American Leftists always transform into wannabe Stalins at Yalta whenever the topic of Israel comes up, determining the best way of how an ethnostate should have been created instead of the way it was IRL.
Really, we’re getting mad at using a generalized “we” in a joke about Germany? Is that really an important issue here?
To be clear, I don’t actually think we should’ve carved an Israel out of Germany either, I just think it would’ve been more appropriate than the actual creation of Israel and drawing a random red line on a map in Germany and writing “Israel” is amusing.
Really, we’re getting mad at using a generalized “we” in a joke about Germany? Is that really an important issue here?
Yes, I'm a party-pooper.
It annoys me because it's common and the message behind it is "it's fine if the other side is morally bad enough" as well as the underlying lack of criticism to the concept of nation states. Also, it's not funny.
Why do we need to criticize the concept of a nation state every time? If the premise is that it will happen regardless, I’m not going to waste my time on that. I would rather suggest an alternative path for the inevitable.
Moralism is cringe and a bad criteria for whether something should or should not be done.
Why do we need to criticize the concept of a nation state every time?
You say that because you have no problems with nationalism, as long as it's done by the people you like of course - so much for a stateless, classless society.
Edit: My accusatory tone in the last sentence was kind of pointless. Choosing to support nationalisms around the world because of x and y reason do not mean that you support nationalism in itself, be it from we have to work with what we have/"critical support" angles or genuine approval of nationalism.
Proletarians tending towards nationalism feel like they have a reason for it - be it because they think the world outside the borders is a threat, be it from capitalist competition hurting the local bourgeois, immigrants scary or being targeted for daring to even consider reformist politics. I see it as a bit of a pointless endeavour for communists in the west - to critical support this, critical support that. However, material aid is a different thing - libs' NGOs spread around their ideology and supporters' economic interests to all corners of the world from material aid (or promises thereof) to avalanches of propaganda. A communist organization donating to proletarian organizations in need of it (like say medical aid to Cuba) or a union blocking weapons shipment to warzones does work to build a movement, no matter how weak we are atm, without needing to compromise on one's principles or going "it's good when they do it".
What we should’ve done in the first place
"We"
American Leftists always transform into wannabe Stalins at Yalta whenever the topic of Israel comes up, determining the best way of how an ethnostate should have been created instead of the way it was IRL.
Really, we’re getting mad at using a generalized “we” in a joke about Germany? Is that really an important issue here?
To be clear, I don’t actually think we should’ve carved an Israel out of Germany either, I just think it would’ve been more appropriate than the actual creation of Israel and drawing a random red line on a map in Germany and writing “Israel” is amusing.
Yes, I'm a party-pooper.
It annoys me because it's common and the message behind it is "it's fine if the other side is morally bad enough" as well as the underlying lack of criticism to the concept of nation states. Also, it's not funny.
Why do we need to criticize the concept of a nation state every time? If the premise is that it will happen regardless, I’m not going to waste my time on that. I would rather suggest an alternative path for the inevitable.
Correct
Moralism is cringe and a bad criteria for whether something should or should not be done.
You say that because you have no problems with nationalism, as long as it's done by the people you like of course - so much for a stateless, classless society.
Edit: My accusatory tone in the last sentence was kind of pointless. Choosing to support nationalisms around the world because of x and y reason do not mean that you support nationalism in itself, be it from we have to work with what we have/"critical support" angles or genuine approval of nationalism.
Proletarians tending towards nationalism feel like they have a reason for it - be it because they think the world outside the borders is a threat, be it from capitalist competition hurting the local bourgeois, immigrants scary or being targeted for daring to even consider reformist politics. I see it as a bit of a pointless endeavour for communists in the west - to critical support this, critical support that. However, material aid is a different thing - libs' NGOs spread around their ideology and supporters' economic interests to all corners of the world from material aid (or promises thereof) to avalanches of propaganda. A communist organization donating to proletarian organizations in need of it (like say medical aid to Cuba) or a union blocking weapons shipment to warzones does work to build a movement, no matter how weak we are atm, without needing to compromise on one's principles or going "it's good when they do it".