Ideological Social Democracy Is Social Fascism: Yet Again

I’ve  been a bit apprehensive in the past about using the old Comintern era  label of “social fascism” because it’s often thrown around in the most  sectarian, harmful, petty and foolish ways — the average rank and file  DSA member is by no means or any definition of the word a “fascist”.  However, when we investigate the ideological water-carriers of this  latest iteration of social democracy, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and others  who have attracted attention for their populist soundbites and have  mislead millions of earnest people (many of whom fancy themselves  revolutionaries), we can come to the conclusion that the social fascist  label still holds good to describe them.

Social  democracy as it manifests itself in the United States and other  imperialist countries (UK, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Germany, etc.)  is basically a more freehanded (towards “citizens”) fascism. Free shit  for the first world, at the expense of the third. Every few decades a  “movement” or several “movements” arise due to the cyclical boom/bust  cycle inherent to capitalism that leads millions of ruined  petit-bourgeois and proletarians (particularly the settler variety) down  the path of either right or left populism. The left populists, many of  whom traffic in a bastardized version of “socialism”, blame “the 1%”,  “the billionaire class”, or some other nebulous category but never get  into the Marxist categories of real class interest or class position. Thus,  we have unrepentant millionaires in the United States and the UK  positioning themselves as socialists and “socialists” claiming that it  is possible for an individual to make a million dollars a year and be a  “worker”, a “proletarian”. This shows the utmost necessity of reading  our Marxist classics along with studying deeply the theory of those who  have actually made revolution in the global periphery. There are people  who have made armed struggle in the United States — failed armed  struggle, but armed struggle nevertheless. Maoists hold that armed  struggle is the highest stage of class struggle, if you are not gearing  up for armed struggle but instead engaging in reformism as strategy, you are not a socialist. You  can not be a Socialist and promote class collaboration — meaning  uniting millionaires and temp workers in the same party. Communism is  the ideology of the lowest and deepest masses and those who have thrown  themselves 100% in their corner on the field of class struggle. Class  collaboration ideology is fascism — our goal is to exacerbate and  sharpen class contradictions, not flatten them by melding various  contradictory classes and semi-classes into “the working class” and  allowing the most privileged strata to make line and demands.

To  be a Socialist, you must be a Communist. Socialism is the transitional  stage from capitalism to communism — during this period the foundations  of communism are built and there is consistent class struggle. There is  no peaceful road, no short cut, no parliamentary path. Socialism is a  fragile thing that must constantly be advanced and sharpened through  struggle, violent and nonviolent. It is not a reform. It is not a series  of reforms. Without violence, there is no Socialism. To not be a  Communist yet call yourself a socialist and pursue a reformist, eclectic  pipe dream of socialism is to be a revisionist and a fascist — a  revisionist one because it throws the living essence of the Marxist  ideology into the garbage, a fascist one because it promotes class  collaboration ideology in lieu of class struggle ideology. The first  world would-be socialists must learn that they cannot have their cake  and eat it too. You cannot express “concern” for the masses of the third  world while ignoring the fact that they call for real revolution here,  not reforms and handouts that eat up ever more of their stolen wealth.

Socialists  do not believe in borders for imperialist countries. Imperialist  countries do not respect the borders of the masses of people they  exploit when they run all over the world stealing their wealth (and  people), bombing and committing other dreadful crimes. Thus, any  socialist who engages in “borders” rhetoric or “we can’t let them come  here” rhetoric is pandering to right populism and is no Socialist at  all. They are a fake socialist, a fraud socialist, a social fascist.  Socialists are proletarian internationalists, meaning that we support  the right of the masses to move anywhere they please, particularly to  the country that has destabilized and destroyed their homelands. What  right does the US to tell a Salvadorean they can’t come here after  destroying El Salvador? What right does an American have to lecture to a Venezuelan after destroying Venezuela? The main error of the US “left”  is that it doesn’t take a global perspective and does not seriously  grapple with the fact that it lives in the most atrocious imperialist  country in the history of humanity. Thus, it is perfectly fine with  holding its hands or offering ineffective whimpers as imperialism does  imperialism. The corrective would be to take some  Marxist-Leninist-Maoist medicine and steel itself against Sanders style  sugar bullets.