You should probably go re-read what else they wrote and follow past that to their actual beliefs rather than stopping at their explanation of Democrat’s inaction and lack of utilization of their own powers to oppose fascism through the system they are a part of.
Are you so naive to think the US government isn’t already authoritarian in its current structure? They explained how an AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENT possessed the means to prevent fascism yet neglected to use those means because they care more about holding power than stopping fascism.
You clearly neglected to read their full comment, as they explicitly said it WAS authoritarian methods by which the Democrats could have stopped the rise of fascism.
They also explicitly stated that they were against the system entirely and explained their own personal perspective but you clearly have ignored all of that to continue to be a pedantic twat who can’t tell the difference between an explanation and personal support of something
You are correct
And the answer to rising fascism is not trying to replace a popular authoritarian with an unpopular one.
I agree, the goal would be the authority of workers to be popular first.
No idea what you’re trying to say.
Communism
Then you expose your utter lack of understanding of what the term “authoritarian” means.
Violence is not inherently authoritarian. Violence is a valid means of self defense against those who are violent.
Or do you wish to try and say that anarchists are authoritarian?
You should probably read what OP wrote and what I responded to.
Military control to prevent an opponent from taking power is almost literally the definition of authoritarian.
You should probably go re-read what else they wrote and follow past that to their actual beliefs rather than stopping at their explanation of Democrat’s inaction and lack of utilization of their own powers to oppose fascism through the system they are a part of.
Just because you like why they’d do it doesn’t make it less authoritarian.
Are you so naive to think the US government isn’t already authoritarian in its current structure? They explained how an AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENT possessed the means to prevent fascism yet neglected to use those means because they care more about holding power than stopping fascism.
You clearly neglected to read their full comment, as they explicitly said it WAS authoritarian methods by which the Democrats could have stopped the rise of fascism.
They also explicitly stated that they were against the system entirely and explained their own personal perspective but you clearly have ignored all of that to continue to be a pedantic twat who can’t tell the difference between an explanation and personal support of something