Left Nationalism?

[Iowa656]

When discussing Nationalism earlier today (with Billy Bragg of all people) an argument was put forward that this "left nationalism" is a good thing whereas "right nationalism" is not. The difference being that "left nationalism" is accepting to those different, ie immigrants, whereas "right nationalism" is not accepting. A comparison was made between the Scottish National Party (a center left, pro-independence party) and the British National Party (a fascist party). It was put forward that the SNP with their center left ideology was a good thing for Scotland, bringing social justice to the people and removing English influence in Scotland. I argued that Nationalism is unrelated to this left/right description and in whatever case brings about division among people. However the counter argument was that with a "center left" and immigrant accepting Nationalist party would advance the country in social terms. There was also the suggest that being proud of one's country, being patriotic, can have a positive impact on society as a whole.

I wanted to hear Revlefts opinion on this matter.

Does Nationalism have a friendly face?

Is it possible to be Patriotic whilst being accepting to others?

Is left Nationalism a contradictory term?

Clearly there is a difference between the SNP and BNP, but can they be compared? And if not how do they differ? Why do they differ?

Fundamentally I still hold the belief that Patriotism/nationalism is the belief that "Your country is great because you were born it in".

Further that whatever economic policy you may have a nationalist government is damaging to the worldwide working class as well as global relations.

"Unifying is greater than dividing". True?

[StalinFanboy]

Does Nationalism have a friendly face? No. Not for revolutionaries. There's that old saying "Fight for your class, not your country."

Is it possible to be Patriotic whilst being accepting to others? I'm sure it is. But see above. We are members of the international working class.

Is left Nationalism a contradictory term? I would say so. Although I'm not a leftist.

Clearly there is a difference between the SNP and BNP, but can they be compared? And if not how do they differ? Why do they differ? They're both bourgeois political parties. They do not, and will never, have the interests of the working class at heart.

Fundamentally I still hold the belief that Patriotism/nationalism is the belief that "Your country is great because you were born it in". Essentially it is. I don't see it as anything different from racism, or sexism.

Further that whatever economic policy you may have a nationalist government is damaging to the worldwide working class as well as global relations. Yes. I'm also going to argue that any government is damaging to the working class.

"Unifying is greater than dividing". True? Across nationalities, race, gender, sexual orientation? Yes.

[Kamerat]

There is no souch thing as "Left Nationalism".
When one create borders and divide poeple there will be diffrences, unequal destribution of resources where some will gorge and others starve. Nationalism creates racism and turns the focus from class struggle to struggle between nations.

[Pogue]

Does Nationalism have a friendly face? No. Not for revolutionaries. There's that old saying "Fight for your class, not your country."

Is it possible to be Patriotic whilst being accepting to others? I'm sure it is. But see above. We are members of the international working class.

Is left Nationalism a contradictory term? I would say so. Although I'm not a leftist.

Clearly there is a difference between the SNP and BNP, but can they be compared? And if not how do they differ? Why do they differ? They're both bourgeois political parties. They do not, and will never, have the interests of the working class at heart.

Fundamentally I still hold the belief that Patriotism/nationalism is the belief that "Your country is great because you were born it in". Essentially it is. I don't see it as anything different from racism, or sexism.

Further that whatever economic policy you may have a nationalist government is damaging to the worldwide working class as well as global relations. Yes. I'm also going to argue that any government is damaging to the working class.

"Unifying is greater than dividing". True? Across nationalities, race, gender, sexual orientation? Yes.

If you're not a leftist why do you have both the anarchist and communist symbols in your avatar and why do you post on a revolutionary leftist forum?

[Atlanta]

Left Nationalism as in the sense of an African nation trying to fight for economic independance from imperialism of literal independance from Europe?

[Leo]

If you're not a leftist why do you have both the anarchist and communist symbols in your avatar and why do you post on a revolutionary leftist forum?I think the point he is making is that he is not a leftist but an anarchist or a communist, making a distinction between himself and the non-revolutionary leftists, those he does not consider to be actual anarchists or communists. It is commonly used terminologically among bordigists (and their modernist neo-bordigist varities), left communists, councilists, situationists and internationalist, revolutionary and class struggle anarchists calling the social democrats, stalinists, trotskyists and platformist or lifestylist anarchists "leftists", while the other sort of camp calling the former "ultra-lefts" or something as such (although in their case they call each other "ultra-lefts" occasionally as well and none of the currents listed in the former category calls themselves "ultra-lefts", so the term is basically a meaningless slur).

[StalinFanboy]

I think the point he is making is that he is not a leftist but an anarchist or a communist, making a distinction between himself and the non-revolutionary leftists, those he does not consider to be actual anarchists or communists. It is commonly used terminologically among bordigists (and their modernist neo-bordigist varities), left communists, councilists, situationists and internationalist, revolutionary and class struggle anarchists calling the social democrats, stalinists, trotskyists and platformist or lifestylist anarchists "leftists", while the other sort of camp calling the former "ultra-lefts" or something as such (although in their case they call each other "ultra-lefts" occasionally as well and none of the currents listed in the former category calls themselves "ultra-lefts", so the term is basically a meaningless slur).
I call myself a post-left insurrectionary anarchist. This is because I feel that anarchism isn't just about politics, but about life. And I don't mean in the lifestylist sense of being vegan and riding your bike everywhere and calling it anarchism. I mean that I have a direct stake in revolution to better my life, and the lives of my family and comrades, and my class. I think anarchists, and anti-state communists/marxists, should distance themselves from the left, as the left has traditionally been statist.

Also, I hate activist culture. "Rar we must educate those blasted workers! Only then will they see that we are right!"

EDIT: I like your definition of "ultra-left."

[StalinFanboy]

If you're not a leftist why do you have both the anarchist and communist symbols in your avatar and why do you post on a revolutionary leftist forum?
I post here because I want a better understanding of traditional anarchist theory.

[Tzonteyotl]

I'm guessing this "left nationalism" is another name for "proletarian nationalism?" I'm still a little iffy on this subject. I mean, if you look at the Cuban example, they've got a history of internationalism, yet they've also got their patriotism, if you will. So, if one is internationalist, does that necessitate non-patriotism in relation to one's own country? I personally am not patriotic and see it as something odd, to say the least. But if others are united with us in the international working class movement, does it really matter if they hold on to their flags and wave them proudly?

[Wanted Man]

I'm wary of people who suggest that we can (re)claim nationalism or patriotism for the left, especially in countries that are still capitalist and imperialist. In the Falklands War thread, Devrim made an interesting post about the stance of The Militant at the time, who said:


The labour movement should be mobilised to force a general election to open the way for the return of a Labour government to implement socialist policies at home and abroad. Victory of a socialist government in Britain would immediately transform the situation in relation to the Falklands. The junta would no longer be able to claim to be fighting British imperialism ...A Labour government could not just abandon the Falklanders and let Galtieri get on with it. But it would continue the war on socialist lines(maybe the Dutch CWI section should support our "socialist" occupation of Uruzgan against the "fascist" taliban, we also have a Labour party in power after all :rolleyes:)

I think it was also a CWI section which refused to support open borders, because of "the very real fears of the white working class" of immigration. I think both of these statements are typical of where "left nationalism" leads. In the end, it just uses class struggle-like sloganeering which directly detracts from class struggle, supporting division among national lines and imperialism in practice.

Another classic one is when "leftists" here say that we need to put a stop to "creeping islamisation" in defence of "western civilisation" (not explicitly, but implicitly). It's basically the world upside down, because it paints muslim immigrant workers as reactionary and imperialist colonisers. And of course, it's basically parrotting the far right. I remember arguing with some "anarchist" guy who said that we need to insult and discriminate against muslims to pressure them into becoming rational-thinking atheists, because nothing less is good enough for revolutionaries. It would be no problem if this divides the working class, because this guy claimed that a divided working class is in our interests, while the bourgeoisie wants us to be united. :confused:

So all things considered, I don't support nationalism for the left in imperialist countries. Leftists who take this view become so proud of their country that they forget that it is imperialist, and support the national interests instead of international solidarity. It seems to inevitably lead to reformism.

[Bilan]

I call myself a post-left insurrectionary anarchist. This is because I feel that anarchism isn't just about politics, but about life. And I don't mean in the lifestylist sense of being vegan and riding your bike everywhere and calling it anarchism. I mean that I have a direct stake in revolution to better my life, and the lives of my family and comrades, and my class. I think anarchists, and anti-state communists/marxists, should distance themselves from the left, as the left has traditionally been statist.

Also, I hate activist culture. "Rar we must educate those blasted workers! Only then will they see that we are right!"

EDIT: I like your definition of "ultra-left."

That's pretty meaningless. Politics is about life. Left, right, centre, or whatever - it is all about life itself.

[Devrim]

I'm wary of people who suggest that we can (re)claim nationalism or patriotism for the left, especially in countries that are still capitalist and imperialist. In the Falklands War thread, Devrim made an interesting post about the stance of The Militant at the time, who said:

I think it was also a CWI section which refused to support open borders, because of "the very real fears of the white working class" of immigration. I think both of these statements are typical of where "left nationalism" leads. In the end, it just uses class struggle-like sloganeering which directly detracts from class struggle, supporting division among national lines and imperialism in practice.

I don't think this is what 'left nationalism' is generally used to mean. I think the positions of the CWI/Militant on these issues aren't really that left. It is just plain straight nationalism alongside a pandering the the most chauvanistic elements within the working class.

'Left nationalism' is usually used with reference to 'oppressed nations'. It covers a variety of currents from the PLO, IRSP even going as far to the right as the 'Workers' Party' in Turkey, an ex-Maoist outfit that decided that Turkey was also an oppressed nation and started cooperating with fascists.

To put it simply it is the nationalism of 'oppressed nations' and national liberation struggles, and in the our view anti-working class.


I'm guessing this "left nationalism" is another name for "proletarian nationalism?"

The idea of 'proletarian nations' comes from the far right. It was used by Mussolini and was part of the ideology of Italian fascism.


We must start by recognizing the fact that there are proletarian nations as well as proletarian classes; that is to say, there are nations whose living conditions are subject...to the way of life of other nations, just as classes are. Once this is realized, nationalism must insist firmly on this truth: Italy is, materially and morally, a proletarian nation.

Devrim

[Tzonteyotl]

The idea of 'proletarian nations' comes from the far right. It was used by Mussolini and was part of the ideology of Italian fascism.
Devrim True as that may be, it doesn't really answer the question. The other part of your post did touch on it somewhat, but still fell short I think. I mean, I've seen people, leftists, use the term proletarian nationalism and perhaps they didn't know of the term's origins, but either way is it a problem for someone who is internationalist, who is involved in the global workers' movement to happily wave a flag they see as theirs? Again I use the Cuban example. They have they're pride, if you will, as Cubans. But they also have been heavily involved on the global stage with liberation movements, literacy programs, medical assistance, etc. That being the case, what difference does it make, realistically, that they're proud to be Cubans? Or as another example, that the Zapatistas are proud to be Mexicans and so on?

[Devrim]

I mean, I've seen people, leftists, use the term proletarian nationalism and perhaps they didn't know of the term's origins, but either way is it a problem for someone who is internationalist, who is involved in the global workers' movement to happily wave a flag they see as theirs? Again I use the Cuban example. They have they're pride, if you will, as Cubans. But they also have been heavily involved on the global stage with liberation movements, literacy programs, medical assistance, etc.

Well yes, but then I don't think that there is anything at all socialist about Cuba, I don't think they were internationalists, and I think that 'liberation' movements are more often than not about mobilising workers to fight on behalf of different imperial powers.

Devrim

[brigadista]

English nationalism is dangerous because historically it was based upon its imperialist domination in the world. Any historical achievements,although always based upon the exploitaion of the british working class, are also based upon the exploitation of the working class controlled by Brit imperialists in other parts of tthe world.eg the industial revolution and its funding sources.

[FreeFocus]

I do not have an issue with nationalism of the oppressed for being such. It may have certain characteristics that cause me to criticize them, however (e.g., emphasis on reactionary religion, traditional forms of hierarchy, etc). Only the nationalism of the oppressed can be progressive, and only specific forms of it.

Nationalism and patriotism from those in imperialist countries is never acceptable.

[black magick hustla]

I do not have an issue with nationalism of the oppressed for being such. It may have certain characteristics that cause me to criticize them, however (e.g., emphasis on reactionary religion, traditional forms of hierarchy, etc). Only the nationalism of the oppressed can be progressive, and only specific forms of it.

Nationalism and patriotism from those in imperialist countries is never acceptable.

you should drop the anarchist tag. this is pure chauvinism.

[FreeFocus]

you should drop the anarchist tag. this is pure chauvinism.

Explain.

[BIG BROTHER]

Here are my 2 cents on this issue.



I wanted to hear Revlefts opinion on this matter.

Does Nationalism have a friendly face?

I wouldn't say friendly, but remember that Nationalism helped the bourgeoisie in replacing feudalism with capitalism which is more progressive. So in that sense its positive.

Also the Nationalism of an oppressed nation against an Imperialism is Revolutionary.


Is it possible to be Patriotic whilst being accepting to others?

Well that depends what you mean by patriotic. I know a lot of liberals who say that being in favor of peace is patriotic. Or others who say America is a nation of immigrants and they are being patriots by accepting immigrants, etc.


Is left Nationalism a contradictory term?

Well, that depends on what exactly you mean by nationalism. If you mean NAZI nationalism of course not.

In the case of an oppresed nation I could say there could be some sort of left Nationalism. Because it could promote lets say socialism as a way of securing sovereingty over Imperialism.


Clearly there is a difference between the SNP and BNP, but can they be compared? And if not how do they differ? Why do they differ?

I don't know enough about both parties to give you a clear answer.


Fundamentally I still hold the belief that Patriotism/nationalism is the belief that "Your country is great because you were born it in". Yea you can say that, but like i said before there are other people for whom patriotism means something else.


Further that whatever economic policy you may have a nationalist government is damaging to the worldwide working class as well as global relations. In an imperialist, or oppressor nation of course you are right, but in an oppressed nation Nationalism can lead to break with capitalism all together in order to achieve national sovereignty


"Unifying is greater than dividing". True?

Yes when its possible of course it is.

[BIG BROTHER]

I think anarchists, and anti-state communists/marxists, should distance themselves from the left, as the left has traditionally been statist.


I hate to be anal about this, but technically all Communists and Marxists are anti-state in the sense that we also seek to abolish it. We just differ in the way of doing that.

[StalinFanboy]

I hate to be anal about this, but technically all Communists and Marxists are anti-state in the sense that we also seek to abolish it. We just differ in the way of doing that.
I was referring to tactics on how to reach a stateless society :)

[Tzonteyotl]

Well yes, but then I don't think that there is anything at all socialist about Cuba, I don't think they were internationalists, and I think that 'liberation' movements are more often than not about mobilising workers to fight on behalf of different imperial powers.

Devrim

I don't consider Cuba socialist either, but seeing these programs they have to assist fellow oppressed peoples around the globe, the free medical schooling for international students (a friend of mine is there now to become a doctor) and so on, I wonder why you wouldn't say they're internationalist?

[Iowa656]

Thank you for all your contributions.

There does appear to have been some confusion though.

What I meant by "left nationalism" is political parties with a center-left polices (one of social democracy, mixed economy) and also a nationalist agenda. I didn't specifically mean it as nationalism of oppressed countries, although I can see how they may be related.

Sorry for any misunderstandings.

The SNP I mentioned are a "left Nationalist" political party in Scotland fighting for independence from the UK. I wouldn't by any means describe Scotland as an oppressed nation. So can their nationalism be justified?

I do in fact support nationalism in oppressed countries as a way of fighting against the oppressors, as long as their is not any of this "Our country is great yours is not".

Taking Cuba as an example, where the citizens appear to be proud of their history fighting the oppressors, they have shown that internationalism and patriotism are not mutually exclusive.

The point being that Cuba's history is one of oppression and not oppressing (ie they were the victims of oppression) could be something to justify patriotism. I would find it difficult to be proud of my history (myself being a British citizen) as the history of Britian is one of imperialism, oppression and enslavement.

[BIG BROTHER]

Thank you for all your contributions.

There does appear to have been some confusion though.

What I meant by "left nationalism" is political parties with a center-left polices (one of social democracy, mixed economy) and also a nationalist agenda. I didn't specifically mean it as nationalism of oppressed countries, although I can see how they may be related.

Sorry for any misunderstandings.

The SNP I mentioned are a "left Nationalist" political party in Scotland fighting for independence from the UK. I wouldn't by any means describe Scotland as an oppressed nation. So can their nationalism be justified?



Oh well, in that case, then yea fuck nationalism, even left nationalism.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Does Nationalism have a friendly face?

Is it possible to be Patriotic whilst being accepting to others?
Yes, if you are proud of your nation and still respect others, like the USSR Russians did, fighting for the Motherland while remaining tolerant.

Is left Nationalism a contradictory term?
No.

Clearly there is a difference between the SNP and BNP, but can they be compared? And if not how do they differ? Why do they differ?
All servants of the ruling class.

Fundamentally I still hold the belief that Patriotism/nationalism is the belief that "Your country is great because you were born it in".
That's right, and that's why I'm not a patriot: I wouldn't know why the hell I would be "proud" of Belgium.

Further that whatever economic policy you may have a nationalist government is damaging to the worldwide working class as well as global relations.
A truly "nationalist" government is always anti-proletarian, as we're all People of the earth after all.

"Unifying is greater than dividing". True?
Absolutely.

[ibn Bruce]

It is an interesting question to ask... does being a supporter of a 'no state solution' in Falastin mean that one denies the identity of Palestinians themselves?

Bangladesh fought for its independence from Pakistan, this manifested itself as a nationalist movement, and yet was reflective of an oppressive situation. People in Bangladesh drew upon Nationalism as a rallying call against those who wished to 'integrate' them into a greater Pakistan, erasing their culture and language.

Is it possible to believe in safe-guarding 'culture' in terms of language and practices, while simultaneously reject rhetoric based upon such things when they are used by fascist groups? The obvious distinction is the oppressive situation, Nationalism is okay when it is felt by the oppressed, but not okay when it is the tool of the oppressor.

Do such things even exist within themselves? Or are they entirely situational?

[Trystan]

Nationalism divides. As soon as a group of people split and say this is our land and that's yours, they're just asking for trouble. I don't really get why some leftists support things the succession of the Basque Country, for example. All it would do is divide. Not that I'm opposed to more autonomy for local areas - I think that would be a step forward, but to hell with nationalism. It's backward as fuck.

[bailey_187]

I call myself a post-left insurrectionary anarchist

In other words: a pretentious prick (no offense)

[StalinFanboy]

In other words: a pretentious prick (no offense)
I don't understand how you can call me a pretentious prick, and then say "Oh, lol, I didn't mean any offense by that."

Idiot.

[Black Dagger]

I hate to be anal about this, but technically all Communists and Marxists are anti-state in the sense that we also seek to abolish it. We just differ in the way of doing that.

I love being anal, most marxists are not 'anti-state' because they advocate a seizure of state power in order to crush the bourgeoisie (termed a 'workers state' or 'DoP'). Supporting the use of a 'state' means they cannot be 'anti-state' - opposing a state - like the bourgeois state is not sufficient. 'Anti-statism' as a principle of anarchist communism implies no exception for so-called 'workers states'.

It's a matter of definition, you can't be a marxist-leninist and be 'anti-state' - as anarchists are not critical only of bourgeois states - fundamentally anarchism anti-statism is a criticism of hierarchy and authority; So not 'the state' but all 'states' - all hierarchy, all authority.

[Black Dagger]

I don't understand how you can call me a pretentious prick, and then say "Oh, lol, I didn't mean any offense by that."

Idiot.

Indeed.

Bailey, please consider this a verbal warning for flaming.

[Qayin]

I think left nationalism is an oxymoron or a bourgeosie front personally

nationalism is such an outdated perspective of politics.

Hey our country is better then yours lets blow the fuck out of eachother

[Tzonteyotl]

I love being anal, most marxists are not 'anti-state' because they advocate a seizure of state power in order to crush the bourgeoisie (termed a 'workers state' or 'DoP'). Supporting the use of a 'state' means they cannot be 'anti-state' - opposing a state - like the bourgeois state is not sufficient. 'Anti-statism' as a principle of anarchist communism implies no exception for so-called 'workers states'.

It's a matter of definition, you can't be a marxist-leninist and be 'anti-state' - as anarchists are not critical only of bourgeois states - fundamentally anarchism anti-statism is a criticism of hierarchy and authority; So not 'the state' but all 'states' - all hierarchy, all authority.

But, to be technical, isn't that a tactical difference as was said by Big Brother? Not that I'm a marxist-leninist, but their end goal is abolition of the state, is it not?

[StalinFanboy]

But, to be technical, isn't that a tactical difference as was said by Big Brother? Not that I'm a marxist-leninist, but their end goal is abolition of the state, is it not?
The term 'anti-state' refers to tactics. You're not anti-state if you think the state can be used to benefit the working class. Even if your goal is the eventual abolition of said state.

[Tzonteyotl]

The term 'anti-state' refers to tactics. You're not anti-state if you think the state can be used to benefit the working class. Even if your goal is the eventual abolition of said state.

But it's still a tactical disagreement which, despite the apparent misuse of the term "anti-state," is what was at the essence of what was said, i.e. that anarchists and other communists disagree on how to reach statelessness, but that it is a common end goal.

[StalinFanboy]

But it's still a tactical disagreement which, despite the apparent misuse of the term "anti-state," is what was at the essence of what was said, i.e. that anarchists and other communists disagree on how to reach statelessness, but that it is a common end goal.
It's not misused at all. We are anti-state because we don't see the state as anything positive. It is not a viable option in the liberation of the working class.

[Andropov]

Connolly was a great believer in the power of Nationalism.
How it could be harnessed by the working class for progressive movements that are fighting imperialism.
Even in the USSR in WW2 the soviets utilised Nationalism to combat the NAZI's.

[Charles Xavier]

Connolly was a great believer in the power of Nationalism.
How it could be harnessed by the working class for progressive movements that are fighting imperialism.
Even in the USSR in WW2 the soviets utilised Nationalism to combat the NAZI's.


Patriotism not nationalism.

[Andropov]

Patriotism not nationalism.

Difference?

[Charles Xavier]

Difference?


Patriotism is love and devotion to your country.

Nationalism is national loyalty that is hostile to the interests of any other nation

[StalinFanboy]

Patriotism is love and devotion to your country.

Nationalism is national loyalty that is hostile to the interests of any other nation
And both are stupid. :)

[ibn Bruce]

Patriotism is love and devotion to your country.

Nationalism is national loyalty that is hostile to the interests of any other nation

Considering the oppositional nature of international politics, it becomes hard to see the difference in application.

[Andropov]

Patriotism is love and devotion to your country.

Nationalism is national loyalty that is hostile to the interests of any other nation

Seems that definition is loosly based on your own personal interpretation.

[Charles Xavier]

Seems that definition is loosly based on your own personal interpretation.
Its called a dictionary.

I'm a patriot I love the people of my country, I hope the best for every one of my fellow workers. But I am an internationalist as well.

[black magick hustla]

you cannot be a patriot and an internationalist. they are diametrically opposite. we wish to destroy all nation states and create a world socialist state.

[bailey_187]

"Patriotism is usually stronger than class hatred, and always stronger than internationalism" - George Orwell

As hard as that may be for us "internationalists" to swallow, its the truth and if you disagree you are lying to yourself

The constant scoffing at the "reactionary working class nationalists" by anarchists and communists only reduces your already pathetic influence amongst the working class in west today


There is nothing wrong with patriotism so long as it does not spill into hatred for others

[ibn Bruce]

Its called a dictionary.

Haha :D

[Andropov]

Its called a dictionary.

I'm a patriot I love the people of my country, I hope the best for every one of my fellow workers. But I am an internationalist as well.

Funny......

Link to which dictionary you got those definitions from?

[Charles Xavier]

Funny......

Link to which dictionary you got those definitions from?

www.dictionary.com

[NecroCommie]

A picture tells it better than a thousand words.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19824&d=1167771926

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/9/96/Warsaw_Pact_Poster.jpg/300px-Warsaw_Pact_Poster.jpg

So it CAN be good, but I still am a bit suspicious.

[Jazzratt]

"Patriotism is usually stronger than class hatred, and always stronger than internationalism" - George Orwell

This strikes me as a reason one cannot be a patriot and a communist - if your feelings of patriotism always trump class solidarity then you've entered the wrong type of politics. Besides which quoting Orwell as the basis for your argument is bloody stupid; his opionins are not the first and last word in human interaction.


As hard as that may be for us "internationalists" to swallow, its the truth and if you disagree you are lying to yourself

This isn't even an argument. "You're wrong and if you say otherwise you're a liar"...fucking pathetic.


The constant scoffing at the "reactionary working class nationalists" by anarchists and communists only reduces your already pathetic influence amongst the working class in west today

Parochialism is a cancer of the left; a set of ideas which serve only to divide the working class and to serve the interests of a parasitic ruling class. Buying into ruling class ideology like patriotism wholesale in order to increase 'influence' is laughable opportunism.


There is nothing wrong with patriotism so long as it does not spill into hatred for others

Patriotism is idiotic bourgeois bollocks the logical conclusion of which is minutemen, "british jobs for british workers", Fitna and so forth.

[Bitter Ashes]

Left nationalism? Hmmm.
You could be called the Nationalist Socialist Worker's Party! Hang on... maybe that's not such a good idea! :laugh:
Humour aside, I'm not sure the two are really compitable, seeing as though the aim is going international.

[bailey_187]

This strikes me as a reason one cannot be a patriot and a communist - if your feelings of patriotism always trump class solidarity then you've entered the wrong type of politics. Besides which quoting Orwell as the basis for your argument is bloody stupid; his opionins are not the first and last word in human interaction.



This isn't even an argument. "You're wrong and if you say otherwise you're a liar"...fucking pathetic.



Parochialism is a cancer of the left; a set of ideas which serve only to divide the working class and to serve the interests of a parasitic ruling class. Buying into ruling class ideology like patriotism wholesale in order to increase 'influence' is laughable opportunism.



Patriotism is idiotic bourgeois bollocks the logical conclusion of which is minutemen, "british jobs for british workers", Fitna and so forth.

"Parochialism" - is this one of those obscure words used by sociologists?

I cant even be bothered to respond to your predictable rhetoric, sorry.

In the general patriotism of the country, the far left form a sort of island of dissent thought.

Patriotism and international class solidarity are not mutually exclusive

[Charles Xavier]

Considering the oppositional nature of international politics, it becomes hard to see the difference in application.


Its quite different, A patriot would defend his homeland. A nationalist would invade someone else's homeland.

[redarmyfaction38]

I'm wary of people who suggest that we can (re)claim nationalism or patriotism for the left, especially in countries that are still capitalist and imperialist. In the Falklands War thread, Devrim made an interesting post about the stance of The Militant at the time, who said:

(maybe the Dutch CWI section should support our "socialist" occupation of Uruzgan against the "fascist" taliban, we also have a Labour party in power after all :rolleyes:)

I think it was also a CWI section which refused to support open borders, because of "the very real fears of the white working class" of immigration. I think both of these statements are typical of where "left nationalism" leads. In the end, it just uses class struggle-like sloganeering which directly detracts from class struggle, supporting division among national lines and imperialism in practice.

Another classic one is when "leftists" here say that we need to put a stop to "creeping islamisation" in defence of "western civilisation" (not explicitly, but implicitly). It's basically the world upside down, because it paints muslim immigrant workers as reactionary and imperialist colonisers. And of course, it's basically parrotting the far right. I remember arguing with some "anarchist" guy who said that we need to insult and discriminate against muslims to pressure them into becoming rational-thinking atheists, because nothing less is good enough for revolutionaries. It would be no problem if this divides the working class, because this guy claimed that a divided working class is in our interests, while the bourgeoisie wants us to be united. :confused:

So all things considered, I don't support nationalism for the left in imperialist countries. Leftists who take this view become so proud of their country that they forget that it is imperialist, and support the national interests instead of international solidarity. It seems to inevitably lead to reformism.
mmm.
support for workers fighting the imperialist ambitions of a country like argentina is totally different to supporting the "nationalism" of thatcher or the bnp.
fighting "creeping islamification" on a class basis is not support for nationalism, it is opposition to religious "fundamentalism", a "religious fundamentalism" that is being used to divide our class upon religious lines where "racial bigotry" has failed.
as a "british worker", i am immensely proud of the part the "british working class" has played in challenging capitalism, i am immensely proud of our working class history in victory and defeat.
does that make me a "nationalist"?

[black magick hustla]

"Parochialism" - is this one of those obscure words used by sociologists?

I cant even be bothered to respond to your predictable rhetoric, sorry.

In the general patriotism of the country, the far left form a sort of island of dissent thought.

Patriotism and international class solidarity are not mutually exclusive

of course they are mutually exclusive. you can cover your ears and shout nya nya nya and try to get the whole cake for yourself, but you wont, because patriotism and internationalism are mutually exclusive.

"defense of homeland" is what the mexican bosses would use when they try to draft me to fight their own wars.

[black magick hustla]

mmm.
support for workers fighting the imperialist ambitions of a country like argentina is totally different to supporting the "nationalism" of thatcher or the bnp.
fighting "creeping islamification" on a class basis is not support for nationalism, it is opposition to religious "fundamentalism", a "religious fundamentalism" that is being used to divide our class upon religious lines where "racial bigotry" has failed.
as a "british worker", i am immensely proud of the part the "british working class" has played in challenging capitalism, i am immensely proud of our working class history in victory and defeat.
does that make me a "nationalist"?

yes, and also makes you a chauvinist and not a communist.

[black magick hustla]

fuck the latin american "socialist" slogan of "patria or muerte" or "motherland or death". its such a disturbing slogan and it has nothing to do with international revolution and the creation of a worldwide socialist state.

[Cumannach]

Well patria o muerte might be a slogan for the idea of destroying the control of foreign capitalists over a people's patria. That makes it anti-capitalist surely. Of course it could also be the slogan for destroying the control of foreign capitalists over the country and putting control into the hands of domestic capitalists. That would make it non-socialist. It depends who says it and in what context.

[ibn Bruce]

Fitna
?

[Andropov]

www.dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com)

Heres your dictionarys definition of Nationalism.
1.national spirit or aspirations.2.devotion and loyalty to one's own nation; patriotism.3.excessive patriotism; chauvinism.4.the desire for national advancement or independence.5.the policy or doctrine of asserting the interests of one's own nation, viewed as separate from the interests of other nations or the common interests of all nations.6.an idiom or trait peculiar to a nation.7.a movement, as in the arts, based upon the folk idioms, history, aspirations, etc., of a nation.


Heres your dictionarys definition of patriotism.

Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country; the virtues and actions of a patriot; the passion which inspires one to serve one's country.

Now both definitions seem to be some way off the definitions you provided.
Are you sure you provided me with the right link? :confused:

[Charles Xavier]

Number 5 are the correct definition of nationalism, the Marxist definitions of Nationalism.

If number 2 was the Marxist definition than all communists would be nationalists. But we are not nationalists, we are patriots, we reject the definitions of the bourgeoisie of what a patriot is. My devotion is to the welfare of my people, the advancement of the social conditions of working people in Canada, and the support of patriotic struggles worldwide for the advancement of social conditions of people. . Sometimes the struggle for independence is a patriotic struggle as well, in the case of Ireland, Palestine, colonies across the world, in Europe against Nazi oppression.

[Jazzratt]

?

A film made by an insane dutch patriot. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitna_%28film%29)

[ibn Bruce]

\\A film made by an insane dutch patriot.Haha, I thought you meant the actual meaning of the word. I get it now :D