: Well, for one thing they both rely on non-existant objects, race, ethnicity, etc. there is no such thing as being English, or being Irish, nor being Black nor white, just different human beiongs, and yet great effort goes into delineating and segregating into such groups. Essentially, racism and nationalism divides the world into groups based on what people are, not what they do.Well I disagree I think nationalism can exist legitimately because it is way in which people construct a personal, individual, identity. Variants which arent based on mutuality, respect, parity of esteem are illegimate though, that's not a generalisation like your religious marxism though.
I can appreciate the humanism of this point though and yes humanistic concern should be the over riding concern but who is to say it has to be the only one?
: :I remember the Levellers having a song called "England my home" which was paatriotic and pluralist.
: Yes, Blair's nationalism is Pluralist, but that is just a means of re-inventing national identity.
Yeah, I can see the comparisons between left-wing anarachists like the levellers and blairism already.
:Nationalism was the clarion cry of teh revolutionary capitalist class, it was a means of providing legitimacy for their revolutions, and later, dividing the world up into property- national boundries are just expressions of property- carved out of Blood, just as England was carved out of the Blood of Cornish and Irish, and Yugoslavia is carved out of many different types of blood, and America itself...
National boundaries that are increasingly irrelevant to the market? Just excuse me one second RD but from reading classical liberal and American revolution era material I find that the early "capitalist" revolutionaries (I prefer liberal, they really weren't as Machavellian as the people who have inherited their mantel) where as internationalist as they where libertarian.
: : The difference is that NJ's patriotism, like my own, is a geographical definiton of home, everything down to the weather and climate probably counts in it's construction, the racism you are talking about is really a varient of right-wing internationalism. Rail against that if you want but dont confuse it with pluralist love of your homeland.
: What is your homeland? Your town? Your county? What connexion have you with any part of Northern Ireland that you don't have with the south of france. Why should you love an adminstrative unit?
I dont really know how to convince you of this, it is rather metaphysical but I think that since my environment defines a lot of me (any Marxist worth his salt would agree with a bit of sociological determinism now wouldn't he?), there's a connection there. Administrative Unit? Bit harsh dont you think?
I prefer the south of Ireland to the North though, to much rabid single identity nationalism here.
: : RD you obvioiusly have invested A LOT in constructing the right sort of sentiments to fit with your quasi-religious philosphy and you wont be able to understand it but could I just add I'm a socialist should I owe allegiance and loyalty to the SPGB?
: No, not unless you actually join it, and it forms a part of your own activity- my loyalty to the SPGB comes through what I do, because it is my self-activity, I don't bask in some illusory glory of others' actions.
But you owe it loyalty and allegiance, I wouldnt even say I owe my "nation" that because it'd mean allegiance to leadership, this self-activity thing sounds a bit like self-identity which is a bit like what I was arguing.
: However, you are not actually presenting me with any logic here, you are just descirbing some random emotionalism that seems to have no connection with practical political activity.
That stone cold rationalism is going to inspire a lot.
However as far as "no connection to political activity" goes as I've said before if anarchists, socialist, liberals etc. cant exploit nationalism then Machavellian politicians or nazi's will your attitude is a bit like that of the German Communist Party prior to Hitler, it's a bit like a lot of Marxists, rehetoric or faith shouldnt be allowed to over ride the realities of the situation.
: The Vietcong were a peasant guerrilla army defending themselves from Agression, Japan was an imperial Government.
Would the japanese not have seen their war as a war of defense once they began to lose? I hope your aware of the nationalist nature of the VC struggle they where fighting for the unification of thier country not really a social revolution.
: : That's true of Britain aswell as the US RD and I suspect that the socialist/liberal patriotism of NJ is a world apart form the US's supremist government.
:At the end of the day, nationalism is teh ideology supporting the rule of the same political elite, regardless of whether NJ is a nice bloke or not.
How can you generalise like that? Rehtorically Marxism understands nationalism as that, I'm a "nationalist" in some sense and I dont support eliteism and think of myself as a consistant socialist.
: Some bugger is trying to foust a national identity on me- what on earth has my life to do with teh dominant definitions of Englishness, fuck all. I have opposed nationalism long before I joined the party.
Well then fine....
: : I dont expect you to understand the predicament of people in a nationless setting, a bit of empathy wouldnt go a miss RD.
: I don't think the way forward for such people is to try and build new states, I think self-determination is the way forward for them, and that means a world socialist revolution, not further attempts to divide the working class.
Points might make it easier:
1)Nationalism doesnt have to be divisive, racist etc.
2)National identity doesnt necessarily involve building new states but reversing colonalism and imperialism.
3)I'm not interested in Socialism if it doesnt fit with my vision, it's someone elses dogma.
: The workers, every time, following the intyerests of their masters- there is no such thing as a 'national interest'- imagine this way- you're being held hostage, in a house, and the only way you can get food is if the demands of the hostage taker are kept, i.e. on their terms, their interest. Do you share an interest with the hostage taker? Thats national interest in action, one small group of masters blackmailing millions of others with their interests- or, as Chomsky puts it, its a way in which gains are privatised, and risk socialised. When the 'anational economy' fails, they can pass the blame onto us.
Fine I understand all this and I've never seen defense of the elites as consistant with my ideas about nationalism, facts are RD the Workers joined, the workers welcomed etc. now I'm not going to welcome any marxist condescention about the workers being fooled if their enthusiasum met with a left wing vacumn then the right was going to fill that in.
: Are the US gonna pick fights that aren't in their interest, that could eventually lead to them taking losses they don't need?
This is all a bit conspiratorial for me...
: Troops made it worse, the problems were dying off..
I disagree...
: : Fine but where has NJ's patriotism had loyalty to the government written into it? You arent debating with right-wing nationalists here and if you think all nationalism is right-wing your making a grave error, a very grave one.
: : Might I just say that I consider myself a patriot and a socialist I dont owe loyalty to any institution or Macavellian government, I owe loyalty to the mystic of the land of my birth. A concoction of ecologism and myth it's never hurt no one.
: 'mystic', are we going to hear some James Connolly -esque rubbish about ireland being redeemed by blood sacrifices next- at least he had the decency to sacrifice his own blood....
No your not I dont really integrate "great leaders" into my patriotic vision, what about all the unnoted people who where slaughtered by the Brits?
: : Macavallian government will always be one of the first among the ranks of the enamy RD what does it have to do with denying legitimate self-identity?
: I didn't deny self-identity, I denied nationalism, the two are not conincident, 'self identity' is a buzz term deployed by liberal ideologists as they divide people up into different groups which the state can recognise. People have self identity when they are self-active and free, and as far as I can see that only results from one course of action.
This is all a bit conspiratorial again, liberals arent all opportunistic scum you know? What your saying here is that individual egotism is more consistant with socialism than some communal identity, well I dont know how the SPGB worked that out...
: : Fair enough, unless there's been an invasion or illegitimate act of aggression.
: Yes, I'm not a pacifist, I would join the resistance should Britain be invaded, but I doubt I would work with the state military...
: Think of the british empire- did the working class gain from that? No, the capitalist class did.
I know people who stack shelves who insist they are capitalists are they part of this capitalist class?
:Europe, the single currency, anything to do with working class interests? No, its all the interest of the ruling class- 'the nation' is their way of passing on the pinch, of universalising their rule.
I think Europe is relevent to me and I dont think I'm capitalist class, being a socialist and all, I'd like a united Euro-federation there's the possiblity that it could become a Keynesian economy capable of matching and then passing the US, once relatively liberal planning has been proven a success then people might like some radical changes and allow time for altruism in thier lives like you'd like.
