Indepedence or United?

[drain.you]

Indepedence or United?

I thought leftwing thinking led more towards countries uniting together rather than dividing but I've seen threads promoting Irish Independence, I'm confused. Someone explain please :)

(Side Note : I'm all for Uniting and for UK to adopt the Euro, etc)

[Paradox]

My opinion is that liberation movements are fine, so long as the main goal is the international destruction of capitalism. Attacking capitalism in one nation and spreading to others. Joint struggles. Movements working together to attack the system simultaneously. I haven't read much on the group, but the Revolutionary Coordinating Junta (JCR) in South America was trying to do that back in the 70s. I support the Zapatistas. I support Venezuela. A friend of mine tells me there's unrest in Belize. That, along with CAFTA, could lead to something. A little early to say really, but it would be great to see groups link up across Central and South America. Not sure if something similar is happening anywhere else, but hopefully it is. Anyway, national struggles linked together to fight global capitalism, not just fighting for "self-determination." Those are my thoughts on the matter.

[drain.you]

You speak of destroying capitalism, sorry i guess i wasn't too clear but i meant after the revolution. shouldn't countries unite? and what is the point in becoming independent only to unite later?
Though I suppose independece of Ireland from Britain would take power from the British capitalists but surely only distribute the power back to Irish capitalists.

[Paradox]

What do you mean "after the revolution"? The goal of the revolution should be the destruction of capitalism. And the destruction of capitalism and implementation of Communism can only be done on a global scale, hence international struggle and solidarity. So, nations and groups should help each other in their struggles, which take place in individual nations. The capitalists aren't going to fall all at once across the globe, but as they fall from place to place, the revolutionary groups are helping each other defeat the capitalists completely.

[Chuck]

Governments should be in direct control of the people; in this sense, it would make more sense to have smaller, more self-governing nations. However, these smaller nations would have to be able to help each other out.

Case and point: Hurricane Katrina. Say that instead of one nation, the US was fifty self-governing socialist nations under direct control of the people. The other 49 countries would have to be altrustic enough to lend Louisiana relief.

[JKP]

I dont want governments to be in control of anyone.

[bcbm]

There seems to be some confusion. Uniting under capitalist agreements such as the EU is not in anyway related to revolutionary unity. It serves the interests of neoliberalism and is more about forming trade relationships than making the world better, and also poses a threat to autonomy for the peoples affected by it. Therefore, calling for a free Ireland, or for liberty for any colonized state, is not calling for division. Quite the opposite, I think gaining independence for one people can help create more unity with others being oppressed.


Governments should be in direct control of the people

People should be in control of all the institutions that affect them, not the other way around.

[drain.you]

Yeah I see your point, BBBG.
And yeah, I agree with Paradox too.

[Chuck]

People should be in control of all the institutions that affect them, not the other way around.

Isn't that what I said? Perhaps I worded it wrong.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

The goal of a classless and stateless society obviously implies the destruction of all nationstates. In a communist society, the entire mechanism of the state would be anachronistic - it serves as a weapon of the rule of the bourgeoisie.
Insofar as liberation movements cast off imperialism, and weaken global capitalist hegemony, they are desirable - not because they create "new" states.

[RedJacobin]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 02:42 AM
You speak of destroying capitalism, sorry i guess i wasn't too clear but i meant after the revolution. shouldn't countries unite? and what is the point in becoming independent only to unite later?
Though I suppose independece of Ireland from Britain would take power from the British capitalists but surely only distribute the power back to Irish capitalists.
You can only have real unity if every country has the right to determine FOR ITSELF whether or not to join. It's not unity when one country is occupying and colonizing another country (ex: Britain in Ireland, US in Puerto Rico).

Borrowing an analogy (from Harry Haywood I think), a marriage isn't a free and equal union without the right to divorce.

Read Marx and Engels on the Irish struggle. Here's a short primer with a lot of good citations to further delve into: http://lark.phoblacht.net/marxenglenlor92.html