[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

In for some red terror?
15% off on selected items with promo code "SPOOKY" at shop.leftypol.org


File: 1761407690886.jpeg (34.75 KB, 447x447, images (12).jpeg)

 

Can there be progressive national struggles after the dissolution of the colonial system and the counter-revolution in the USSR?

An easy answer would be to simply point out thte palestian struggle. However besides the just side of the war from the side of the palestinian resistance
We can point out that the international attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be classified into four main categories, that have antagonistic intrests that can be assimilited in the intra-imperialist struggles. First, the open supporters of Israel —the US, UK, NATO member states and leading EU powers (France, Germany)— who politically, militarily and economically support the Israeli state, the Euro-Atlantic axis. Second, the powerful capitalist states of the emerging Eurasian alliance, mainly Russia and China, which maintain a cautious stance, promoting the creation of an independent Palestinian state and a peaceful solution, but aiming to strengthen their own geopolitical and economic interests. Third, regional powers in the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, which sometimes cooperate and sometimes clash with the US and Israel, selectively supporting the Palestinians when it serves their interests. Saudi Arabia has suspended rapprochement with Israel, Turkey is reconsidering energy projects with Tel Aviv, while Egypt is concerned about refugee flows and the strengthening of Hamas. Finally, states such as Iran, Lebanon (through Hezbollah) and Syria are more directly involved, supporting the Palestinian resistance and maintaining an open conflict with Israel, making a generalized conflagration in the region possible.
It is obvious that the palestinian struggle does mot aim at socialist revolution but the formation of a state in general. That is necessary. However, can we say that it is progressive if the national struggle is not conmected with the social struggle? Can national indipendence even be achieved without socialism?

Imo, the delusions of multipolarism are dangerous.
They are traps against the formation of an independent peoples movement and end up assimilating any resistance against western imperialism in the intrests of the part of the national bourgeoisie that wants to allign with Russia and China. Most importantly, these delusiona conceal the eurasian imperialist camp that is begining to take form.
For example, the kicking out of french imperialism from the sahel zone is progressive but only if it is seen as a step that empowers the masses in independent struggle against imperialism. Is this what is happening there?

The truth is, of course, that behind these coup processes lies not the struggle of the peoples against exploitation, foreign and local, but intra-urban conflicts and frontal clashes of powerful imperialist forces to promote their own monopolies.

Let us give an example: Who can assure us that the coup in Niger has nothing to do with the plan to definitively bury the natural gas pipeline from Nigeria to Algeria, which would necessarily pass through Niger's territory, supplying Europe with Nigerian natural gas?

Nor, of course, is the pure "defense of democracy" behind the opposition to coups. The imperialists' interest is hypocritical and it is characteristic that France, which is now turning its back on democracy in the case of Niger, had no substantial reaction a few years ago to the coup in Chad.

The coups, which are presented as "revolutions" (note: The Greek people also have relevant experience), are carried out by sections of the bourgeois army of these countries, which in some cases rely on the indignation of popular strata both for their living conditions and for the international alliances forged by the prevailing bourgeois political force at each time. Alliances that facilitate the extraction of natural wealth and peoples. However, these coups are based on the capitalist system, while foreign designs are often involved in them. Other times, they are carried out to advance processes and manipulate popular consciousness.

In any case, these developments are not based on large popular, radical, revolutionary movements and organizations. The workers'-communist movement, which is in decline worldwide, is even weaker in Africa. Characteristically, out of the 55 countries in Africa, only 5 (Egypt, Algeria, Swaziland, South Africa, Sudan) have Communist Parties that participate in the International Meetings of Communist Parties. The workers' movement in Africa as a whole is still weak throughout the continent, since the majority of the population (over 60% and in some countries 85%) is still engaged in the agricultural sector, while approximately 15% of the economically active population is reported to work in industry.

We are talking, therefore, about developments that do not aim to liberate workers and other popular strata from capitalist exploitation, but rather about efforts to promote plans of the bourgeoisie (or parts of it) of the specific countries, which aim at their bourgeois modernization, at increasing the role and profits of the capitalists, which bring about upheavals at the level of the local "fireplaces" and their imperialist "patrons".

Through these developments, some imperialist powers emerge weakened, while others become stronger. Thus, for example, according to various estimates, the developments in Niger and the retreat of French interests are not only strengthening the emerging Eurasian imperialist bloc (China - Russia), but also the USA, as was evident from the visit to this country by B. Nuland, US Deputy Secretary of State, who secured from the coup plotters the continued existence of the two American military bases, as well as the US ties with one of the leading military figures of the junta.

On the other does the dissolution of formal colonialism mean the end of national oppression in general? I don't think so. But it is a fact that the bourgeoisie of former colonies seek more and more indipendence from western imperialism and turns towards the eurasian bloc, for its own intrests that cannot be the same as those of the working people. It is a basic marxist truth, that in the era of imperialism the bourgeoisie doesn't have common intrests with the proletariat and needs to be overthrown.

How would you go on to talk about critical support toward the struggles of former colonised peoples against imperialism without becoming a campist?

File: 1761451935193.png (25.26 KB, 1343x50, ClipboardImage.png)

National liberation is good because economic development is progressive and dependence is not.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1919/02/22.htm

>>2536847
Economic development for who? Of course, the development of the productive forces is the hard shell of historical development and the material substratum of social action. But today's epoch is the era of transition from capitalism to socialism exactly because of the contradictions of the relationships of production to the productive forces. Or do you think that capitalists and workers have common intrests and the contradiction can be solved peacefully? Plus, I am asking can you really be independent in contemporary imperialism? It is an economic law that a state on the capitalist path is going to pass in one of the two imperialist camps and therefore regulate its internal economic policy based on the needs of said camp.

>>2536954
not if one camps is communist

>>2536970
Imperialist camps cannot be communist. Socialism is when there are socialised means of production, workers have the political power and there is centrally planned economy not wage labour and markets.

>>2536980
Communist camps cannot be imperialist. The set of affairs you describe requires a sufficient level of productive capacity as its foundation.

>>2536991
404: counter not found

IV. The Two Great Camps in the World of Today and the Path of the National Liberation Movement

As indicated above, the national question in the present-day world is essentially a question of the exploitation and oppression, or attempted exploitation and oppression, of the nations the world over by American imperialism as well as the struggles of all nations in the world against the oppression and exploitation by American imperialism in order to achieve national liberation or to defend national independence.

Even during the Second World War, the American imperialists had made their plans for plundering and oppressing all the nations of the world. After the war, they put the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan into operation, thus step by step bringing many countries and nations of the world under their own control and rule, preparing a network of military bases throughout the world, setting their foot in all countries and intervening in the domestic affairs of other countries. All these activities stemmed from their ambitious and aggressive plans. And their aggressive plans, just like those of Hitler, ᴉuᴉlossnW and the Japanese warlords, are being carried out under the slogan of “defence against the Soviet Union, defence against Communism.”

In order to put their plans for the enslavement of the whole world into operation, the American imperialists have no alternative but to do all they can to mobilize the people of their own country in support of their plans and to suppress all forces among the people of their own country who oppose their plans. Thus, they have to carry out propaganda among the American people about the “theory” of the so-called “American Century” and the “theory” of the “superiority of the white race”, declaring that the United States should “lead the world” and that all the nations of the world should be brought under its rule. Therefore, the American imperialists are persecuting the Communist Party of the United States, the progressive American trade unions and the progressive movement of the American people. They are establishing a fascist-like rule in the United States, for otherwise they would not be able to put their plans into effect.

In order to put their plans for world domination into operation, the American imperialists have no alternative but to do all they can to oppose all the world forces that are fighting against the realisation of such plans. Thus, they are opposing the U.S.S.R., the New Democracies of Eastern Europe, the Communist Party of China and the Chinese people’s liberation movement, the national liberation movements in Greece, Viet-Nam, Indonesia, Malaya, Burma and the Philippines; they are opposing the Communist parties and the people’s democratic forces of all countries. This is because all these countries and forces have formed an anti-imperialist camp, headed by the Soviet Union, in determined opposition to the plans of the American imperialists for the enslavement of the world. Therefore, when the Tito clique made known its anti-Soviet position, deserted the Communist Information Bureau and destroyed the vital forces of real progress within its own country, the American imperialists displayed uncontrolled glee. They are making preparations to start a third world war some time in the future, in an attempt to subdue all the forces of the world in opposition to them.

In order to put their plans for the enslavement of the world into operation, the American imperialists have no alternative but to search for lackeys and agents in the various countries who will carry out and support their plans. They seek out national renegades and traitors and give them their backing in suppressing the resistance movements of these countries and in opposing the Soviet Union. American imperialists help the reactionaries or all countries and support the revival of fascism in Germany, Japan, Italy, and other countries. The reactionary parties and groups of the bourgeoisie and the remnants of fascism in these countries have become the lackeys and agents of American imperialism and are suppressing, with American aid, the resistance movements of their own countries and of the colonial countries and are opposing the Soviet Union and the democratic forces of the peoples of all countries.

However, precisely because of the plans of the American imperialists for the enslavement of the world, and because of the betrayal of their nations by the reactionaries of the various European countries, the national question has become a vital issue for even a greater part of the population than after World War I. The anti-imperialist camp of the national liberation movement has become even broader, while the number of imperialist countries has dwindled and these have become more isolated. The foundations of imperialism are growing ever more unstable and its strength has been getting weaker and weaker; the oppressed people are rising on an ever-broadening scale to fight against the imperialists, bringing ever nearer the end of their domination.

The class enemies of the proletariat of the capitalist suzerain countries in Europe are at the same time national traitors and, consequently the national enemy of these countries. To win socialism, the proletariat of the various European countries must oppose both enslavement by American imperialism and the national traitors of their own countries. The class question and the national question are thus clearly linked together. This is to the advantage of the proletariat of the various European countries. On the one hand, by uniting with still broader masses of people within their countries. they can link up the defence of their national independence with the cause of achieving socialism; and on the other hand, by uniting with broader masses of the colonial and semi-colonial peoples, they can link up the national liberation movements of the colonies and semi-colonies with their own cause of achieving socialism.

The plans of the American imperialists for the enslavement of the world, and the betrayal of their own nations by the reactionaries of the various European countries reflect the development of the general crisis of world capitalism as well as the extreme accentuation of the various contradictions of capitalism. They reflect the fact that the American and other imperialists who plan an insane and desperate struggle are sitting on a volcano of new severe crisis. The American imperialists’ plans for enslavement, at the same time, further accelerate the development of the general crisis of capitalism while accentuating the basic contradictions of world capitalism — the contradictions between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, between the various imperialist countries fighting for colonies and markets, and between the imperialists and the oppressed peoples. As a result, the vast majority of the peoples of the world have no alternative but to develop their unity on a world scale in the struggle for their liberation and in this way, hasten the downfall of imperialism.

At present, the American imperialists are intensifying thier activities for the enslavement of the peoples of the world, and the imperialists of Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and other countries, with American aid, are intensifying their oppression of the colonial peoples. There is an upsurge of the people’s democratic movement against American and other imperialism in the various countries; and an upsurge of the national liberation movements on the part of the colonial peoples. As a result, the national question in the world today has become unprecedentedly acute.

The world today has been divided into two mutually antagonistic camps: On the one hand, the world imperialist camp, composed of the American imperialists and their accomplices — the reactionaries of all countries of the world; on the other hand, the world anti-imperialist camp composed of the Soviet Union and the New Democracies of Eastern Europe and the national liberation movements in China, South-east Asia, and Greece plus the people’s democratic forces of all the countries of the world. American imperialism has become the bastion of all the reactionary forces of the world; while the Soviet Union has become the bastion of all the progressive forces.

These two camps include all the peoples of the world — of all countries, classes, sections of the population, parties and groups. When these two camps are in sharp conflict, people line up with one side of the other. That is, if one is not in the imperialist camp, if one is not assisting American imperialism and its accomplices to enslave the world ore one’s own people, then one must be in the anti-imperialist camp, assisting all oppressed peoples of the world fighting to achieve liberation, or fighting for the liberation of one’s own nation against American imperialism and its accomplices — the reactionaries in all countries. This means one is assisting the Soviet Union, the New Democracies of Eastern Europe, the people’s democratic forces in the United States and other countries, the proletariat and the communist Parties of all countries. To remain neutral or sitting on the fence is impossible. In the critical situation of the present-day world, so-called neutrality, as was pointed out long ago by Comrade Mao Tse-tung in his New Democracy, [A] is nothing but deception, intentional or otherwise.

It can thus be seen that in the present world situation, in order to win its liberation, every oppressed nation has no alternative but to oppose American imperialism and its accomplices within its country, to oppose the reactionaries of all countries, to unite with the Soviet Union and the New Democracies of Eastern Europe, to unite with the national liberation movements and the people’s democratic forces of other countries, to unite with the proletariat and the Communist Parties of all countries — that is to say, it must line up with the anti-imperialist camp and wage a stubborn struggle against American imperialism and its accomplices in other countries. No nation can win real liberation any other way.

It can thus be seen that if the Communist Parties, the proletariat, the people’s democratic forces in the United States, Great Britain, France, the Netherlands, and other countries, especially those in the United States, can rise up and overthrow the rule of their monopoly capitalists, abolish the imperialist domestic and foreign policies of their countries and carry out proletarian socialist domestic and national policies, then they will have completely liberated not only the peoples of their countries, but also the all the oppressed nations of the world as well. It follows that the complete victory of the proletariat and the peoples of these countries, as well as every blow they deliver to the rule of the monopoly capitalists of their countries, constitutes the best and most direct help to the oppressed nations of the world. Therefore, the national liberation movements of the oppressed nations of the world must endeavour to obtain help from the proletariat and the people in the imperialist countries, and to form with them a united front in opposition to the rule of imperialism. This is because both are facing a common enemy, the victory of one helps the other to win victory.

It can thus be seen that the victories of the national independence movements of the oppressed nations of the world over the imperialists of the United States, Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and other countries, will deprive these countries of their colonies, undermine the foundation on which they dominate the world, greatly weaken the rule of imperialists in their home countries, and will therefore lead to liberation of the proletariat and the peoples of these counties from the rule of imperialism. Thus the victories gained by the national independence and liberation movements of the oppressed nations in in the colonies and semi-colonies, and every blow delivered to imperialism, constitute the best and most direct help to the proletariat and the peoples in imperialist countries. The proletariat, the Communist Parties and the people’s democratic forces in all counties, especially those in imperialist countries, must still give more support to the national independence and liberation movements in colonial and semi-colonial countries., and take further steps in building up a united front with them in opposition to the rule of imperialism. This is both are facing a common enemy, and the victory of one helps the other to win victory.

It can thus be seen that the existence and prosperity of the anti-imperialist, socialist Soviet Union, and the existence and development of the New Democracies of Eastern Europe, constitute a heavy blow to American imperialism and its lackeys — the reactionaries of other countries — and to the rule of world imperialism. All this signifies and accentuates the general crisis of world capitalism, brings ever nearer the final collapse of world capitalism, strengthens the socialist revolution of the proletariat in all counties and the camp of the national liberation movement of all oppressed nations, and brings the socialists and the New Democratic revolutions in all countries ever nearer to victory.

In his letter to the Soviet Union just before his death in the spring of 1925, the great Chinese patriot, Dr. Sun Yat-sen wrote: “This great union of free republics, bequeathed by the immortal Lenin to the oppressed nations of the world, is a real inheritance with which sufferers under imperialism will protect their freedom and free themselves from the international system based on ancient slavery, war and selfishness.” The truth is as fresh as ever. This truth was borne out once again in the future struggle for the liberation of mankind. Comrade Mao Tse-tung gave a similar expression in his New Democracy:

“The choice is between uniting with the Soviet Union and uniting with imperialism. It must be one or the other. That is the line of demarcation between patriotism and betrayal of one’s own country, between revolution and counter-revolution, between progress and retrogression for any nation. Opposing the Soviet Union will surly be serving the interest of imperialism and betraying the interests of one’s own nation.”

All that which was said above explains one fundamental question; that is: the oppressed nations, the proletariat and the people’s democratic forces in all countries must unite with each other, unite with the New Democracies of Eastern Europe before they can defeat the plans of American imperialism for the enslavement of the world, and the rule of other imperialists over their colonies before they can solve the national question of the world today, i.e., to liberate all oppressed nations and consequently to abolish the rule of the monopoly capitalists in their home counties, which is the cause of imperialist aggression.

That is to say: the Communists and the peoples of all countries must base themselves on proletarian internationalism, on the proletarian-internationalist concept of the nation and the proletarian-internationalist programmes and policies with regard to the question of the nation, unite with the labouring people and the ant-imperialist revolutionary forces in all countries of the world and unite with the Soviet Union and the New Democracies of Eastern Europe, in a common struggle through mutual assistance and mutual support in order to liberate all oppressed nations and solve the national question of the world today.

There is not the slightest doubt that to regard the national question as separate from the class question, or to regard the national struggle as separate from the class struggle, is absolutely wrong and harmful and constitutes a form of deception adopted by landlord and bourgeois reactionaries. Inasmuch as reactionary bourgeois nationalism and modern imperialist aggression brought about by the development of the capitalist system of exploitation, which has as its final outcome the fanatical attempts of American imperialism to achieve world domination, the counter revolutionary policies of American imperialism for the enslavement of the world have, with unprecedented clarity, joined together the socialist revolutionary movements of the proletariat in the capitalist suzerain countries and the national liberation movements of the oppressed nations. These policies also point out with unprecedented clarity that to uproot imperialist aggression, the rule of monopoly capitalists in capitalist suzerain countries must be over thrown.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/liu-shaoqi/1952/internationalism_nationalism/ch04.htm

>>2536970
We are in the era of AI and the fourth industrial revolution. China has already surpassed the US in the commanding heights of the economy. When the founders of marxism-leninism talked about a transitional step such as the NEP, for very very different situations. Even then they pointed out the dialectic relationship of the productive forces to the relationships of production. In the April theses Lenin stopped talking about a transitional stage, and rejected the menshevik notion that socialism should wait until capitalism is developed (it was already developed, the fact that Russia was as developed as England didn't mean it wasn't capitalism for Lenin). The experience of the first five year plan under Stalin proved that the only way to catch up to the imperialists is to deepen the socialist relations of production not go backwards to capitalism. Today, everywhere the material conditions for socialist revolution are ripe.

>>2537013
>China has already surpassed the US in the commanding heights of the economy.
in absolute numbers maybe but they also have five times as many people they have to feed and shelter

File: 1761473026216.png (Spoiler Image,577.93 KB, 894x894, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2536265
>can we say that it is progressive
Yes
but at what cost?!

V.The Progressive Character of Bourgeois Nationalism in Given Historical Conditions and the Marxist-Leninist Attitude Toward Such Nationalism

Marxism-Leninism considers all questions in their historical settings. Marxism-Leninists view bourgeois nationalism under the given historical conditions. Drawing a distinction between its different objective roles, they decide what different attitudes the proletariat should take toward it.

In the early period of capitalism, the national movement led by the bourgeoisie had as its objective the struggle against oppression by other nations and the creation of a national state. This national movement was historically progressive, and the proletariat supported it.

In the present period, such bourgeois nationalism still exists in the colonial and semi-colonial countries. This variety of nationalism also has a certain objective progressive historical significance.

The bourgeoisie of Europe, the United States, and Japan has established the imperialist system of colonial and semi-colonial oppression in many backward countries. In such colonial and semi-colonial countries as China, India, Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines, Viet-Nam, Burma, Egypt, etc., bourgeois nationalism naturally developed. This was because the national bourgeoisie in these countries has interests antagonistic in the first place to those of imperialism, and in the second place to those of the domestic backward feudal forces. Moreover, these feudal forces unite with imperialism in restricting and hampering the development of the national bourgeoisie. Therefore, the national bourgeoisie in these countries is revolutionary in a certain historical period and to a certain degree. Bourgeois nationalism in these countries has a decidedly progressive significance when the bourgeoisie mobilize the masses in the struggle against imperialism and the feudal forces. As Lenin pointed out (in a speech delivered at the Second Congress of the Eastern Peoples), nationalism of this type “ has historical justification ” . Therefore the proletariat, with the aim of overthrowing the rule of imperialism and the feudal forces, should collaborate with this bourgeois nationalism which plays a defiantly anti-imperialist and anti-feudal role provided, as Lenin said, that these allies do not hinder us in educating and organizing the peasantry and the broad masses of theexploited people in a revolutionary spirit. The clearest example of this type of collaboration was that which existed between the Chinese Communists and Sun Yat-sen.

Sun Yat-sen’s nationalism was a form of bourgeois nationalism. The Three Person’s Principle of Sun Yat-sen, as Comrade Mao pointed out in his New Democracy, has undergone great changes in the two historical periods before and after the Russian October Socialist Revolution. In the former period, it came under the category of old democracy, that is, it remained within the scope of bourgeois democratic revolution of the old world and was a part of the bourgeois and capitalist world revolution. In the latter period, however, it belonged to New Democracy, that is it pertained to the scope of new bourgeois democratic revolution and was a part of the proletarian Socialist world revolution.

Sun Yat-sen’s nationalism in the old democratic era had a dual character. His opposition to the current rulers of China, the Manchu Dynasty, had a progressive character. Yet the Greater Han-ism he advocated had a reactionary character. After the October Revolution, when China entered the New Democratic era, received help from the U.S.S.R. and from us Chinese Communists. He then revised his nationalism characterized by Greater Han-ism and turned toward revolutionary nationalism characterized by his active opposition to imperialist aggression and his adoption of the three policies of alliance with the Soviet Union, alliance with the Chinese Communist Party and support for the workers and peasants. He also advocated that “the Chinese nation should strive to liberate itself” and that “there should be equality for all nationalities within the country” (Declaration of the First Congress of the Kuomintang). Thus he turned toward New Democracy and we Communists therefore adopted the policy of collaborating with him. This collaboration was absolutely correct and necessary for national liberation and was in accord with the interests of the proletariat at the time, even though it was an unreliable, temporary and unstable alliance which was later undermined by the shameless betrayers of Dr. Yat-sen’s cause.

Although Sun Yat-sen’s world outlook at the time was still of a bourgeois of petty-bourgeois character, and although his nationalism was still a form of bourgeois nationalism preserving some reactionary features (for instance, his concepts of so-called “common blood” “state and nation” and “Greater Asianism” etc.), nevertheless he stood for the doctrine of a national revolution which called for “arousing the people and uniting in a common struggle with all nations in the world who treat us as equals.” He also put into effect the three great policies of alliance with the U.S.S.R.. alliance with the Chinese Communist Party and support for workers and peasants. This was an excellent illustration of the progressive character of revolutionary bourgeois nationalism in colonial and semi-colonial countries during the new era of world Socialist revolution. It was of enormous revolutionary significance.

However, shortly after Sun Yat-sen’s death, the brazen betrayers of his cause - the representatives of the big bourgeoisie such as Chiang Kai-shek, Wang Ching-wei and other reactionary leaders of the Kuomintang - began to turn Sun Yat-sen’s doctrine of national revolution toward the opposite and extremely counter-revolutionary direction. They swung from the anti-imperialist struggle to capitulation to imperialism, from alliance with the Soviet Union to struggling against it, from unity with the Chinese Communist Party to attacks on the Party, from supporting the workers and the peasants to slaughtering them. Moreover, they used the conservative and reactionary features of Sun Yat-sen’s nationalism as their anti-national banner. It therefore became necessary for the Communist party, in order to defend the interests of the nation, to adopt a firm policy of opposition to the Kuomintang reactionaries, who were headed by Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Ching-wei.

Of course, the Communists in other colonial and semi-colonial countries such as India, Burma, Siam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Indo-China, South Korea, etc., must for the sake of their national interests similarly adopt a firm and irreconcilable policy against national betrayal by the reactionary section of the bourgeoisie, which has already surrendered to imperialism. If this were not done, it would be a grave mistake.

On the other hand, the communists in these countries should enter into an anti-imperialist alliance with that section of the national bourgeoisie which is still opposing imperialism and which does not oppose the anti-imperialist struggle of the masses of the people. Should the Communists fail to do so in earnest, should they to the contrary, oppose or reject such an alliance, it would also constitute a grave mistake. Such an alliance must be established in all sincerity, even if should be of an unreliable, temporary and unstable nature.

The experience of the revolution in other countries as well as in China fully confirms the correctness of the scientific Marxist-Leninist conclusion that the national question is closely linked with the class question and the national struggle within the class struggle. An historical analysis of class relations reveals why in certain periods, one country is oppressed by another and becomes a colony or semi-colony of imperialism; why national traitors may appear in such a country, not only from the ranks of the feudal classes, but also form the ranks of the bourgeoisie - for instance, form the ranks of compradore, bureaucratic bourgeoisie in China. Such an analysis also reveals under what conditions, and under the leadership of which class, national liberation can be achieved.

An historical analysis of the class relations also reveals that although such outstanding national revolutionists as Sun Yat-sen sprang from China’s petty-bourgeoisie or national bourgeoisie, yet this bourgeoisie, generally speaking, views the national question solely in the light of its own narrow class interests and changes its position solely in accordance with its own class interests. In the same way, only the class interests of the proletariat are really in full accord with the fundamental interests of the people of a given country, with the common interests of all mankind. When the proletariat of an oppressed nation, as is the case of China, enters the arena of struggle and becomes the leader of the national liberation struggle against imperialism and the saviour of the whole nation, then every genuinely patriotic class, party, group or individual inevitably forms an alliance with the Communist Party, as did Sun Yat-sen (and thus becomes linked with the policies of alliance with the Soviet Union and support for the workers and peasants). On the other hand, those persons or groups - like Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Ching-wei - who oppose the Communist Party (an opposition linked with opposition to the Soviet Union and to the interests of the workers and peasants), inevitably become servile lackeys of imperialism and the most vile, contemptible national traitors who sell out their own country.

An historical analysis of class relations further discloses that under the new conditions, in the new period of accentuated international and internal struggle, as a result of threats combined with all kinds of tempting offers and enticements held out by the imperialists, and owing to the developing class struggle within the country, there may appear within the revolutionary ranks such people as Chen Tu-hsiu, Chang Kuo-tao in China and Tito in Yugoslavia. These people capitulate to reactionary bourgeois nationalism, betray the common interests of the toilers of all countries and place the liberation of their own people in serious jeopardy. They are the spokesmen of bourgeois nationalism inside the ranks of the proletariat. They cynically desert the cause of national liberation in mid-path, and they divert their country down the road leading to its transformation into an imperialist colony. The Communist Parties of all countries and each individual Communist must be alert to this danger.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/liu-shaoqi/1952/internationalism_nationalism/ch05.htm


Unique IPs: 4

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]