...also at the point of a gun.
You're being disingenuous in evoking the monopoly of force but only applying it to "the left", in order to imply that, "socialist" governance is more coercive (and thus less legitimate) than any other.
If you live in a state that collects taxes or regulates the market, or any system other than anarchy, then you live under a regime that distributes wealth at the point of a gun.
And with anarchy, you're just trading the monopoly on violence for a free market of violence.
Market Populism seeks wealth redistribution for organizations by using force against organizations exclusively to break up local maxima (monopolies, duopolies, etc.).
Both use force, but one operates on the individual level, the other at the organizational level.
For a very good reason.
> insulting peoples will seems improper
It does seem improper, but drawing the connection between calling out people drawn to populism and insulting them is one of the least discrete attempts at muddying the waters I've seen recently.