> be me
> be patriotic socialist
> use sinophobia and american exceptionalism to fuel support for my “patriotic socialist” org
> write manifesto called “my struggle”
> org starts receiving a lot of money mysteriously
> membership skyrockets
> start going by “PatSocs”
> get cool uniforms and armbands
> start patrolling neighborhoods
> a lot of those neighborhoods are minority communities
> idpol is an op though so we don’t care
> gain support in the suburbs
> now backed by the country’s most powerful unions
> it’s the police union and prison guard union, but whatever, they’re workers too, right?
> now being called “Patzis” for short
> mfw the actual people’s revolution comes and we’re the baddies
> smdh as I’m lined up against the wall for being a fucking nazi
:hst-gun: :pit:
Marxism cannot be reconciled with nationalism, be it even of the “most just”, “purest”, most refined and civilised brand. In place of all forms of nationalism Marxism advances internationalism, the amalgamation of all nations in the higher unity, a unity that is growing before our eyes with every mile of railway line that is built, with every international trust, and every workers’ association that is formed (an association that is international in its economic activities as well as in its ideas and aims).
Some bald boy
Nah this ain't it chief. Marxism and nationalism can coexist, as Stalin writes here and Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and the rest of the third world liberation movements have demonstrated. You can be both nationalistic and build up your own nation while supporting the workers of the world. Where nationalism cannot work with Marxism is in settler colonialist states like the United States, whose entire national identity is built upon genocide and death.
This is a great distinction, thanks for making it. My critique of nationalism is very much focused on when it manifests in the imperial core, which has a “national identity” entirely dependent on imperial conquest and exploitation.
:stalin-heart: Yeah I find it's very easy to go down the track of "all nationalism=bad" as a Western leftist, since it's very obvious that any nationalism in the Global North is very very bad and often leads to genocide. There have been and continue to be examples of countries outside of this core that have built up a "nation" and socialism together, wedded nationalism to socialism in an internationally oriented manner, and have succeeded. China is the perfect example that comes to mind, the only caveat being that the era of China supporting revolution outside of China seems to have come to an end after the normalization of relations with the United States since the 70's. They won't hurt any revolutionary movement, and are more than willing to work with you when you succeed, but don't want to rock the boat and risk being seen as a bad actor on the international stage. This is the bad part of nationalism, but as the Great Satan falls further into obscurity and collapse I have a feeling this is going to change :xi-shining:
It’s a tactical concession to attract national bourgeoisie (or peasants :vivian-shrug: ), nothing more
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.
I don't think Mao would agree with you here. It's definitely more nuanced than you're implying.
Is it though.jpg
Like it’s an obvious shortcut in a war of liberation, sure, but say there is no war?
There's never been an actually existing socialist state without a long and drawn out war of national liberation, whether that be a civil war or otherwise, so that hypothetical doesn't interest me too much.
The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word
Some beardy boy in small unknown manifesto
Wow, I wonder why there’s so much resistance to the concept of combining nationalism and socialism? It’s not like this idea has been tried before.
ib4 “nazis weren’t socialist”: yes, of course. They adapted a lot of their language and imagery in the beginning from “social patriotism”. Blind nationalism is toxic, especially blind nationalism for a country literally founded on human slavery.
You don't know how many boomers I've argued with that wholly believe the nazis were socialists.
They just cannot understand how the fascists co-opted socialism for their own gain. They think that because it's in the name, national socialism it has to be socialist. :wall-talk:
I just hit em with "Wait you say a Democratic society is best? Like the North Koreans?"
Obvs DPRK good, but to them DPRK Evil
I think people on both sides of the Patriotic Socialism debate are being overly dogmatic, but goddamn have the PatSocs gone out of their way to prove that it just attracts reactionaries.
There is the correct understanding that we should meet our fellow citizens where they are at, rather than where we would like them to be. But that hardly entails stooping to jingoism.
the PatSocs gone out of their way to prove that it just attracts reactionaries
u kno ef yur ideaolologee keps atraktin reaktshunaris tht mite b a sine ur ideuhs r badd
write manifesto called “my struggle”
holy shit.
it’s the police union and prison guard union, but whatever, they’re workers too, right?
:agony-shivering:
Also, I'm proud of this site for not having any PatSoc nerds malding in the comments.
