Okay so based on this, the part of my initial statement that was inaccurate would be "communism already exists" in that there are communists, and people building communism, but "communism" doesn't exist because the conditions don't exist for it yet. That is, as long as we are drawing lines between "communism" and something like communalism, which might refer to certain communal living experiments taking place in different parts of the world. Like Marx didn't consider the Obshchina to be communist, but theorized that it could contain some pre-socialist potential (which bore out, at least partially, in the formation of the soviets.)

I wanted to consider communism as the practical work of communists. But I can see how that, at the very least, confuses the issue. And like the other responder pointed out, Marx was at least blended in his definition of communism, since he did spend time and energy describing "communist society." So in order to be correct, I would have to prove a worthwhile theoretical break between "communism" and "communist society" which, at the very least, confuses people's understanding more than it like addresses a practical shortcoming in our movements, and also seems to piss off other comrades.

If that tracks, I think I get where you're coming from.