Murderous Communism

From Kengor's Devil and Karl Marx:

Mallory Millett also recalled in this 2018 interview with FrontPage Magazine the “consciousness-raising sessions” in New York City. She underscored that these girls wanted to normalize a host of evils and taboos that even included Satanism and witchcraft:

In 1969 I attended consciousness-raising sessions in New York City with my sister, Kate, where a group of 10-15 women sat around a long oval table and plotted the New Feminist Movement and the founding of NOW. Their template was Mao’s China and the group confessionals conducted in each village in order to “cleanse the people’s thinking.” The burning objective of Kate’s “consciousness-raising” was “the destruction of the American family,” as she deemed it “a patriarchal institution devoted to the oppression and enslavement of women and children.”
They went on to form NOW and, with that organization, achieve their stated goal of taking down the Patriarchy through a massive coordinated promotion of promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution, abortion and homosexuality. Their proposed method was to infiltrate every institution in the nation: the universities, the media, primary and secondary schools, PTAs, Teachers Unions, city and state governments, the library system, the executive branches of government as well as the judiciaries and legislatures.
One of their most desired results was the smashing of every taboo in Western culture. Imagine that! Think of that alone! The normalizing of every taboo: polygamy, bestiality, Satanism, pornography, promiscuity, witchcraft, pedophilia—all activities which rot the human soul and city.
I think Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot were as evil as Hilter. Please point out how I doubted the basic claim, that communism was murderous so it warrents a "your typical reaction" aside. What they said at other sites is irrelevent.

I am just saying that you have no evidence (numbers) to back your claim that "paid little attention to, compared to the well-worn Nazi coverage." Nor does your (to you) logical claim that "publication does not mean influence on the average intellectual" (it is hard to impact the average intellectual if the idea is not discussed or published, which mine, the claim that there is little difference between the coverage of nazi versus communist genocide, is).

These are both empirical (data-driven, measureable) claims... how you you validate them?

If you look at the literature (Scholar or Nexus-Lexus) the number of articles is pretty consistent across Germany, China, Russia, Armenia, Cambodia, Rwanda, and Bosnia (the last two are more recent, so a little less).

The numbers are all within 20-30% of each other across the board.

That this is more than a "little attention" is like saying that the sales difference between GM and Ford (GM ahead by 22% or so world-wide) means Ford will go under.
You have a point. Offend somebody in popular discourse and they scream, "Nazi!" Back at dear old University of Texas-Austin, I suggested someone's point of view was Stalinist. The reply? "At least he was anti-Nazi!" Examples could be multiplied.