The Dimitrov definition was wrong when it was formulated over the objection across two plenums of many delegates with actual direct experience with fascism in its stage as a mass movement.
It was simplistic, factually false, and ideologically-motivated.
It was crap then and it is crap now.
-Chip
> Alan Rudy
>
>
>
> APR: I think it is really important to define fascism carefully and
> the definition I think is important to use does not fit with Jim Crow.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB: Hey Alan. We've had a number of threads on the list on this where I
> have
> discussed my definition. Here are some:
>
>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2008/2008-October/016427.html
>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2008/2008-January/000144.html
>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/1998/1998-October/008693.html
>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/1998/1998-October/008414.html
>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/1998/1998-May/000875.html
>
>
>
> I use Dimitrov's (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi_Dimitrov) definition as the core
> of my definition: Open
> terrorist rule of the most reactionary, chauvinist, bellicose sector
> of finance capital.