No, they may have had some reforms for working conditions and social welfare in their platforms but that all came packaged with "we need to use incredible violence to destroy the Bolsheviks ravaging our country." And fascism always changes and morphs to suit its needs and aquire more power. It's disingenuous and a little dangerous to describe it as left wing. But you're right in that fascism seems to be an easier leap for libs to make, I'd wager mostly because of their nationalist rhetoric
Oh, I absolutey dont want to describe it as left wing. More like an amorphous blob, that uses whatever it can to get power, but ultimately ends up very far right as it gains power. Like a cynical realpolitik type of thing. My point is that early on, when it doesnt have power it will try to attract people with traditionally left-wing consolations - i.e. working conditions and social welfate, whereas the incredible violence kind of comes when they start gaining power. And that it kind of seems easier for people (as in the masses, devoid of ideology) to go down that alley, instead of the more peaceful socialism path. Think of "social welfare and rights, but for me and people like me, and concentration camps for immigrants" type of thing instead of - does it make sense?
And this is also a problem I struggle with - how do you build a movement and make a revolution that doesnt get coopted by a bunch of reactionaries, or wanna be fascists. Also how do you overcome these tendencies within the masses. I kind of lowkey suspect this fear is what drives so much of leftist in-fighting...
No, they may have had some reforms for working conditions and social welfare in their platforms but that all came packaged with "we need to use incredible violence to destroy the Bolsheviks ravaging our country." And fascism always changes and morphs to suit its needs and aquire more power. It's disingenuous and a little dangerous to describe it as left wing. But you're right in that fascism seems to be an easier leap for libs to make, I'd wager mostly because of their nationalist rhetoric
Oh, I absolutey dont want to describe it as left wing. More like an amorphous blob, that uses whatever it can to get power, but ultimately ends up very far right as it gains power. Like a cynical realpolitik type of thing. My point is that early on, when it doesnt have power it will try to attract people with traditionally left-wing consolations - i.e. working conditions and social welfate, whereas the incredible violence kind of comes when they start gaining power. And that it kind of seems easier for people (as in the masses, devoid of ideology) to go down that alley, instead of the more peaceful socialism path. Think of "social welfare and rights, but for me and people like me, and concentration camps for immigrants" type of thing instead of - does it make sense?
Yeah honestly I think you nailed it lol. Those sort of early reforms is how fascism distinguishes itself from the status quo.
And this is also a problem I struggle with - how do you build a movement and make a revolution that doesnt get coopted by a bunch of reactionaries, or wanna be fascists. Also how do you overcome these tendencies within the masses. I kind of lowkey suspect this fear is what drives so much of leftist in-fighting...