> I know exactly what I am talking about when it comes to communism and Fascism as they have always been, when implemented, a direct path to central planning.

Right so you're specifically talking about your flavor of communism you went through. Which is exactly missing the point of what I said. Please tell me what part of this is centrally planned, or has a strong state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-communism

> The Nazis where first and foremost national socialist and then softly migrated to Fascist.

Yes, they were nationalist. AKA fascist. But we already knew that didn't we.

> with Anarchist being the end of the spectrum to the right.

You're actually trying to use the political spectrum to discuss politics? You understand there are nuances involved, right? I'm tired of people falling for the political compass meme thinking they've understood politics in a 2 or 3 dimensional grid.

> The left is defined by reliance in government

Okay what? Where was this definition?

> and the desire for centrally planned governments,

You're literally making stuff up now.

> We can certainly state that I lived thru communism, the fact that they all became dictatorship speaks more to the flaw of the system than it does that it did not get a fair shake.

You lived through ONE flavor of communism that was authoritarian. Not every flavor of communism is authoritarian or centrally planned.

> I am well studied in geopolitical affairs

Yet you use a political compass to describe politics.

> worked in the field and have extensive experience with the horrors of communism

Yes the horrors of communism. Specifically your flavor of communism.

> The fact that you did not know that the Nazis where socialist and slid towards a Fascist economy means you frankly don't know what you are talking about or further that libertarians are extremely right and cannot be left as per their desires to limit government, as per historic and classically defined political pendulum analysis.

Uh huh. What part of the nazi economy was worker owned and operated? Do you just pick up on the name of something and say "ah yes they called themselves socialist therefore who am I to question them?"

> peripheral experience with communism are wary of government overreach and would not look for a reason to argue or advocate for it.

Except you're wrong here and plenty of people who have lived through USSR are still advocates of communism, just not stalinism :)

> central planning always leads to totalitarianism.

You're the only one bringing this one up mate.

> not the CIA not KSK not MI6,

Yeah they didn't do anything to destabilize countries, no sir. Wonder if the situation was as bad as you're talking about, why did they get involved?

> death camps, gulags or oppress dissidents for the communist

No but we have the modern prison industry complex to do that for us. Same shit, different name. https://twitter.com/chloedontsurf/status/1277422601061744640

> As further reading I would point you to the chronology of US and USSR spying. As you will note, the USSR had an established agency, propaganda network and sources before the US, and where actively meddling in US affairs, many agencies where formed in light of this new reality, the USSR had a active policy of world wide spread of communism, because Lenin believed in Marx as a profit and Marx was emphatic on the fact that for communism to succeed it would have to be a world wide revolution, Lenin is the text book example he implemented Marxist vision to a T, and honestly out of all of them he was probably the best example but it was the communist according to their core doctrine, that said the capitalist has to go. They painted a mark on people not the other way around. When the capitalist went and it still did not work, someone else had to go, in the case of the UUSR, it was the intellectuals then portions of the Bolsheviks, then the artists. the US response was to contain that spread after the fact, somewhere along the way, that commission changed and the CIA decided it was going to get into nation building, but that does not excuse communism for it's spectacular failings:

This is the wildest justification of the redscare that I've read. You're acting like Marx somehow invented communism or that his version is the only version out there.

I'm sorry you lived through an authoritarian state, it sucks, I know because I lived through one as well. But if you take your head out of the dirt and actually go understand that not all of the left want a strong central government, maybe then we can have a better conversation.