The victory situation for free software is that it becomes socially unacceptable, and rare, for individuals and for organizations to claim IP rights over software, to restrict its dissemination, to hide its source code, etc. When it is clear that software is shared commons, and nothing else.
Software is too important for people not to _share_. And too important for people to have to waste endless resources in re-developing in multiple closed contexts.
As for "communism" - if by whiskey, I mean if by Communism you mean soviet-union-style social arrangements, then I'm pretty sure they had closed-source software which the government controlled and people could not use and alter freely; but if you mean "communism" as in software being a "commons", then, yeah, free software will win when that is again the case.
Why would that ever happen? Software is too important for people to not sell outside of communism and free software people aren’t as good as making consumer products as capitalists