>What Dimitrov and others got wrong was the idea of the social fascists
>as a main enemy. Not that it is not in part true, but that stopping
>fascism in fact requires a popular front not a united front composed of
>only the workers. And that despite all evidence to the contrary, the
>Stalinists continue to claim that stopping Hitler was a victory for the
>united front thesis.
It is true, I think, that some on the left (on the left in the Communist Party -- but mostly in other more sectarian movements--I think majority opinion in the CP favors what is termed a bit jargonistically an "all-people's movement to defeat the ultra right") really don't like the idea of popular front. Left-center alliances (as opposed to left-left alliances or the traditional notion of united front) are regarded as a liberal copouts by some -- a notion with which I disagree completely. Left-left alliances are nice to think about, almost impossible to create (at present -- hope for the future) and gathering a couple of thousand people together to bicker in a country of 300 million is a bit silly.
[More below]
>So I argue that we need a broad popular front to both oppose the erosion
>of liberties under Bush & Ashcrosft, and to also flank the various
>proto-fascist movements that want the left to join them in an
>anti-regime crusade
I completely agree!
Joel Wendland
_________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963