Yes, I ate all the pixels
Then it seems that social Dems are fascist seems a bit of a an oversimplification
As I explained in my previous post: in the presence of an established and popular revolutionary party, social democrat reformists act to defend capital against them just as fascists do. Therefore, they will continually side with the fascists and can be considered, for all intents and purposes, “social fascists”.
Considering what the SPD did in the 20s and 30s (which is the entire subject of this thread, and every comment I’ve made in it), the theory at least has merit.
I would still disagree. Social Dems don’t meet any definition of fascism. It sounds like you’re just declaring anyone who’s not revolutionary as a fascists. But fascists are revolutionary minded as well.
But fascists are revolutionary minded as well.
Fascism occurs in order to protect the power of capital when faced with revolution. Social democracy also exists to do this. This is why Bourgeois will support both those movements, but never communism. Make of those material motivations what you will.