changed their social stances often. Stalin even banned homosexuality. Despite some differences among communists on social issues, what didn’t change were the economic views. Those remained the same among them despite variation and disagreement on social issues or views of how the socialist revolution would be achieved.
That’s because the economic side of Communism is the most important aspect of it and deviating from it means you’re no longer a communist.
Some orthodox fascists will try to trick you by portraying Communism as mainly a social program. They do this because their economic stances are virtually the same as communists and astute observers will notice the strong similarities. To distract you from the similarities on econ, they’ll shift focus to social issues. But then they have no clue how to differentiate themselves from tendencies like National Bolshevism who adopt some of their social positions.
Most blue haired trannies are communists, but what makes them communists is their stance on economics (collectivization of the means of production/abolition of private property) not their blue hair or transsexualism.
If you enjoyed this commentary, consider making a small contribution or becoming a member.
A good observation.
What’s pissed me off for years are those idiots who describe our current Western leaders as fascists. By definition, fascism always involves nationalism which is the antithesis of their globalist doctrine. They are indeed communistic in the way you described, with our governments as the Central Planners and International Finance being their overlords.