Since when is Jimmy Carter a socdem, wtf? Jimmy Carter was a run of the mill liberal who was I guess a little bit more progressive than most of the other ones. It is ridiculous to call the US social democratic at any point in its history except maybe for a brief time during the New Deal, and even that doesn't really count. Also look at the date of that Stalin quote, and look at the history of fascist movement. The circumstances under which that quote was produced have nothing to do with the subsequent history of fascism. And I don't understand why every wrong thing Stalin said must be taken as gospel.
Social democracy as it manifests in countries of the imperial core doesn't challenge imperialism. In periphery countries it is different. Fascism itself is not the same thing always, there is fascism as a movement before it takes power and fascism as a form of governance, which is still not the same as a "typical" imperialist liberal government (though I don't want to say that fascism is not fundamentally related to imperialism). This Stalin quote comes before the side of fascism in power was even really widely seen. The silliness of "social fascism" has been demonstrated every time communists have realized that they have to work with social democrats etc to fight the rise of fascism. The entire concept was developed in the framework of the Comintern's theory that the world was entering a new era of instability at which the social democrats (which, again, referred to particular parties in Europe, not every liberal) would be the main enemy of the communists as the entire world would try to rise up. This turned out to be extremely wrong and rejected in 1935. So I don't understand why people have to drag up mistaken concepts from 100 years ago as if we've learned nothing more about these things.
Since when is Jimmy Carter a socdem, wtf? Jimmy Carter was a run of the mill liberal who was I guess a little bit more progressive than most of the other ones. It is ridiculous to call the US social democratic at any point in its history except maybe for a brief time during the New Deal, and even that doesn't really count. Also look at the date of that Stalin quote, and look at the history of fascist movement. The circumstances under which that quote was produced have nothing to do with the subsequent history of fascism. And I don't understand why every wrong thing Stalin said must be taken as gospel.
Social democracy as it manifests in countries of the imperial core doesn't challenge imperialism. In periphery countries it is different. Fascism itself is not the same thing always, there is fascism as a movement before it takes power and fascism as a form of governance, which is still not the same as a "typical" imperialist liberal government (though I don't want to say that fascism is not fundamentally related to imperialism). This Stalin quote comes before the side of fascism in power was even really widely seen. The silliness of "social fascism" has been demonstrated every time communists have realized that they have to work with social democrats etc to fight the rise of fascism. The entire concept was developed in the framework of the Comintern's theory that the world was entering a new era of instability at which the social democrats (which, again, referred to particular parties in Europe, not every liberal) would be the main enemy of the communists as the entire world would try to rise up. This turned out to be extremely wrong and rejected in 1935. So I don't understand why people have to drag up mistaken concepts from 100 years ago as if we've learned nothing more about these things.