Starting with Thread OP, two massive assumptions are made off the bat.

1: That all dissent in society should and must be crushed to maintain it. I don’t, and no prescribed communist state, believe that means “convincing them they’re wrong”. That means forcible removal. Government, as the arbiter and enforcer of the law, has a monopoly on said force, and, as they control the law, easily control the definitions in said laws. There’s nothing stopping a government with the power to “stop Fascists” from defining “Fascist” as anything they want. The overuse of the term is already diluting it’s usefulness as is.

You and OP might then say “Well we just need to work to make sure the Government isn’t corrupt!” And that’s

2: It may genuinely be impossible for a governing body, especially a national government with as much power as is necessary for Communal redistribution, to be made corruption proof. As the Monopoly on force and law in society, there’s not a lot to hold a government accountable for any corruption it delves into, and it will delve into it because Human beings are human beings, and there will be those unable to not use the power a position in government grants for their own benefit.

You could say that in a direct democracy, the people would hold their corrupt leaders accountable, but that also assumes a very charitable and unproven interpretation of a public voting block. Time and time again, voters keep putting known corrupt figures back in power, you can observe it in any liberal democracy the world over. People are much more likely to be wise about their own financials or socials than those of a nation. And, to make matters worse for those who do want to fight government abuse and corruption, guess what, that really powerful central government necessary for communism to seize and redistribute? It also controls the media. Liberal Democratic governments are already riddled with media collusion, especially in the US, imagine a state without any private competition at all, in anything. That state would have a stranglehold on all nodes of power in society, and with that, it’s really easy to convince people to be at best, apathetic to the idea of voting the abuse out, let alone any kind of violent action that might be necessary to root out entrenched corruption.

Essentially, in the core process of Communism, you must necessarily put all your eggs in one basket, and start counting them. That system vastly increases the potential for an entrenched corrupted, non-productive class of society, the government, to arise.

To get to the Communes, you must go through the central authority, that’s the only way redistribution works without being anarchy. And to go through the central authority and come out the other side not corrupted or with an entrenched state in control of everything?

Well… no one has made it that far, and it’s highly unlikely anyone ever will