Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
> in keeping with Churchill's quote, it has never been
> widespread or systematic enough to become a foundation for anything
> approaching a totalitarian government. If that was the case, would
> we be talking so openly here?
The debate focuses too much on how _bad_ conditions are. The point is that there are many varieties of police state (the term "totalitariian" was never too useful), and for A to be worse than B does not necessarily at all mean that A is "closer" to fascism than B. Particularly if you are using marxist criteria, talking about A worse than B or not as bad as B puts you in Prudhon's cage, not Marx's. There have been many non-fascist states that were a lot worse live in than Mussolini's Italy. It's not a line from Good to Bad, with "Fascism" = Bad.
Carrol
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk