Nothing socdems did to help fascists after the war (or before it) matters half as much as actually aligning with the USSR and actually fighting Nazi Germany. If you had read Stalin's statement on the eve of WWII (it was originally made in 1924) you would have thought he'd expect the social democratic countries to align with the fascists against the communists. They did the exact opposite.
This doesn't mean that social democrats are BFFs with communists, but it does substantially weaken the argument that "when the chips are down, social democrats tend to side with fascists," and it disproves the type of absolutist claim Stalin made in his original comment. We can't claim to have politics informed by history and then ignore the most obvious, most relevant bit of history just because accounting for it would make something Stalin said look like a bad take.
WW2 wouldn’t have even happened if SocDems hadn’t armed fascists to kill communists beforehand, so your notion that WW2 somehow disproves this is ridiculous.
Any statement beginning with "WWII wouldn't have happened if" is highly speculative at best. The Treaty of Versailles was a ticking time bomb right from the start, and that wasn't a controversial opinion even at the time.
But in any event, Stalin's claim is about who socdems will side with "when the chips are down," not who they'll opportunistically sell to in peacetime. And they sold to everyone, including the Soviet Union. You can say that socdems aren't reliably anti-fascist, but claiming that they're literally another wing of fascism is silly when a bunch of them went to war against fascists.
By “went to war against fascists” do you actually mean “fought back against a foreign country once it literally attacked them first”? That bar is so low it’s underground.
I didn’t say they sold weapons to anybody. I said they literally armed fascists to kill communists rather than allow communists to take power in Germany. Yes, WW2 would not have happened if they hadn’t done that. Your thesis is trash tbh.
They murdered Rosa, they murdered the Ruhr Red Army, they murdered Levine and the Bavarian Council Republic by aligning with the military, they wiped out the Bremen Soviet Republic, they carried out Blutmai, put down the March Action, among a shitload of other things.
I do really loath the "such and such war wouldn't have happened" thing, I especially try not to do it with WWI AND WWII, but if anything applies it is the literal creation of the Friekorps
Except it does matter about as much. They helped facilitate the Nazis getting power in the first place. They then continued the Nazis projects. The history shows that socdems align with and enable fascism. That Nazi Germany arising in the first place required the socdems to murder communists and create fascist militias. That is material to, and cannot be divorced from their later opposition to Hitler. You are acting like fighting against the Nazis exists in a vacuum, while aiding fascism does not and in fact is made null due to they helping mop up their mess.
They also do tend to side with fascists since before and after the big example, they have done so. We cannot make ww2 the singular case of fascism that matters. Socdem enabling of fascism in Latin America and elsewhere, or post-war Europe matters and is a stain on them that fighting the nazis for a time cannot clean away. You want to take some history and say that refutes the import or significance of other history before and after. The point is socdems can exist with fascism, they helped it become a thing in the first place. Fighting Hitler and then immediately protecting fascists' post-war does not somehow refute the point. It speaks to the ability of social democracy to facilitate fascism. It _can oppose fascism, but fascism also seems to rely on its help
Nothing socdems did to help fascists after the war (or before it) matters half as much as actually aligning with the USSR and actually fighting Nazi Germany. If you had read Stalin's statement on the eve of WWII (it was originally made in 1924) you would have thought he'd expect the social democratic countries to align with the fascists against the communists. They did the exact opposite.
This doesn't mean that social democrats are BFFs with communists, but it does substantially weaken the argument that "when the chips are down, social democrats tend to side with fascists," and it disproves the type of absolutist claim Stalin made in his original comment. We can't claim to have politics informed by history and then ignore the most obvious, most relevant bit of history just because accounting for it would make something Stalin said look like a bad take.
WW2 wouldn’t have even happened if SocDems hadn’t armed fascists to kill communists beforehand, so your notion that WW2 somehow disproves this is ridiculous.
Any statement beginning with "WWII wouldn't have happened if" is highly speculative at best. The Treaty of Versailles was a ticking time bomb right from the start, and that wasn't a controversial opinion even at the time.
But in any event, Stalin's claim is about who socdems will side with "when the chips are down," not who they'll opportunistically sell to in peacetime. And they sold to everyone, including the Soviet Union. You can say that socdems aren't reliably anti-fascist, but claiming that they're literally another wing of fascism is silly when a bunch of them went to war against fascists.
By “went to war against fascists” do you actually mean “fought back against a foreign country once it literally attacked them first”? That bar is so low it’s underground.
I didn’t say they sold weapons to anybody. I said they literally armed fascists to kill communists rather than allow communists to take power in Germany. Yes, WW2 would not have happened if they hadn’t done that. Your thesis is trash tbh.
They murdered Rosa, they murdered the Ruhr Red Army, they murdered Levine and the Bavarian Council Republic by aligning with the military, they wiped out the Bremen Soviet Republic, they carried out Blutmai, put down the March Action, among a shitload of other things.
I do really loath the "such and such war wouldn't have happened" thing, I especially try not to do it with WWI AND WWII, but if anything applies it is the literal creation of the Friekorps
Except it does matter about as much. They helped facilitate the Nazis getting power in the first place. They then continued the Nazis projects. The history shows that socdems align with and enable fascism. That Nazi Germany arising in the first place required the socdems to murder communists and create fascist militias. That is material to, and cannot be divorced from their later opposition to Hitler. You are acting like fighting against the Nazis exists in a vacuum, while aiding fascism does not and in fact is made null due to they helping mop up their mess.
They also do tend to side with fascists since before and after the big example, they have done so. We cannot make ww2 the singular case of fascism that matters. Socdem enabling of fascism in Latin America and elsewhere, or post-war Europe matters and is a stain on them that fighting the nazis for a time cannot clean away. You want to take some history and say that refutes the import or significance of other history before and after. The point is socdems can exist with fascism, they helped it become a thing in the first place. Fighting Hitler and then immediately protecting fascists' post-war does not somehow refute the point. It speaks to the ability of social democracy to facilitate fascism. It _can oppose fascism, but fascism also seems to rely on its help