Exactly, so why are we talking about communism again?
You claimed "SJWs" (Conflict Theory -> Culture) and "Communists" (Conflict Theory -> Economics) are at odds with each other, insinuating that as such, they're not both derivatives of Marxist thought.
The manifesto gives answer to several questions some of which are extremely detailed. The demands of the communist party of Germany are listed near the end and as I said most nations already have them, which they would considering that times have changed. If they are not intrinsically communist (not sure what this means) then the term "communist" is irrelevant.
People want the same basic things. Different ideological systems promise the same basic things as ends, but realized through different means.
To go off on a tangent and offer an illustration, Capitalists and Communists both wish to applaud when their respective heads of state make an appearance, and then to stop applauding at some point. The length of the applause varies dramatically, from a matter of seconds to several hours, and the consequences for the first person to stop applauding are also quite different. Just because the applauding inevitably comes to an end doesn't mean the systems are the same, or that the differences are irrelevant.
I believe we need to differentiate a few things. First, Peterson usually speaks of identity politics, which generally has its basis in liberal idealism, and fuses it with talk about Marxism(usually referencing Marxist lennism or Maoism) in his presentations. You seem to believe that sjws operate from the same basis as certain communists, which is conflict theory, am I correct? Are you talking about peterson's description of these people or your experience with these people? ---