Why oppose anti-fascism?

[the_me_collective]

I was reading the "Basic Positions" of the ICC when I stumbled upon the following:


"All the tactics of ‘popular fronts’, ‘anti-fascist fronts’ and ‘united fronts’, which mix up the interests of the proletariat with those of a faction of the bourgeoisie, serve only to smother and derail the struggle of the proletariat." Why is this? Can anyone explain me the logic behind this statement? Do they oppose all forms of anti-fascism (or only cross-class anti-fascism), or do they see anti-fascism as a separate struggle from the class struggle?

[Rjevan]

So what do they suggest? Hopefully not that we should fight "anti-fascist fronts" and "united fronts" because they only consist of bourgeoise elements? :confused:

[Pogue]

I never understood this position either, but we should give an ICC member a chance to explain it to us before we jump to conclusions.

[Absolut]

Seems to me that theyre rejecting the idea of a united front with the bourgoisie to oppose fascism, not at all rejecting all anti-fascist struggle, instead meaning that the proletariat should fight fascism and all, and not engage in cross-class cooperation to fight off fascism. Rejecting this idea does not at all mean that they reject the anti-fascist struggle as an integral part in the class struggle.

I can definately see the point in that.

EDIT: Whats the ICC?

[F9]

Tupac Amaru II you have been issued with a warning point, for posting crap posts in the learning, for things dont concern you, and calling people around "lunatics" of an ideology which at least in here is respectful.Learning isnt the place to "fuck" with other ideologies, newcomers come with their questions here to learn, not others to come and say the A ideologie is shit etc etc.This wont be accepted at all!If the matter dont concerns you, stay away of it.

Fuserg9:star:

[Coggeh]

Seems to me that theyre rejecting the idea of a united front with the bourgoisie to oppose fascism, not at all rejecting all anti-fascist struggle, instead meaning that the proletariat should fight fascism and all, and not engage in cross-class cooperation to fight off fascism. Rejecting this idea does not at all mean that they reject the anti-fascist struggle as an integral part in the class struggle.

I can definately see the point in that.

EDIT: Whats the ICC?
International communist current . They don't seem too bad just having a quick look through their stuff .

However on the point of uniting with the bourgeoisie, its important for the radical left to ally with all other anti-fascist factions in smashing in , for no real theoretical purposes but for practical ones . We seen the example in Spain of how different movements allied together against fascism to fight it , but we saw what happens when this doesn't happen in the case of Germany and the social-democrats and the KPD squabbling against each other while hitler's scum took power .

[ComradeOm]

Why is this? Can anyone explain me the logic behind this statement? Do they oppose all forms of anti-fascism (or only cross-class anti-fascism), or do they see anti-fascism as a separate struggle from the class struggle?The fundamental problem with the ICC position is that they do not perceive fascism to be distinct from liberal democracy. That is, a bourgeois state and a fascist state are not substantially different and, to quote, "All factions of the bourgeoisie are equally reactionary"

In my opinion its an extremely reductionist viewpoint that precludes any real analysis and is entirely lacking in nuance

Edit: Although, as this thread demonstrates, the ICC hold no monopoly on ultra-sectarianism :rolleyes:

[tehpevis]

this brings up a question I've had for a bit now.

Which is the greater of two evils: Bourgeois Capitalism, or Fascism?

[Charles Xavier]

this brings up a question I've had for a bit now.

Which is the greater of two evils: Bourgeois Capitalism, or Fascism?


They are the same thing, the question is, which type of rule is worse, bourgeoisie democracy or open terrorist dictatorship of the bourgeiosie?

[Alf]

We don't think that everyone who is not a left communist is a counter-revolutionary. We think, for example, that there are anarchist currents that are genuinely internationalist, and there are all sorts of grey areas between revolution and counter-revolution. But we do think that currents like Social democracy, Stalinism and Trotskyism have passed over to the other side of the barricade by participating in imperialist wars and the bourgeois state apparatus. Obviously many honest workers and would-be revolutionaries are sucked into these organisations - that's part of their function.

Of the various interpretations of what our position is, the one by Absolut seemed closest. Like the left wing of the Italian communist party in the early 20s, or the workers of Barcelona in July 1936, we are for fighting fascist attacks with the methods of the class struggle, not by allying ourselves with 'democratic' factions of the bourgeoisie who will disarm and crush us at the first available opportunity - as they did in Italy and Spain. Mussolini (like Hitler) came to power through 'democratic' channels; and in Barcelona less than a year after the July uprising (May 37), the workers had to defend themselves arms in hand against an assault by the Republican/Stalinist forces.

We are not specifically 'anti-fascist' any more than we are 'anti-Stalinist' or 'anti-democrat'. We are for the independent struggle of the workers against all bourgeois factions.

Thanks also to rakunin and others who have stood up for what they see as positive in our positions despite their disagreements on other issues. That's the basis for proletarian solidarity as opposed to a bourgeois 'popular front'!

[Shin Honyong]

It is not so much to opposition of Fascism allying with other groups; its the concept of allying with your enemies to fight Fascism, even if it means undermining the proletariat cause. Consider it a rejection of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" philosophy.

[F9]

Issued Cummanach with a PM warning for spamming, same reasons as TupacAmaru II
Moved some posts that actually have a real going conversation here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/left-communism-t104619/index.html?t=104619), i was thoughtful to put it in learning, but its sure some people need to learn, and trashed some offtopic posts, mainly of TupacAmaruII concerning his warning point and the replies, there is an ongoing thread in the members forum about this.

[tehpevis]

so, basically, this is saying we should oppose militant opposition to fascism because it would undermine our militant opposition to capitalism?

Here in the US, Antifa is seen as either 1. a Terrorist Group or 2. "wtf is Antifa?"
Judging from this, I would say that militant anti-fascism isn't in the interests of the Bourgeois, so I support it.