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".
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".