Do workers respond better to nationalism?

[spartan]

I was wondering this after viewing the "apathy of the population" thread in OI.

People are more apathetic than ever and we leftists should be profiting from this with lots of people - pissed off with society - joining the movement to oppose it.

Instead it's the small xenophobic nationalist parties who seem to be the ones who are gaining because of all this apathy, with significant gains made by these parties in local and national elections recently (well in Europe anyway).

Why is this?

Is it because workers respond better to nationalism rather then internationalism?

If so then what does this mean for us?

I mean how do we compete against this popularity advantage that nationalism has compared with internationalism?

Is there a way of compensating for it? (for example we support the nationalism of oppressed peoples).

[BIG BROTHER]

Well I think this happens because nationalism is part of the establishment in a capitalist society. Meanwhile internationalism is a revolutionary idea, and unlike nationalism, workers won't find that type of consciousness in a capitalist nation.

Also, there's the fact that its a lot easier to say, "look its the immigrants/that country,etc fault that we are fucked up" than you know explaining Marxism to workers.

[Wake Up]

Nationalism is easier to understand than most leftist ideologies.

Our theories revolve around worker education in order for them to 'see the light' as such, but we are often hamstrung by jargon and a sense of superiority.

"We are better than then" is a much easier message to understand than "We should abolsih capitalism and set up a society of freedom and equality which will work because of human nature, oh and by the way what do you know about Dialectics?

[RadioRaheem84]

I was going to write a post about this so its good that someone else brought it up. I think that there is a healthy sense of nationalism that can mobalize workers to stand up to oppression. It worked in Vietnam. In Latin America, many of the good leaders that the US opposed during the Cold War, were merely economic nationalists that wanted to keep the resources for the people. But the US labeled them as Communists instead.

As long as the nationalism isn't xenophobic, racist or repressive then it can be a healthy method to mobalize the workers.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Nationalism is easier to understand than most leftist ideologies.

Our theories revolve around worker education in order for them to 'see the light' as such, but we are often hamstrung by jargon and a sense of superiority.

"We are better than then" is a much easier message to understand than "We should abolsih capitalism and set up a society of freedom and equality which will work because of human nature, oh and by the way what do you know about Dialectics?

this.

workers (at least in the 'first world') are brought up in a deeply rooted nationalist society. meaning the pride of your 'nation' isnt just something you can discard and reject in favor of internationalist socialism. its an intangible concept that you are "taught" when you are still very young. its almost like the "default" ideology of the nation state. Marx said "The ruling class ideology, is the most prevelant ideology among the masses", or something along those lines.




As long as the nationalism isn't xenophobic, racist or repressive then it can be a healthy method to mobalize the workers.

why? what happens when the 'nation' becomes obsolete, and there are no more 'nations'? how can nationalism be a healthy way to mobilize workers to fight for internationalism?

[JimmyJazz]

Is it because workers respond better to nationalism rather then internationalism?

In the imperialist countries, yes. It serves their material interests better than international working class solidarity does. Short-term material interests, anyway.


this.

workers (at least in the 'first world') are brought up in a deeply rooted nationalist society. meaning the pride of your 'nation' isnt just something you can discard and reject in favor of internationalist socialism. its an intangible concept that you are "taught" when you are still very young. its almost like the "default" ideology of the nation state. Marx said "The ruling class ideology, is the most prevelant ideology among the masses", or something along those lines.

I think you hugely overestimate both the actual influence of ideology and the amount of credit that Marx gives to ideology for influencing society. Marx believed ruling class ideology was a reflection of ruling class rule--not the cause of it.


The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness.

In fact, this insight was Marx's main contribution as far as I can tell. It is the foundation of his theory of working class revolution due to the increasing misery of the working class under capitalism. Their increasing physical misery would lead to increasing anti-capitalist consciousness.

However, it seems to me that the ruling classes of the Western countries have escaped these contradictions by moving their manufacturing jobs overseas, and moving us into an era where they exploit foreigners more than domestic workers. They obviously won't be able to prolong the consequence of the contradictions they create forever, but they have significantly prolonged the period before these contradictions come to a head. Also due to imperialism, I think the fall of capitalism will be truly global. The entire world will have to be more or less fully integrated into capitalism (through imperialism) before capitalism gets replaced by something else.