zlacker

Stalin and Mao were autocrats. Autocracy and leftism/communism are not the same thing -- there have been just as many right-wing/fascist autocrats (if not more given the US' propensity to prop them up past their expiration dates) who have genocided their own people. I would argue that it's the consolidation of power that leads to bad outcomes regardless of political ideology.

What I would call "ultra-left" are militant anarcho-communists who believe in abolishing strong systems of centralized control in favor of community rule. So no nations, only self-governed communities of some arbitrarily small size. This jives with "ultra-left" in areas with leftist militia uprisings. Not saying it's practical, but there are well-established schools of leftist thought at play that predate Stalin and Mao.

Liberalism is a center-right ideology that tries to marry right-wing capital control economies with left-wing social values. Many on the left regard liberalism (and neo-liberalism) as a failed project, because with any clash between economics and social values, the economics tend to win out. I'm not saying communism is the answer, but a move away from a scarcity-based economy would be a good start.