And yes, the bourgeois parties hated the Marxist-Leninists much more than the Nazis who they collaborated with.
You say “the bourgeois parties,” but that’s all the parties besides the KPD. That’s more than 80% of German voters in 1932. After the depression, the war, the austerity, more people still voted for the SPD, and all the other parties, than the KPD. Those voters couldn’t all be members of the capitalist class. In fact, I’m pretty darn certain they were mostly working class people.
There were a number of objectively conservative parties that backed Hindenburg: Catholic Centre Party, BVP, DVP, and DStP.
That’s true, which means there was no possibility of a coalition being formed that involved the KPD, regardless of SPD’s feelings about the KPD. Believe me, I’m not denying that the SPD hated the KPD. I’m certain of it, and it looks like so did every other party. My point is that the KPD hated the SPD, and all those other parties, at least as much. That’s the thing about Marxist-Leninists, they excel at making people hate them, and they’re perfectly content to be completely on their own, politically and ideologically isolated from everyone else. A plurality of German voters literally chose Nazis over the MLs. Even today, I think there are more people who hate MLs than hate Nazis, and that’s saying something because A LOT of people really hate Nazis, rightfully so.
Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party never managed to win a majority in a national election; instead, it was helped into office by conservatives who were more terrified of real socialism than they were of Hitler’s “national socialism.”
Are the social democrats the “conservatives” in this scenario? If so, was it really the social democrats who refused to work with the communists, or was it the communists who refused to work with the social democrats? The communists had no love for the SPD after they helped put down the Spartacist uprising in 1919, and many communists, even today, blame the SPD for the murders of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. So, I don’t think there’s much validity to the implication that the social democrats and the communists could have formed a coalition if only the social democrats hadn’t been so terrified of “real socialism.” Also, not everyone sees Marxism-Leninism as “real socialism.” I’m not sure there is consensus on what constitutes “real socialism,” with every socialist faction believing only their socialism is the real socialism.
As I’ve said many times: I don’t hate Windows, I hate Microsoft. If Windows were owned by a not-for-profit, or a consortium or some other democratically run organization of interested groups, I don’t think I would have any need for Linux. But, as it is, Linux is absolutely necessary. I hope some day that Windows is replaced by a Linux distribution that is owned and maintained by an organization that gives all stakeholders, including and especially end users, a tangible voice in its management.
The solution requires a new ideological paradigm, but transitioning into the right paradigm would be extremely difficult and it would likely take a very long time.
I think the US is already in the process of transitioning to a new paradigm, away from neoliberalism, which was the dominant paradigm over the past half century or so, to something else. However, I’m not sure we are transitioning into the “right” paradigm. I think the paradigm we are transitioning into is more protectionist than neoliberalism. We are moving away from globalization and towards something more like the cold war era, where the world was divided along ideological lines into a “first world” and a “second world.” I expect the new paradigm we are shifting into to be more antagonistic toward “unfriendly” nations. I wouldn’t be surprised if this were to lead to some kind of major conflict.
There’s no bind here. Investors have no loyalty to any nation, they take their capital wherever they feel they can get the best return. They care only about themselves and their own financial interests. US investors do not care if US power is undermined. The US could collapse tomorrow and they would abandon the nation like rats fleeing a sinking ship.
A distinction without a difference. Whether explicitly bourgeois parties or not, the Nazis and SPD were both vehemently opposed to the ideology of the KPD, and those two parties received a majority of the votes in the 1932 election.
And do, still. By the millions, in every election. Or, at least, if not explicitly bourgeois parties, parties that are based on some form is liberal ideology, not necessarily in opposition to bourgeois interests, and that often are aggressively opposed to Marxism-Leninism.