Nationalism & Patriotism - Acceptable or Not?

[MustCrushCapitalism]

There's national pride. When you root for your national football team, that is patriotism in a way. Things like this, and political nationalism, do you believe them to be acceptable in any way, or are they contrary to the idea of eventual abolishment of the state?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Nope,not acceptable one single bit.

Short and sweet,eh?

[Искра]

There’s difference between love for your country (in geographical sense) or love for people who live around you, who look like you, or speak like you and nationalism/patriotism.Nationalism is ideology of creating national state. It can not be separated from national state and it’s main goal is to preserve interests of state which are always interests of ruling classes (capitalists or red-beurocracy – doesn’t matter). In order to preserve interests of state, state intelligentsia developed series of national myths which always preach how your nation is great, who are the enemies, what kind of “historical injustice” your country suffered etc. Proletariat has not country, but only the whole World.

[tir1944]

Bourgeois nationalism ISN'T acceptable.
Socialist patriotism is.


Proletariat has not country, but only the whole World.
In a big part of the world the proletariat doesn't even have access to education or healthcare.Just reminding.

[Thirsty Crow]

Bourgeois nationalism ISN'T acceptable.
Socialist patriotism is.

How cute, just stick the label "socialist" and there ya go, it's all good.

The entire premise of socialist patriotism is based on the nonsense of socialism in one country.

[tir1944]

How cute, just stick the label "socialist" and there ya go, it's all good.
No,it's content,not form that matters.



The entire premise of socialist patriotism is based on the nonsense of socialism in one country.
Is that really so?

[thesadmafioso]

Bourgeois nationalism ISN'T acceptable.
Socialist patriotism is.

Can someone please fucking ban this self admitted nationalist already? Is it not enough that he constantly defends the murdering of communists on a regular basis? Do we really have to tolerate this shit as well?

There is no nationalism but bourgeois nationalism, it was the result of the dialectical development of capitalist society from that of feudal society. The nation was a concept born of the 18th century, it has no place in a socialist future. Only the most vulgar of an approach to the application of the Marxist dialectic could lead to such reactionary conclusions.

[tir1944]

Can someone please fucking ban this self admitted nationalist already?Relax.I'm definitely not a nationalist,especially not a "self admitted" one.
It's you who has problems with terminology,not me.
I despise bourgeois nationalism.



Is it not enough that he constantly defends the murdering of communists on a regular basis? Hurr durr let's ban most MLs from this forum.Let's ban everyone who "defends" murder,ignoring the fact that,by that criteria,supporters of pretty much every revolutionary would get kicked out from the site.
How typical...


Do we really have to tolerate this shit as well?What shit? If you don't want to participate in this discussion you don't have to...



The nation was a concept born of the 18th century, it has no place in a socialist future.Lenin disagreed.If you want me i can find the exact quote.
You're supposed to be a "Bolshevik-Leninist",right?



Only the most vulgar of an approach to the application of the Marxist dialectic could lead to such reactionary conclusions. It'd be interesting to hear more about this.
How about you explain in more details how you reached this important conclusion?

[Rooster]

No,it's content,not form that matters.

What does that even mean in this context? What would be the content and what would be the form and why does one matter when the other doesn't?

[Искра]

In a big part of the world the proletariat doesn't even have access to education or healthcare.Just reminding.
We know that. Still, welfare state is a capitalist project.

[eyeheartlenin]

... Proletariat has not country, but only the whole World.

I want to second the last line in the post by cde Kontrrazvedka ("counterintelligence"). On my first visit to comrades in Mexico City, we were in a bar, and one of them asked me if I was a fan of "los Patriotas," the New England Patriots. I answered, "yo soy el anti-patriota," which I thought was an appropriate response, since, of course, Mexico lost over half its territory to US expansionism in President Polk's war, which included a Marine invasion of Veracruz ("halls of Montezuma"). I think anyone from the US should oppose patriotism, since this country inflicts such disaster and suffering on other peoples, in the name of US security and self-interest.

In connection with that, there is a Metro station in Mexico City, called "General Anaya." "In 1847, after the victory of the invading U.S. Army in the Battle of Padierna ... the Mexican battalions of Independencia and Bravo were attacked [in the battle of Churubusco] ... and the Mexican army was bravely commanded by Pedro María Anaya. When General Anaya was asked by General Twiggs to surrender his ammunition after the end of the battle, he was reputed to have replied, 'If I had any ammunition, you would not be here'" (from wikipedia.org).

[DaringMehring]

Nationalism is reactionary.

The proletariat is in all countries, and capital too is transnational. The class struggle is world-wide. Nations are tools the capitalists use to divide and conquer. They create false unity with the oppressors and false enmity with the other exploited.

Marxism 101.

By the way, check out this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7nM9doQc_Q to see what we all know. That "when fascism comes to America, it will wrap itself in the flag." The symbols used at this meeting of Nazis at Madison Square Garden 1939: a giant George Washington and streaming colonial flags.

[tir1944]

We know that. Still, welfare state is a capitalist project.
It's,first of all,a product of class struggle.
Thousands died for the 8 hour workday,remember?

[Искра]

Since when Hitler and Keynes were for class struggle? Point of welfare state is that state found itself on a crossroads between reform or revolution and decided for a reform.

[tir1944]

Point of welfare state is that state found itself on a crossroads between reform or revolution and decided for a reform. The state doesn't just suddenly "find itself" in that situation,it's brought to this "crossroads" by the struggle of the working class and unions' .

[No_Leaders]

I believe nationalism and patriotism are not something any self described socialist can defend. Nationalism is extremely reactionary and puts fourth the notion that the nation-state is a legitimate entity. In reality we all know that the the state must be abolished, and with that all notions of nationalism and patriotism. We're internationalists are we not? Working class and free comrades stand side by side, not on the basis of nationality or patriotism towards the nation but based on our class. It is the ruling classes who keep spouting their nationalistic rhetoric to keep people pacified and indoctrinated to the status quo. I see no need for such reactionary sentiments in a socialist society.

[Rooster]

The state doesn't just suddenly "find itself" in that situation,it's brought to this "crossroads" by the struggle of the working class and unions' .

What point are you arguing now? That you're in favour of social democratic reformism?

[The Douche]

Patriotism is only acceptable during the world cup.


That's actually my serious answer.

[rundontwalk]

Nations are tools the capitalists use to divide and conquer.
Nations have existed for ever. That is: a group with a common language, history, etc. The Cherokees are a nation, for instance. As are the Basques, Ossetians, and whoever else. A nation =/= a state because nations exist whether capitalism does or not.

[DaringMehring]

Nations have existed for ever. That is: a group with a common language, history, etc. The Cherokees are a nation, for instance. As are the Basques, Ossetians, and whoever else. A nation =/= a state because nations exist whether capitalism does or not.

Nations existed under feudalism, and some other social relations. I never said they didn't. Although, I'd call what you call a nation, a people. For instance, in the USA, we don't have a "common language, history, etc." particularly. In my area, plenty of people speak Spanish and not English, and their history is in Central America or wherever. The nation is defined by the more or less arbitrary line drawn by history some miles to my south.

What I said was: nationalism is used by capitalists to help secure their power. I see it here all the time, when the Latinos get played against the nationalist whites and blacks, for not being "patriotic."

Therefore nationalism and patriotism, are reactionary.

[rundontwalk]

Nations existed under feudalism, and some other social relations. I never said they didn't. Although, I'd call what you call a nation, a people. For instance, in the USA, we don't have a "common language, history, etc." particularly. In my area, plenty of people speak Spanish and not English, and their history is in Central America or wherever. The nation is defined by the more or less arbitrary line drawn by history some miles to my south.

What I said was: nationalism is used by capitalists to help secure their power. I see it here all the time, when the Latinos get played against the nationalist whites and blacks, for not being "patriotic."

Therefore nationalism and patriotism, are reactionary.
Ah, okay. But I would still disagree that lines on a map have anything to do with with defining nations. You can have bi/multi-national states, like Belgium. And I think the US is a multi-national state too.

I agree that nationalism is reactionary tho.

[tir1944]

Therefore nationalism and patriotism, are reactionary.
The means of production are used to exploit workers,therefore the MoP are reactionary.

[Le Socialiste]

Nationalism/patriotism, regardless of ideology, serves little purpose but to divide the working-class along purely arbitrary lines. The concept of the nation-state is a relatively 'new' development; it was built by human interests and can therefore be deconstructed. Nationalism and patriotism aren't beneficial to the average workingman/woman - instead, it is in the best interests of the international bourgeoisie to leave the former in a state of constant division. What use would we have for it? Our goal is the dismantlement of national lines and artificial barriers, not the construction of new ones.

[The Douche]

Ah, okay. But I would still disagree that lines on a map have anything to do with with defining nations. You can have bi/multi-national states, like Belgium. And I think the US is a multi-national state too.

I agree that nationalism is reactionary tho.

The words are defined like this in my experience:

Nation- A group of people sharing a common history, language, geographic region, and appearance.
State- A group of people sharing a common geographic region, organized and represented by a government and borders.

There can also be a "Nation-State". So its like this;

The Basques are a "nation" but not a state.
The USA is a "state" but its inhabitants do not generally comprise a nation, though there are independent nations inside the state.
The Jews are a nation and Israel is a "nation-state".

[the last donut of the night]

The means of production are used to exploit workers,therefore the MoP are reactionary.

so away with the machines that made the keyboard you just used then?

[Ocean Seal]

I think that were being quite absurd here. It depends on which country you're living in.
If you're cheering on NATO bombs from a comfortable first world country, then no nationalism isn't acceptable. If you're using nationalism to throw off a bourgeois imperialist regime like in Vietnam, I don't care if you call yourself a fucking unicornist. Labels don't matter, actions do.

[Искра]

The words are defined like this in my experience:

Nation- A group of people sharing a common history, language, geographic region, and appearance.
State- A group of people sharing a common geographic region, organized and represented by a government and borders.

There can also be a "Nation-State". So its like this;

The Basques are a "nation" but not a state.
The USA is a "state" but its inhabitants do not generally comprise a nation, though there are independent nations inside the state.
The Jews are a nation and Israel is a "nation-state".
Croatian language is better to explain what nation-state is as we have two words from what you all in English put in word “nation”. We make difference between ethnical and political nation.

When we are talking about nation state it’s important to realise that in this case nation is refereed as political body which has right to “rule the state”. In Croatia political nation (to use a term created by Croatian right-liberal theoretician and “father of nation” Ante Starcevic) is called Croats in USA it’s Americans. Croatians and Americans are very different. Croatians are ethnically homogeneous while Americans are heterogeneous. Still both of them are nations because nation is, as I pointed out, political body which has right to “rule the state”. This theory is what right-liberalism brought to us during 19th centuries creation of nations. In Europe where nations were ethnically homogeneous right-liberal intelligentsia used common language, ethnical background, culture etc to form national myths and national identity. In the New World it was different because those countries were ethnically heterogeneous so these nations formed on “common consensus” regarding certain ethnical question.

So, when we are talking about nation it’s important to emphasize that nation is articificial construction constructed in 19th century in order to create nation state. Before that most of nations didn’t exist and so called “national identity” was carried out only by nobles. So, when we say that nationalism is reactionary we are right, because nationalism is ideology which was created to defend the state and to spread it to working class and peasants.

[thefinalmarch]

The means of production are used to exploit workers,therefore the MoP are reactionary.
but, unlike the means of production, nationalism can't change into the working class' hands because nationalism is a purely bourgeois construct used to divide the working class everywhere. the working class has no country.

nationalism was progressive historically, when the bourgeoisie used it to bring themselves and the other classes together to overthrow the old social order and, in the process, bring us a step closer to communism. however, such times are long gone.

[Robocommie]

I think that were being quite absurd here. It depends on which country you're living in.
If you're cheering on NATO bombs from a comfortable first world country, then no nationalism isn't acceptable. If you're using nationalism to throw off a bourgeois imperialist regime like in Vietnam, I don't care if you call yourself a fucking unicornist. Labels don't matter, actions do.

So "comrade" what exactly do you have against us Marxist Unicornists? ;)

[thefinalmarch]

State- A group of people sharing a common geographic region, organized and represented by a government and borders.
The more-or-less agreed upon "Marxist" definition of the state is generally given as an institution of organised violence which is used by the ruling class of a country to maintain the conditions of its rule.

The definition you gave, for example, doesn't even begin to address the question of why the state even exists, or in what circumstances did the state first appear (to control the slave class [which was private property of the slave-owning ruling class] thereby maintaining the conditions of the slave-owners' rule).

[khlib]

I don't think that nationalism is acceptable because it puts national interests above class interests. According to nationalist ideologies, you should care about the well-being of a bourgeois elite belonging to your own nation more than a fellow proletarian from another nation. It has been used as a tool to obscure the fundamental hierarchical differences that exist within a given national group, to create the appearance of horizontality: "hey, we all are all one nation."



So, when we are talking about nation it’s important to emphasize that nation is articificial construction constructed in 19th century in order to create nation state. Before that most of nations didn’t exist and so called “national identity” was carried out only by nobles. So, when we say that nationalism is reactionary we are right, because nationalism is ideology which was created to defend the state and to spread it to working class and peasants.

That.

[black magick hustla]

open the gates of all borders let all the brown ppl and undesirables flood the garden of eden, and use flags to wipe your dick after watching porn. that is the communist position motherfuckers, and i am speaking seriously

[Savage]

Attempting to reconcile the classes of bourgeois society through any means of mystification is obviously anti-communist.

[citizen of industry]

Seeing how we view the world in terms of class and class struggle, and not nation or race, I don't see how it is possible to be a nationalist or a patriot. So, no.

[00000000000]

Personally, have never understood the concept on patriotism and national pride. It's a lump of land that you happen to have been born in, what's there to be proud of? It's not acheivement, being born.
Also, the whole 'dying for your country' myth that is espoused by those in the armed forces. You aren't really dying for a country, more like you're dying for whatever government that happens to be in at the time in that country.
And finally, the over-paid dicks who play a game for a living do not represent me or any of my fellow 'countrymen'.

So yeah, nationalism is not my cup of tea.

[Rooster]

Could someone correct me on this if I'm wrong? Wasn't the idea of social patriotism something that was adopted by the sell out communist parties during WWI to justify not opposing the war?

[kid communist]

Nationalism is in no way shape or form acceptable.Patriotism is over-rated.Point blank,no questions asked.

[Nox]

It's rather ironic for a Communist to be a patriot/nationalist, seeing as their dream come true would be for all countries to disappear.

[tir1944]

It's rather ironic for a Communist to be a patriot/nationalist, seeing as their dream come true would be for all countries to disappear. Undialectical thinking unrelated to the current situation in the world and worldwide imperialism.

[The Douche]

open the gates of all borders let all the brown ppl and undesirables flood the garden of eden, and use flags to wipe your dick after watching porn. that is the communist position motherfuckers, and i am speaking seriously

Two words:

World fucking cup.

[Rooster]

Undialectical thinking unrelated to the current situation in the world and worldwide imperialism.

Could you explain why that is undialetical?

[tir1944]

Because it assumes that nations "should be done with" instead of withering away after a long period of socialism where certain contradictions regarding all this will be adressed.
I mean,our goal is communism where there is no nations,however that doesn't mean we should advocate for "canceling of countries" now.

[No_Leaders]

But shouldn't we want to do away with the state and the idea of a "country" No borders, no nations, no states. At least that's what i thought we were aiming for here? Maybe that's just the anarchist in me:cool:

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

"Can a Communist, who is an internationalist, at the same time be a patriot? We hold that he not only can be but also must be. The specific content of patriotism is determined by historical conditions. There is the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler, and there is our patriotism. Communists must resolutely oppose the "patriotism" of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler. The Communists of Japan and Germany are defeatists with regard to the wars being waged by their countries. To bring about the defeat of the Japanese aggressors and of Hitler by every possible means is in the interests of the Japanese and the German people, and the more complete the defeat the better.... For the wars launched by the Japanese aggressors and Hitler are harming the people at home as well as the people of the world. China's case, however, is different, because she is the victim of aggression. Chinese Communists must therefore combine patriotism with internationalism. We are at once internationalists and patriots, and our slogan is, "Fight to defend the motherland against the aggressors." For us defeatism is a crime and to strive for victory in the War of Resistance is an inescapable duty. For only by fighting in defense of the motherland can we defeat the aggressors and achieve national liberation. And only by achieving national liberation will it be possible for the proletariat and other working people to achieve their own emancipation. The victory of China and the defeat of the invading imperialists will help the people of other countries. Thus in wars of national liberation patriotism is applied internationalism."

"The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War" (October 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 196. *

[Rooster]

Because it assumes that nations "should be done with" instead of withering away after a long period of socialism

Fits perfectly with Stalinist revision. What is this special period of socialism?


where certain contradictions regarding all this will be adressed.

What contradictions and addressed how?


I mean,our goal is communism where there is no nations,however that doesn't mean we should advocate for "canceling of countries" now.

Why not? Because it doesn't fit in with your Stalinist views of having a country for socialism to be in? Countries are just legal frameworks that have formed in an arbitrary way then enforced in the public conciousness with patriotism and nationalism. Look at all of those straight lines on an African map.

[Rafiq]

There is certainly a difference between Nationalism in Patriotism. However both are crap.

[Rafiq]

The means of production are used to exploit workers,therefore the MoP are reactionary.

No offense but that's a pretty dumb argument.

Patriotism serves no real good purpose for the working masses while machines make work easier and the MOP is the means of producing all of the things we need.

[Void]

He means patriotism of the proletarian dictatorship without which nothing is possible as a revolution ?

[dodger]

Because it assumes that nations "should be done with" instead of withering away after a long period of socialism where certain contradictions regarding all this will be adressed.
I mean,our goal is communism where there is no nations,however that doesn't mean we should advocate for "canceling of countries" now.

Well I would hope not TIR 1944. Cancelling of countries sounds quite painful. Sovereignty over ones own affairs comes to mind. I certainly wish I might have some say in the matter. Long denied a say(vote) on further integration in EU. i REFUSE TO VOTE IN ALL EU ELECTIONS. a turnout of 34%, shows up no great desire to be ruled from Brussels. I share that disdain. Those that wish to sell our nation might bear in mind that they cannot expect our backing. LABOUR WERE DEMOLISHED in 2009. Each of 3 parties have reneged on promises for a referendum.

Considering workers make up in excess of 95% the countries number.....the nation. I will look to see how the Greeks vote to see how the tide is flowing. Surely they must turn their backs on Brussels and reclaim their independence and sovereignty. As must other countries of Europe writhing under this false Internationalism. The wolves are at the gate.....I have had a taste of foreign laws, privatization, attempts to plunder my occupational pension, anti trade union laws. The triumvirate of NATO..EU ....USA looks set to drag Britain into further plunder. A scramble for Africa. All countries must set out to extricate themselves from this unholy of trinities.Or be dragged into perpetual war with perpetual victims. Look to your nation. look to your class.

National struggles are also viable forms of resistance to capitalist globalisation and its exploitative terms, global capital markets and unequal terms of trade, which all compromise nations' sovereignty.
The alternative to nationalism or indeed patriotism are not acceptable to me, is my answer. I suspect I am not alone ....indeed I know I am not ...have I got my history right ? Was it not Mosley the Fascist who dreamed of a UNITED STATES of EUROPE......did that not involve "nations should be done with?"

[Bronte]

Provided they don't contradict international Communist's movements, then they may be a tool to allow for the working man to be listened to, by the masses of the body politic. National pride allows people to sympathize with the struggle against the Capitalist control of their State.