Message from @Cyboman
Discord ID: 556693829919440906
it is authoritarianism and state socialism
which isn't communism, or at least not supposed to be
it gained legitimacy through the state
Stalin also claimed legitimacy on that basis, hence Stalin could not be described as fascistic. Stalin has significant deviations from more traditional Marxist thought but still adheres to the foundations.
Legitimacy and power are two different things
>Communism seeks legitimacy through the proletariat
So does Fascism
so
lol
Stalinism is more a centralized authoritarian.
Fascism is not exclusively seeking power by garnering upper class support
or even middle class
it is supposed to captivate support irrespective of economic category
As such it does include the proletariat
Strasserism and Peronism may arguably, but fascism does not seek the support of the proletariat but of the volk, the nation, etc
the proletariat are apart of the volk
and National Socialism did try to aid the working class
Stalin does not adhere to traditional Marxism, Marxism was international and closer to Trotsky's ideals of permanent revolution than the nationalist, isolationism of Stalin
through its heavy social policy
Right but it did not define its success or failure by the workers as workers, but as the workers as a part of the people. The fact that fascism also seeks to include the middle class and even upper class demonstrates the difference here
people are stupid
fascism is the uniting of classes rather than the communist dividing of classes.
"the proletariat" or whatever will follow the rules/social norms as set by the rulers
or leaders
whatever title you give them
This is Lenin’s concept of the vanguard. Not sure what your getting at
people are too readily influenced to make decisions for themselves
Lenin had some ok ideas
the idea of a "vanguard class" isn't really new
that a small group of people should watch out for a larger one?
how ancient is that idea?
oligarchy has existed forever
Also, ally, stalins socialism in one state still sought to achieve the internationale and continued the Comintern but sought to achieve a revolution more fully before spreading, not really a significant difference to draw a total distinction
@Friend of Greatest Ally it depends on whether you consider it oligarchy
were tribal leaders oligarchs?
Stalin post 1941 employed nationalist rhetoric
@Cyboman I’m not saying its new or effective, I’m saying the opposite. It is the thought process though
but he flip flopped on everything, so
@CronoSaturn so you're saying a population, half of whose IQ lies below 100, should decide for itself what to do?
a small group of people deciding for the wider group is oligarchy, so yes it would be if ir is a tribe of elders or something similar
if you define it so broadly then the world has always been lead by oligarchs