Socdem is bad because capitalism etc etc I understand that, but I saw some people in here saying that socdem is OBJECTIVELY the moderate branch of fascism, which I don’t really understand, because most socdems I know just want their basic welfare system, but are far from nationalism, advocating for genocide etc

I know it’s still bad but for example in spain I feel there’s a big difference between the francoist spain and the socdem wannabe spain, for the better

So please explain, and feel free to call out any brainworms that I might (probably) have shown in here

This could also just be a very funny line, like the “unlimited genocide on the first world” thing, idk

  • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    31·
    3 days ago

    I had another comment in this thread that’s related to this topic maybe other people can help me out with.

    I’ve seen others use this same logic to say that MLs are the equivalent to even lefter groups, though. Like how Soc Dems have betrayed communists, MLS have always betrayed and backstabbed anarchists. I haven’t read enough history to know if that’s true so I never argue this point. I guess one of the things they may be referring to is the Bolshevik 1917 revolution, and their betrayal of the elections, squashing of other socialist factions, etc?

    • StalinIsMaiWaifu@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      The two examples most people use are Bolsheviks in 1917 (Ukraine specifically) and in the Spanish Civil War. This is another irreconcilable split (Marx literally kicked Anarchists from the first international). Anarchists fundamentally believe the revolution must destroy all hierarchy while ML’s believe the vanguard party must lead a temporary state as it transitions to communism. This means that in a revolutionary state anarchists will begin to agitate for it’s destruction, which a Vanguard party will take as a threat.