Definition of "social fascist'...

[Cheung Mo]

I often here this term tossed about by anti-Stalinists and others who reject totalitarian models of leftism...Is it a portmanteau of "socialist" and "fascist"?

[RebelDog]

In 1930's Germany one of reasons cited by the KPD for not embarking on a 'united front' against Hitler was that they thought of the SPD as 'social fascists'. Its a derogatory term for social-democrats and a fitting one of you ask me.

[Severian]

The Dissenter's stated the history accurately, though why anyone would think that policy was sane, let alone "fitting" is beyond me.

It's a meaningless cussword, part of the long history of everyone calling everyone else a "fascist" as long as you don't like 'em.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Right, Severian, and it opened the door for the Nazis, as Communists physically fought the Socialists.

A united front would have wiped them off the map.

[RebelDog]

The Dissenter's stated the history accurately, though why anyone would think that policy was sane, let alone "fitting" is beyond me.

I never said the 'policy' was fitting. I was merely saying that the term 'social fascist' is a good one to describe social democrats anywhere. A united front didn't mean the KPD had to fall in love with the SPD. We have to remember though we have the benifit of hindsight, the KDP of course at the time did not and I agree that all at the time should have turned their attention to defeating the nazis.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Dissenter, correct, but using the term 'social fascist' was a screw up, for it blurred the distinction between the real fascists and the reformists.

[JimFar]

The refusal of the KPD to join forces with the SPD to oppose the Nazis was certainly one of the greatest blunders in all of human history. And of the many blunders perpretated by Stalin (whose line, the KPD rather slavishly followed), this has to rank near the very top. Having said that, there were good reasons why the rank and file of the KPD were not overlay enamored with the SPD. It was after all, an SPD-led government that crushed the 1919 revolution and to that end had let loose the Freikorps, out of whose ranks many Nazis would be recruited later on. There were reasons why there was no love lost between the KPD and the SPD. However, the refusal of both the KPD and the SPD to perceive the magnitude of the threat posed by the Nazis was an error that would literally cost the lives of millions of people.

[metalero]

But why in Spain, when the Socialist, Communist, and even Anarchist joined the Popular Front, fascim was not defeated? Is this a good strategy against fascim? Maybe I'm confusing "United front" with "Popular Front"? It's precisely unity we need to strugle against fascim, but it's a task that could only be carried out by the working class itself, since it is their interest to destroy the ultimate tactic of bourgeoisie to preserve capitalism.

[The Bitter Hippy]

except that the fight against the fascists in Spain was not united. The stalinists were responsible for much anti-anarchist activity.

[Intelligitimate]

The SPD :

1. Supported the 1914 war against Russia, and promised the Kaiser that they would control the unions. Kicked out anti-war members or silenced their dissent.

2. Denounced the October Revolution.

3. Actively participated in the destruction of the German Revolution.

The label of social-fascist doesn't even do justice to the complete betrayal of this party to the working class.

[RedKnight]

Originally posted by The Bitter [email protected] 17, 2006 01:16 pm
except that the fight against the fascists in Spain was not united. The stalinists were responsible for much anti-anarchist activity.
Also the Falange were aided by both Fascist Italy, as well as Nazi Germany.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2006 01:11 pm
Maybe I'm confusing "United front" with "Popular Front"? It's precisely unity we need to strugle against fascim, but it's a task that could only be carried out by the working class itself.
A united front is a broad front of working class forces, a popular front is a cross class colition of 'progressive' parties. I would certainly agree that a united front was needed, as you say popular fronts failed both in Spain and France, as it is inevitbable with popular fronts that the front acts utlimatley in the interest of the ruling class rather than the working class.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell:


The label of social-fascist doesn't even do justice to the complete betrayal of this party to the working class.

Class traitors are not to be confused with fascists; lack of clarity here does not help.

Metal:


But why in Spain, when the Socialist, Communist, and even Anarchist joined the Popular Front, fascim was not defeated? Is this a good strategy against fascim? Maybe I'm confusing "United front" with "Popular Front"? It's precisely unity we need to strugle against fascim, but it's a task that could only be carried out by the working class itself, since it is their interest to destroy the ultimate tactic of bourgeoisie to preserve capitalism.

Totally different circumstances. The Nazis would have been overwhelmed by the left had they been united, as Jim Farr points out. Whatever hatreds existed on the ground, refusal to join forces condemned both sides to extinction, along with at least 50 million others. Monumental stupidity.

And Franco received help from the Nazis who had triumphed in Germany, as a result of this split.

Had the Nazis been crushed, Spain would probably have remained a left republic.

But, the Stalinists made so many errors in Spain too, that even this is not guaranteed.

[Leo]

The label "social fascist" which was put on social democrats initially has economical roots about the similarities between the social democratic and corporatist economical models and the political similarities between SPD and NSDAP regarding their altitude against the KPD.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Leo, yes, yes, we know the excuse the Stalinists dreamt up, but there is no way one can equate reformists (no matter how toadying they are to the status quo) with fascists, who are hell bent on smashing the working class.

[bezdomni]

"Social Fascism" is a lousy term used by lousy people to describe other lousy people.

[Leo]

Leo, yes, yes, we know the excuse the Stalinists dreamt up, but there is no way one can equate reformists (no matter how toadying they are to the status quo) with fascists, who are hell bent on smashing the working class.

Well, KPD and SPD had a pretty bitter history, and old members of the KPD, as right wing as they were, still did regard the SPD as the murderers of Luxemburg, Liebknecht and Jogiches and destroyers of the German Revolution, which the SPD was. Besides, SPD really would never, ever cooperated with the KPD, perhaps unless KPD unconditionally surrendered to them. SPD was still working against the KPD and sending the police to kill their members in demonstrations, while still in power. Here's a SPD propaganda poster, after all a picture is worth a thousand words:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Spd-poster-1932.jpg

Anyway, I just wanted to stress that reformists are not simply toadying to the status quo; they are a part of the status quo, and they too are hell bent on smashing the working class when it is necessary.

As for the term, "social fascism", it is a substitute for "bogeyman" in Stalinist jargon, and if I recall correctly, here the Maoists and Hoxhaists were calling official CP members "social fascists", and the official CP members were calling them something like "Maoist Grey Wolves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Wolves)"

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Leo, I do not deny much of what you say, but there is no way you can compare the SPD with the Nazis (not that I think you'd try to do so); so anyone who does has lost any right to be taken seriously, whether in the KPD or not.

This sort of stereotyping is, as we know, just one way of blurring distinctions that in the end worked to the advantage of the Stalinist bureaucracy, and Russian national chauvinism.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2006 07:11 am
But why in Spain, when the Socialist, Communist, and even Anarchist joined the Popular Front, fascim was not defeated? Is this a good strategy against fascim? Maybe I'm confusing "United front" with "Popular Front"? It's precisely unity we need to strugle against fascim, but it's a task that could only be carried out by the working class itself, since it is their interest to destroy the ultimate tactic of bourgeoisie to preserve capitalism.
I think you've made a good start on answering your own question.

In '33 Germany, official "Communism" made the ultraleft error of rejecting united action of the workers' parties against fascism. By '36, it was making the opposite, reformist error: allowing liberal capitalist politicians to retain power and pretend to lead the fight against fascism. Also known as the Popular Front.

These liberal capitalists added no real force to the fight against fascism: the capitalist class had pretty much all gone over to Franco. But they were able to sabotage the fight with their refusal to fight in a revolutionary way.

Still, the workers in Spain were able to put up a better fight than in Germany. Hitler took power without firing a shot, but Franco took years to crush the Republic.

***

Anyone who's going on about how bad the SPD is in general is just missing the point. Yes, they're enemies. No, not all enemies are the same: that's what tactics are for.

Leo's also missing the point about speculating on whether the SPD woulda agreed to cooperation. Who knows? But if they do, that's on them. The working class, including the millions of workers who still supported the SPD, woulda seen it was them blocking united action against fascism. If nothing else, it woulda created better conditions for getting some SPD members to join actions.

As it was, both the KPD and SPD acted as obstacles to working-class struggle against fascism. And everybody saw it. Necessarily, this took part of the heat off of the SPD leadership.

[Leo]

made the ultraleft error

:lol: LOL!


Leo's also missing the point about speculating on whether the SPD woulda agreed to cooperation. Who knows?

Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht did, unfortunately they were dead by then.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Severian, your latest post is just more proof that we agree over more than we disagree.

I could not have put it better.

Leo:


Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht did, unfortunately they were dead by then.

I think these two would not have made these mistakes in the 1930's, and would have regarded the SPD as a necessary evil to rid Germany of the poison of Nazism.

The Freikorps, which killed them, turned into Nazi thugs; had Hitler been around and in power in 1919-23, he'd have wiped out the entire movement, not just tens of thousands.

Nazism is a few dozen leagues up from anything the SPD ever did or could do. In fact there is no comparison; the links with the organised working class that still existed in the SPD would have guaranteed that.

[Leo]

I think these two would not have made these mistakes in the 1930's, and would have regarded the SPD as a necessary evil to rid Germany of the poison of Nazism.

Regarding the SPD "as a necessary evil to rid Germany of the poison of Nazism" doesn't really change anything; the world did not revolve around the policies of the KPD. SPD would have never joined forces with the KPD, unless, perhaps, the KPD unconditionally joined the SPD. It was impossible, and it would be even more impossible if Luxemburg and Liebknecht were alive, they would focus more on independent yet united working class organization against the Nazis, after all they were, ah what was that term - oh, right, a bunch of ultra-leftists.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 19, 2006 10:07 pm
it would be even more impossible if Luxemburg and Liebknecht were alive, they would focus more on independent yet united working class organization against the Nazis, after all they were, ah what was that term - oh, right, a bunch of ultra-leftists.
Rosa and Liebknecht were never ultra-leftist, except perhaps in Stalinist fantasies.

On the contrary, Rosa and Liebknecht refused to leave the SPD voluntarily; they fought within the party until they were both expelled - thus showing clearly who was against working class unity, who was sectarian, etc.

(if anyone, it was Lenin and his conditions to join the III International - including conditions that no real working class party in Germany could have accepted without destroying itself, as the further history of the KPD proves - who were ultra-leftists)

Of course, having not been in a Kardekist center in order to channel their spirits, I cannot know what they would have done in the thirties, hadn´t they been murdered by the Freikorps at the service of Friedrich Ebert´s social-democratic government.

But I doubt they would embark in the Stalinist euphoria about Nazism being a good thing because it would clarify class-struggle. I doubt they would remain in a party that was nothing more than a facade for Russian national interests. I doubt they would have refused to face fascism as the main enemy of the whole working class, and that they would have dismissed the necessity of uniting the class - including the social-democratic part of the class - against fascism.

Don´t use Rosa Luxemburg to justify Stalinist crimes, Leo.

Luís Henrique

[Intelligitimate]

Nice picture, Leo Uileann. The Trotskyite defense of the SPD is revolting, not to mention moronic. The SPD would have sooner cooperated with the Nazis in destroying any chance of socialism than cooperting with the KPD against the Nazis.

That Trotsky would even advocate forming an alliance with the SPD is just proof he never gave up his Menshevism or his "conciliator" ways, as Lenin put it in 1916.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Leo:


Regarding the SPD "as a necessary evil to rid Germany of the poison of Nazism" doesn't really change anything; the world did not revolve around the policies of the KPD. SPD would have never joined forces with the KPD, unless, perhaps, the KPD unconditionally joined the SPD. It was impossible, and it would be even more impossible if Luxemburg and Liebknecht were alive, they would focus more on independent yet united working class organization against the Nazis, after all they were, ah what was that term - oh, right, a bunch of ultra-leftists.

Sure, the world did not, but Germany did; and the failure of these two parties to unite was catastrophic.

But it did not help with the KPD depicting the SPD this way, and organising attacks on them.

Even ignoring them would have been better.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Lack of Intelligitimate:


Nice picture, Leo Uileann. The Trotskyite defense of the SPD is revolting, not to mention moronic. The SPD would have sooner cooperated with the Nazis in destroying any chance of socialism than cooperting with the KPD against the Nazis.

And yet another comrade who cannot learn from history.

[Intelligitimate]

Originally posted by Rosa [email protected] 20, 2006 12:25 am
Lack of Intelligitimate:


Nice picture, Leo Uileann. The Trotskyite defense of the SPD is revolting, not to mention moronic. The SPD would have sooner cooperated with the Nazis in destroying any chance of socialism than cooperting with the KPD against the Nazis.

And yet another comrade who cannot learn from history.
You mean the idiotic fantasy version of "what if" history Trots believe in. If only the KPD would have done what Trotsky suggested, it would have saved Germany from the Nazis!

Yeah fucking right. The SPD would have never, ever gone for it. They were complete and utter traitors to the working class, as demonstrated time and time again. That you think they would have magically turned around and stopped the Nazis from gaining power is so god damn stupid.

[Luís Henrique]

Rosa, you quoted Leo and attributed the quote to me. My opinion is quite different from his.

Luís Henrique

[Leo]

Rosa and Liebknecht were never ultra-leftist, except perhaps in Stalinist fantasies.

They actually were left communists and the current left communist movement draws lots of conclusions from their actual work instead of simply turning them into "icons who would have supported Trotsky". They were for independent working class organization, actual dictatorship of the proletariat, they acknowledged that the unions had turned into the instruments of the bourgeoisie and they were against nationalism in every form it could take. That's "ultra-leftism" for ya, and it's not an insult; it's a good thing.


But I doubt they would embark in the Stalinist euphoria about Nazism being a good thing because it would clarify class-struggle.

I never said anything like that. If you regard "focusing more on independent yet united working class organization" and "embarking in the Stalinist euphoria about Nazism being a good thing", then woe on you...


I doubt they would remain in a party that was nothing more than a facade for Russian national interests.

Now, that's the point. "Independent working class" organization emphasizes that either the KPD would not be a facade for Russian national interests, or Luxemburg and Liebknecht would not be in it.


I doubt they would have refused to face fascism as the main enemy of the whole working class, and that they would have dismissed the necessity of uniting the class - including the social-democratic part of the class - against fascism.

As I said, it is not that simple. If what you mean by gaining social-democratic part of the class is gaining the leadership, it wasn't possible at all, because the SPD itself didn't regard "commies" as anything better than Nazis. As for getting the workers in their base, you know that trying draw workers away from social democracy meant opposing the SPD, right?


Don´t use Rosa Luxemburg to justify Stalinist crimes, Leo.

Are you high? Which crime am I justifying? I'm simply pointing out the real situation.


Sure, the world did not, but Germany did

No, Germany did not either. What KPD thought about the SPD did not matter to the SPD, they regarded KPD as enemies regardless.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell:


You mean the idiotic fantasy version of "what if" history Trots believe in. If only the KPD would have done what Trotsky suggested, it would have saved Germany from the Nazis!

Even if Trotsky had never existed, the monumental blunder by Stalin and his henchmen over the fight against the Nazis in Germany will go down in history as one of the very worst.

If you can't see that, then I fear that in your present state of mind, you might be a danger to yourself, and there is not much I can do to save you from a fate it seems you rightly deserve.

However, a few more swear words please; after about eight I concede defeat through force of logic....

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

LH:


Rosa, you quoted Leo and attributed the quote to me.

Sorry!

My only excuse is that my computer was acting up at the time, so I could not check things as well as I normally try to do.

I will correct it.

Done!

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Leo:


What KPD thought about the SPD did not matter to the SPD, they regarded KPD as enemies regardless.

I am not sure why this shows that this did not matter in Germany.

Where did it matter then?

On Venus?

[Intelligitimate]

Originally posted by Rosa [email protected] 20, 2006 01:36 pm
Intell:


You mean the idiotic fantasy version of "what if" history Trots believe in. If only the KPD would have done what Trotsky suggested, it would have saved Germany from the Nazis!

Even if Trotsky had never existed, the monumental blunder by Stalin and his henchmen over the fight against the Nazis in Germany will go down in history as one of the very worst.

If you can't see that, then I fear that in your present state of mind, you might be a danger to yourself, and there is not much I can do to save you from a fate it seems you rightly deserve.

However, a few more swear words please; after about eight I concede defeat through force of logic....
You have done nothing in this thread but make a semantic quibble of the term social fascist. You have not presented the slightest shred of evidence that if the KPD would have adopted Trotsky's policies, the Nazis would not have come to power. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine what sort of 'evidence' could possibly justify this "what if" shit you're doing.

The closest thing you even present to evidence is calling it a party with "links to the working class". I'm sure the Nazis had some of them too, as do Republicans and Democrats and tons of bourgeois parties. You're an utter fool if you think this means a fucking thing. Does the history of the SPD mean nothing to you? No, clearly it doesn't. Only defending Trot dogma matters.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell:


You have done nothing in this thread but make a semantic quibble of the term social fascist. You have not presented the slightest shred of evidence that if the KPD would have adopted Trotsky's policies, the Nazis would not have come to power. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine what sort of 'evidence' could possibly justify this "what if" shit you're doing.

Not so, and I did not argue along the lines you allege.

If you want to make stuff up, I suggest you seek a career in the White House writing dossiers justifying wars in places like Iraq, and stop posting here.

Looks like you are a natural.

And, since you merely confine yourself to abuse, with no swear words this time, I find your argument not as compelling as when you used the 'F' word.

I think you should try harder.

Try the 'c' word; that should help.

[Leo]

I am not sure why this shows that this did not matter in Germany.

It shows that Germany did not revolve around KPD's view on the SPD. It is quite logical actually.

[Intelligitimate]

Not so, and I did not argue along the lines you allege.

Of course you are! Just look:


A united front would have wiped them off the map.


The Nazis would have been overwhelmed by the left had they been united, as Jim Farr points out. Whatever hatreds existed on the ground, refusal to join forces condemned both sides to extinction, along with at least 50 million others. Monumental stupidity.


Sure, the world did not, but Germany did; and the failure of these two parties to unite was catastrophic.

Literally every single one of these idiotic claims assumes that the KPD uniting with the SPD was possible, and furthermore, that it would have stopped the Nazis coming to power. You are arguing "what if" history, without even the pretense of presenting evidence to substantiate this bullshit. You indeed are arguing along these lines. Furthermore, the whole validity of this line of reasoning can be called into question, considering you don't have a fucking time machine, do you, Mr. Peabody? You gonna jump in the Way Back Machine and show us any of this shit you allege would have happened, actually could?


If you want to make stuff up

Oh the irony!


I suggest you seek a career in the White House writing dossiers justifying wars in places like Iraq, and stop posting here.

The only people in the White House doing that are ex-Trots. The main feature of Trotskyism, an intense hatred of socialism, is part of the ideological makeup of the Neocons, many of whom are ex-Trots. They basically just dropped all the superfluous elements of Trotskyism and got right to the core of your ideology: rabid hatred of anything associated with socialism.


And, since you merely confine yourself to abuse, with no swear words this time, I find your argument not as compelling as when you used the 'F' word.

Please, no one is fooled by your faux-concern for politeness. If you cared about maintaining a civil discussion, you wouldn't do things like address my responses with "Lack of Intelligimate".

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell (still inventing):


Please, no one is fooled by your faux-concern for politeness.

What, no swear words?

I can't believe how weak your arguments now are!

Surely you could manage just one 'f' word??

Or, even worse, the 's' word: 'Stalin'?

[Intelligitimate]

Allow me to oblige: fuck you.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell:


Allow me to oblige: fuck you.

Now that is so much more Stalinist, and cogent.

Well done!!

I am sure Uncle Joe would be proud of you.

I know I am.

[Intelligitimate]

You should go back to the Philosophy forum, where at least you don't seem like such a clueless idiot.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by Leo Uillean
They actually were left communists and the current left communist movement draws lots of conclusions from their actual work instead of simply turning them into "icons who would have supported Trotsky".

They would certainly have supported Trotsky against the bourgeosie or agains Stalinism. In fact, I am pretty sure that they would have supported practically any proletarian alternative to Stalin, including Bukharin.

And no, Rosa Luxemburg wasn´t a icon. She was a very real working class fighter and theorist, who first denounced Lenin´s sustitutionism, and did that from a working class point-of-view (in that sence, she never supported, and would never support Trotsky and Trotskyism, who are also substitutionists).


They were for independent working class organization, actual dictatorship of the proletariat, they acknowledged that the unions had turned into the instruments of the bourgeoisie and they were against nationalism in every form it could take.

I have never seen any indication that Rosa Luxembourg "acknowledged that the unions had turned into the instruments of the bourgeoisie".


That's "ultra-leftism" for ya, and it's not an insult; it's a good thing.

Maybe it isn´t an insult to you. To me, and I believe most certainly to Rosa Luxembourg too, it obviously is - it means a position that put abstract, bourgeois principles, above the material interests of the working class. Rosa Luxembourg wasn´t in the business of being the purest revolutionary ever; she was up to proletarian revolution - revolution made by the masses, not by substitutionist cliques who "acknowledge" that working class organisations are "instruments of the bourgeoisie".


I never said anything like that. If you regard "focusing more on independent yet united working class organization" and "embarking in the Stalinist euphoria about Nazism being a good thing", then woe on you...

Well, you sound quite like defending the KPD´s suicidal line of rejecting working class unity and downplaying the fascist menace. What exactly do you think the KPD did right, and wrong, during Hitler´s bid to power?


Now, that's the point. "Independent working class" organization emphasizes that either the KPD would not be a facade for Russian national interests, or Luxemburg and Liebknecht would not be in it.

The point, however, is not hypothetical. During all the political crisis that led Hitler to power, the KPD was a facade for Russian national interests. So your claiming that the KPD shouldn´t make a common front with the SPD because the SPD had betrayed the working class is void - because the KPD was no less treacherous...


As I said, it is not that simple. If what you mean by gaining social-democratic part of the class is gaining the leadership, it wasn't possible at all, because the SPD itself didn't regard "commies" as anything better than Nazis.

Considering the KPD were Stalinists, to what extent can we say that the SPD was completely wrong concerning this point?


As for getting the workers in their base, you know that trying draw workers away from social democracy meant opposing the SPD, right?

Yeah - effectively opposing the SPD, not merely making verbal points against them. Stealing their bases, not alienating them by making abstract declarations of principle, that those workers would have been unable to relate to their material struggles.


Are you high? Which crime am I justifying? I'm simply pointing out the real situation.

The capitulationist policy of the KPD regarding Nazism.

Luís Henrique

[Severian]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+December 20, 2006 05:11 pm--> (Luís Henrique @ December 20, 2006 05:11 pm)
Leo
Are you high? Which crime am I justifying? I'm simply pointing out the real situation.

The capitulationist policy of the KPD regarding Nazism. [/b]
Yeah, exactly.

Occurs to me the correctness of Stalin's policy in 1930s Germany has previously been debated in this thread. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=32686)

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Intell:


You should go back to the Philosophy forum, where at least you don't seem like such a clueless idiot.

You are right: when I am in that Forum, I do not seem at all like you.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Severian, that link is now this:

http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic...entry1292233733 (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=32686&st=25&#entry1292233733)