Well then happy Chanukah.
> . . . Mao, who you
> quoted, did not espouse a fascist
> ideology. He espoused revolutionary
You got me wrong. I did not quote Mao; I quoted Cox quoting Mao. I got no use for Mao, ever since he betrayed the Vietnamese 27 years ago by kissing Nixon's ass in the middle of the Vietnamese struggle for liberation. It's how I came to be a Trot, if only temporarily.
> . . . Mao is not at all an example of
> fascist ideology . . .
I agree. Compared to C. Cox, Mao is a Fabian socialist.
> class dimensions are so critical
> in defining fascist ideology, and
> Mao's class ideology is the
> complete opposite of that of
> the fascists.
Reminds me of the joke, (paraphrased), fascists were for the exploitation of man by man, and Mao was just the opposite.
> . . .
> The despotisms that have arisen
> in socialist countries are not
> politically correct, but it is important
> to analyze them differently from
> bourgeois forms of despotism.
I agree with that too. My reference was to fascist ideology as a mode of political persuasion, not as a defense of an unjust social order. The nature of the message is one of rebellion, not of upholding the status quo. In this sense, fascist ideology (as opposed to a literal fascist state) functions as a diversion for people who are angry with capitalism (or socialism). This ideology isn't functional in the same way under an established fascist state, hence the eventual Nazi execution of the 'anarchist' SA wing of the movement.
I wouldn't deny that there are multiple types of fascist ideology, and in general this is all making much too much about a brief remark.
I don't think we disagree, but if we work hard enough I'm sure we can find something to fight about.
Cheers,
MBS