It depends on the lens you're using to look at the situation:
Would you argue that the Dems are not Progressive Liberals?
They are leftist depending on the definition. Classic left-wing was simply anti-monarch, pro-republic. In that regard the Dems are left wing. Are they Communists/Socialist though? lmao, absolutely not. They are WAY too focussed on social issues, in general.
There is "personal property" - your clothes, toothbrush, phone, bike, house, car, etc.
"Private property" means any asset that produces something that can be used to extract profit. Think of factories, warehouses, rentals, mines, ships, servers, patents, etc.
"Common property" are things like community gardens, a public fishery (like a lake).
"Public/Social property" are usually state-owned, like public roads, the railway, the power grid (usually), etc.
"State property" also state-owned, but not publicly accessible, like the office buildings where government officials work.
“If you own a chair and sit on it, that is personal property. If you own a factory and other people work in it while you collect the profit, that is private property.”
My problem with these definitions is that my personal computer is also my private computer. I can use it to make money, but it's also deeply personal. Then again, Marx could not have anticipated this issue.
I think we need a secular form of spirituality (be it heathenism, druidism, paganism, etc), so people can still be spiritually fulfilled, while not following some large-ass church that gets corrupted over time, every damn time.
It helps that most people in "the west" are becoming more and more secular (as far as I can tell).
I quit smoking because I actually want to live beyond 55 - I still remember my neighbour-woman smoking a ciggy, while standing outside with her chemo-drip... Absolutely haunting.
Oh, also, the left-right-wing binary (or even spectrum) is poisoning the well. Everyone in the UK is right-wing because they have a literal king. Everyone in the USA is left-wing because they don't have a king. Simple as is.
Now, lets talk about how authoritarian a party is, how good they are at improving society's health, etc. Calling a party left or right-wing MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
You just listed several things related to Authoritarianism, and called them communist
Spoiler: they are the same thing. OK, fine. Not everything Authoritarian is Communist, but everything Communist will end up Authoritarian. Ask East-Europe.
Not everything Social is bad, mind you, but holy shit can it go sideways.
What else would you want him to do?
And what consequences are you specifically talking about?