Because I said there's no united front with social democrats because they aren't leftists.

I do not even.

  • CannotSleep420
    ·
    1 year ago

    I need to learn more, but wasn't Stalin a proponent for the united front against fash? The USSR did work with the burgers and the bongs during WWII after all.

    • President_Obama [they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes, at first the Komintern took the stance that they were 'social-fascists' — finding them in support of capitalism, they deemed socdems unfit for fighting fascism, and only an ML party could lead the proletariat against it. This was their position in 1924. In 1928 they went so far as to call socialdemocracy a supporter and fellow traveller of fascism.

      In 1935 they changed their position and called for a united front with socialdemocrats against fascism. If you want to satisfy a historical curiosity for their reasoning you can read Dimitrov's The fascist offensive [...]

      • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        To me, this is a big part of why leaning too hard on the "social democracy is fascism" line is a bad idea.

        1. It was a highly specific comment to begin with
        2. It was abandoned in favor of anti-fascist cooperation within a decade
        3. Today, it makes you sound like a crank unless your audience knows a decent amount of early Soviet history and agrees with you already
        4. Even among people who kind of know what you're getting at, it's more divisive than useful

        If you want to criticize a group for bad stances on imperialism, or a government for a bad imperialist record, just do that.

      • CannotSleep420
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks. Is the ellipses because the book has a long title?

    • Bjork_shhh [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      but FDR actually did radical stuff like packing the supreme court with vaguely proletarian judges