This comment is just both a personal attack and straw man and doesn't address anything in the original comment or the topic at hand.

I disagree. My comment is about the phrase:

>"In a larger sense, academia and a big chunk of contemporary western "culture" is all about coming up with stories, narratives, explanations, mindsets (frameworks) to ignore the exploitation of humans as a resource for the sake of ill-defined (by design) notions of "the group" or "us all" when in fact the end result is a big hierarchical pyramid with little room at the top which requires lots and lots of desperate people at the bottom"

This notion that capitalism and gainful employment is all some fundamental exploitation of people is really common on Reddit. I encounter it all the time. This idea, and those which cluster around it, really could be quoted in just a slightly rephrased version out of the works of Marx and Engels. I noticed this sentiment started really picking up around 2016, and I consider it a public duty to temper it with the reality check that it is absolutely communist in nature.

So... since I'm discussing a general trend on Reddit, I'm not sure how you considered it a personal attack. Other than perhaps the preconceived notion that "communism=bad" and therefore labeling it as such is an "attack"?

I also fail to understand how this is a straw man? The comment above me and above that one were both already discussing this. Noting that the sentiment is deeply connected to communist ideology is I think quite relevant. Is it that you consider communism to be an easily defeatable and unrelated idea to the one I was discussing? Since I think they are in fact VERY related, I don't think the straw man applies. And since communism has captured the minds of many, many people over last century, I don't see how it's easily defeated either.

This comment confuses Leninism/Bolshevism with communism. The writer would do well to understand the nuances of authoritarianism across all flavors of communism before making generalizations from specifics.

I'm actually familiar with a great many of the communist sub-ideologies. I mentioned the Leninist Vanguard for two reasons: One, because it is actually a VERY common theme, albeit in slightly different and sometimes hidden forms in basically ALL versions and flavors of communism. And two, because I consider it to be one of the most accessible and honestly-defined flavors of this theme.

If instead you're suggesting that Leninism/Bolshevism is somehow completely apart from communism, I think that's incredibly disingenuous.

> I'm actually familiar with a great many of the communist sub-ideologies.

You're really really not.

> One, because it is actually a VERY common theme, albeit in slightly different and sometimes hidden forms in basically ALL versions and flavors of communism

This isn't even remotely true. Not in social democracy, not in democratic socialism, market socialism, Titoism, mutualism and especially not in anarcho-communism, the most popular form of anarchsim globally. Half of these aren't even Marxist let alone "Bolshevik" or "Leninism."

> If instead you're suggesting that Leninism/Bolshevism is somehow completely apart from communism, I think that's incredibly disingenuous.

I think you're just really ignorant about this topic.

Thank you. This is a great opportunity to learn how that theme applies to basically all versions of Orthodox Marxist Communism, Libertarian Marxism, Austro-Marxism, Left communism, Ultra-leftism, Autonomism, Western Marxism, Eurocommunism, Luxemburgism, Council communism, De Leonism, Situationism, Impossibilism, Marxist feminism, Marxist humanism, Primitive communism, Anarcho-communism, and Communist Bundism, It would seem you have your work cut out for you.

Was there a flavor of communism that didn't go way south? Perhaps a true scotsman?

IMO, no. And the reason for that is exactly the one best summarized with that Leninist position.

Any practical attempt to enact or enforce communism necessarily falls back on that central precept coupled with authoritarianism.

Sure, there are plenty of naive, academic flavors of communism. (I even almost mentioned some of them because I had a feeling that's where some of the replies to my comments were going.) ...But I can essentially guarantee that they all suffer from that same fundamental flaw if you were to actually try to implement them.

Are you genuinely asking? There are dozens of flavors of communism and you are free to pursue their histories and determine their conclusions.