Firstly, if anyone is wondering why I sometimes don’t respond to you, its either because your arguments are so ridiculous that they defeat themselves, that I feel you haven’t listened to what I have already clearly stated and are just trying to be obstructive for the sake of ‘winning’, that someone else has clearly addressed the points before I had the chance to, that you have chosen to be aggressive with me and attack me personally instead of trying for a constructive conversation, that you have said nothing of worth, or that I believe that our worldviews differ so much on the wider topic at hand that there is nothing more to be said to eachother.
Apologies in advance if this is upsetting for any of you.
Lots of political parties help the working class in small ways (and then crush them in others). This doesn’t make them socialists.
Then we agree.
I have no doubt that fascists have more motive to their ideology than the defeat of communism. Nevertheless, fascism, as far as I know, always come in to force when capitalism is most under threat as that is when all the capitalists tend to jump ship and give all of their money and resources to the fascists in order to protect themselves.
Yes. They tore out the spirit of socialism and wore it as a cloak. They ‘evolved’ away from socialism but still kept the rhetoric when it suited them. I don’t think we disagree here, do we?
Yes. They were deviating from the status quo, so, of course they had bourgeois enemies who wanted to preserve the status quo as a way of safely preserving their money and power. I don’t disagree. But I still say that fascism isn’t an enemy of capitalism as they always preserve it against the communists who want to destroy it.
Again, and maybe I am making presumptions, but I don’t think we disagree.
I think you may be under the false impression that I believe that fascism comes in to being solely for the cause of preserving capitalism. This is not my belief. I said that it comes in to force when capitalism is most under threat. Do we disagree?