The results are the same.
If you mean that in instances where communist revolutions have taken place a la Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, et al have resulted in oppressive, authoritarian regimes then I have zero argument.
But then I also don't believe that there has ever been a genuinely communist nation, the language of "the revolution" is used to gain populist support, and then there is a violent coup, and then instead of implementing marxist economic models the whole thing results in authoritarian corporatism. Which, generally speaking, is one of the defining features of fascism. So, again, if the argument is that nations which have called themselves communist have produced fascist results you're not going to get an argument from me.
But I think it's pretty important that we understand the very clear differences between these very different models of economy and government.
I have no intention of trying to defend Marxist philosophy, as I'm not a Marxist and I have major disagreements with Marxist philosophy; I take issue both with its delusional utopianism as fundamentally unrealistic, as well as take issue with the idea that the only true and meaningful way to enact massive economic and social change is through a violent revolution.
With that said, I believe that socialism offers a great deal to the table as an effective counter-balance to the clear and present dangers of the evils of capitalism.
And antifa is anything but anti fascist.
Right, because being opposed to fascism is anything but being opposed to fascism.
It's sort of like the fact that I hate celery doesn't mean that I hate celery. Words don't have meaning, and potato albatross cold running lasagna.
-CryptoLutheran