I am confused by the question.
The Left is defined by an understanding that
- the interests of capital and workers are opposed
- this an irreconcilable difference
- The working class can and should organize itself to eliminate the capital class, instituting ~~democrat~~ democratic control
The whos, hows, whens, wheres and whatsafters are the details that divide the Left.
The left has been substantially defined by Marxist and other communist ideas. The only other other broad tradition are anarchists. And most left anarchists are influenced by communism if not communist also themselves.
"the robots should take over"
Which one do you mean?
- robots should take over repetitive, boring, dangerous labor that nobody wants to do so everyone's time can be freed up for work and other activities we prefer to do = luxury space communism
- robots should take over control or decision making power = right wing technocrat
I think this is on the right track. I'd like to make a clarification that will probably be agreed with. (Caveat: Haven't read Proudhon; am describing the colloquial use.) Which is that "thing" here doesn't apply to personal items or work tools of everyday life.
When I was a kid I recall being told that under communism you didn't own your own socks. That is not it.
"Property" certainly refers to land, infrastructure, large equipment, intellectual property, factories, buildings, large vehicles like cargo ships. You could also include housing, personal vehicles, livestock and other substantial but personal Capital as anywhere between public and personal.
On the other hand, while "property is theft" does not disallow personal items, that only goes so far as what one can reasonably use. Hoarding up valuable items is not appreciated. And it would certainly not be allowed to claim
False. Invite you to further investigate both the historical basis of that idea and any contemporary example you can find.
Capital which is publicly owned can be and often is well managed. There are all sorts of structures to get this done. Depending on the context, the people involved can have their pick. If you heard a public good you appreciate
a school, road, software, utility like power or water, library, museum, park, transit system, hospital
was getting "privatized", how do you expect the experience to be? Generally it fucking sucks. Whereas when the opposite happens it's generally awesome.