Social democrats are capitalists, which means they’ll utilize imperialism and ally with fascists to suppress the working class abroad while defusing it at home.
This is why we call them social fascists. There is no distinction. The only reason communists stopped openly calling them that was because the Comintern saw the Second World War coming and desperately needed allies. At the end of this road is communism or barbarism, and the social democrats cannot decide which one they hate more.
The Comintern only called them fascists during a specific era which was right around when fascism started emerging as a phenomenon. It's extremely silly to claim there is no distinction and proven wrong in practice, especially when online American leftists don't even seem to understand how the different stuff they call "fascism" is different. People should start actually analyzing stuff instead of using old aphorisms and pretending it's actually insightful. Yeah, you CAN act like everything ever is literally the same, except then your analysis will be nonsense.
Then don't call them social fascists, call them what they are-capitalists. Capitalism is enemy of the proletariat and we should be clear about that rather than giving socdems a chance to go "well see we're personally anti-fascist in this or that way". If the end of this road is communism or barbarism, why attack them with "fascism", allowing some capitalists that would lead us to barbarity to pretend there's a middle ground? Unless you mean to extend fascism to everything, in which case you should just use capitalist because that's what those that oppose communism already are.
This is why we call them social fascists. There is no distinction. The only reason communists stopped openly calling them that was because the Comintern saw the Second World War coming and desperately needed allies. At the end of this road is communism or barbarism, and the social democrats cannot decide which one they hate more.
The Comintern only called them fascists during a specific era which was right around when fascism started emerging as a phenomenon. It's extremely silly to claim there is no distinction and proven wrong in practice, especially when online American leftists don't even seem to understand how the different stuff they call "fascism" is different. People should start actually analyzing stuff instead of using old aphorisms and pretending it's actually insightful. Yeah, you CAN act like everything ever is literally the same, except then your analysis will be nonsense.
Then don't call them social fascists, call them what they are-capitalists. Capitalism is enemy of the proletariat and we should be clear about that rather than giving socdems a chance to go "well see we're personally anti-fascist in this or that way". If the end of this road is communism or barbarism, why attack them with "fascism", allowing some capitalists that would lead us to barbarity to pretend there's a middle ground? Unless you mean to extend fascism to everything, in which case you should just use capitalist because that's what those that oppose communism already are.