"Will to power" is a Nietzschean concept which has the context of both a master/slave morality (which is in praise of the aristocratic class), and of the idea of an Übermensch, which is a sort of superhuman which transcends other humans in a Darwinian type of way.
If you think about what liberalism is, its foundations are in things like the Magna Carta, the French Revolution, The Enlightenment. All of these things were contra the autocratic power system in the form of monarchism, feudalism, theocracy. Primarily the objective was personal freedom—liberty being derivative of Libertas.
Well if we are talking about a Will to Power, communism is basically an antithesis of that. It seeks to flatten the meaningful phenotypic and genotypic distinctions between us in society, as a matter of morality.
When it comes to what is more liberal (not that I think it's particularly important), that's an interesting point that people can be autistic about. And I assume the angle that you're coming at it from is that in many ways true Leftists are not lovers of freedom; they are just as autocratic as the monarchs. I'm actually surprised to the extent people like Hasan Piker are able to say on Twitch that they believe in re-education camps...the fascists don't get it so easy. :)
But now how about the very idea that all people are inherently dignified and that they all deserve equal rights and representations? See, that was the tip of the spear of liberalism. A fascist believes inherently in hierarchical systems. And that does not preclude poor treatment of the proles. But how do you square that?
Communism has nothing to do with morality or freedom which are idealist and reactionary. An inherent part of fascism is still the idea of freedom, just focused more on the "freedoms" of a racial bourgeoisie. You'd be right to point out that only liberals promote the "freedom" to be fascist or bourgeoisie.
