nationalism

Tom O'Lincoln suarsos at alphalink.com.au
Sat Jul 19 19:02:37 MDT 2003


We are getting into quote-mongering here, but I guess you can blame me for
starting it. Anyway, Ed quotes Lenin as saying:

>>'Insofar as the bourgeoisie of the oppressed nation fights the
oppressor, we are always ... in favour, for we are the staunchest and the
most consistent enemies of oppression. But insofar as the bourgeoisie of
the oppressed nation stands for its own bourgeois nationalism, we stand
against.<<

Lenin is for the fight against national oppression. This does not mean he
supports the bourgeoisie or its ideology (which is what nationalism is -- a
bourgeois ideology). In fact the minute the bourgeoise turns to
nationalism, he is against them.

Ed then quotes this:
>>'The bourgeois nationalism of any oppressed nation has a general
democratic content that is directed against oppression, and it is this
content that we unconditionally support.'<<

How does this square with my quote from Lenin, which says he is against
nationalism "of every kind"?

Come on comrades, it isn't that hard. The nation-state is a bourgeois
construct. Nationalism is the ideological reflection of the construction
process. If the attempt to construct a nation is directed against
imperialism, we support the struggle - i.e. the "democratic content". On
this, Ed is entirely right. I have tried to make it clear in previous posts
that I'm not for being sectarian or abstentionist towards movements that
embrace nationalism.

It does not follow that we support the ideology. On the contrary, Lenin was
for the revolutionaries organising around socialist internationalism. I
have quotes for that too, but I will restrain myself. :-)



More information about the Marxism mailing list