VGPolyglot said:
Yes, because as World War II taught us, using non-violence to deal with the fascists really worked. Except no, it didn't. They had to be violently fought to be defeated. That was the only way that they lost. |
This is not proof for anything. Fascism was a new ideology which hadn't discredited itself yet, and the conditions of the early 20th century were predisposed to it. The same is nowhere true today. By that logic you'd support American interventiknism, because many of the regimes the U.S toppled were not that much different from fascist. It is telling how much the left has a tankie problem, just as the right has an ethno-nationalist problem, when they throw out traditional leftist ideals for authoritarianism.
I will stick to Chomsky's much more nuanced and principled view, than follow stalinist tactics of suppressing speech.







