Why Communism isn't as hated as Nazism?

Some will argue that what was practice did those regimes wasn't communism in the way Marx described it. However, it does lead to my general criticism of Communism in that the transition phase is where the revolution tends to get co-opted for more personal or selfish gain by the ruling party. Also they never see the irony of using authoritarian methods to somehow move past authoritarianism. It's why I think the horseshoe theory is so fun at times, Communists and Nazis hate each other but their methods are quite similar and tend to get very authoritarian. And yes, anyone who tries to defend the Soviet Union for the Ukrainian famine and all the other crimes Stalin et al. committed really needs to take a hard look at themselves. I've never met anyone who tired to defend the Khmer Rouge though, although it's the internet so I'm sure they exist. I think the allure of communism comes from some of the good things they do advocate: worker's rights, protection from corporations doing whatever they want to do, everyone having access to basic rights i.e healthcare, food, shelter, etc. So people are more willing to give it multiple chances to work, that's just my belief though and I'm open to discussion on the matter.

Where did you get Corporatism from my post, the talking of criticizing corporations? Even in Portugal they didn't have labor unions and no minimum wage, which could be ripe for abuse of the workers which goes back to the communist critique. Also which form of corporatism are we talking? Because depending on who you talk to Corporatism can be collectivist in nature http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/corporatism.htm I wouldn't say it's accurate to say anything worked for Portugal during Salazar's reign for decades. It wasn't until the 60's til they saw any consistent economic growth and those good times, the 3 decades before were bad times for them and they were way underdeveloped compared to the rest of Europe. For Spain, the Spanish Miracle lasted for 15 years before saying hello to the stagflation crisis of the 70's, so again, to say it worked for decades is a bit inaccurate.

It's because Communism never had the stigma of being crushed in a global military conflict liked Nazism/Fascism did. Uncle Joe was our ally so how can we justify allying with someone who was as bad if not worse than Hitler? Victor's propaganda. The Soviets were also the ones to deliver the deathblow to the Nazis which bolstered its prestige and communist regimes funded/supported left-wing liberation movements in the third world against puppet governments which gives it the appearance of it being more "benevolent", something the Nazis and Fascists never did because they did not survive WWII. Furthermore, while many Communist regimes like Pol Pot's Cambodia were explicitly racist, and were far more heinous than the Nazis (per capita, granted) Communism as an internationalist ideology of course does not have racism as a tenant of its ideology like Nazism did. Do not take what I said as a defense of communism (I'm anti-Communist too) but those are a couple reason why its reputation is not quite as bad as Nazism and Fascism's is, although it is a close second.

I know that. The Battle of the Bulge is considered the point in which Allied victory in the the war was assured. If the Nazis were able to push back against the US and other allies, they could have allocated more resources to stopping the Red Army. Nevertheless Russians like to boast that "America tries to take credit for defeating the Nazis, when Russia was the ones who did it and sacrificed more lives than any other country to do it". That is why many Russians admired Stalin, even the non-Communist ones. However, the neglect that if Stalin wasn't too busy killing off the Red Army leadership and disastrously invading Finland, and if the NKVD weren't killing Russian soldiers for retreating, the USSR could have more easily fended off the Nazis with more Russians alive. Also when it comes to romanticizing Communism, most of them only romanticize Cuba and Vietnam because they weren't as bad as Stalin or Mao and they directly dealt with the US or someone the US was supporting.

Franco had to protect Spain huh? I'm sure that justifies all the human rights atrocities committed during the early portion of his reign. Ironic that his white terror caused more deaths than the leftist red terror by the other side of Spain. Also Spain's economy was in absoute shambles after the Civil War and did little to recover during Franco's "protective years". It wasn't until he began easing up a lot that Spain saw their miracle. Also the corporatism practiced by portugal and Spain still had government power to threaten coporations if they began going against what was good for the political union of the state. It wasn't unchecked corporations doing whatever they want which communists worry about if that's what you were implying. It's definitely closer to collectivism than the free market. Even the German revival during Hitler's reign was a form of corporatism with massive state funded projects and corporate groups working for the interest of the state.