Socialist Patriotism Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 20:58:20 No. 574951 [Last 50 Posts]
Despite what most baizuo think, there is no contradiction between being both a socialist and a patriot in America, regardless of its origin as a settler-colonialist venture, and its current status as the leading imperialist power. Many baizuo have incorrectly gone so far as to equate patriotism and nationalism, claiming that for socialists, patriotism represents an affront to the principles of internationalism and that socialists that speak in patriotic terms are both inconsistent and on the road to red-brownism.>Though not in substance, yet in form, the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle. >It is altogether self-evident that […] the working class must organize itself at home as a class and that its own country is the immediate arena of its struggle. >Can a Communist, who is an internationalist, at the same time be a patriot? We hold that he not only can be but also must be.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:04:11 No. 574958
Go back to Twitter
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:05:07 No. 574961
idk patriotism seems anglo
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:15:27 No. 574970
There is no American culture besides settler colonialism, capitalism, and imperialism. There's nothing to be a patriot for . Now, patriotism for black or indigenous nationalism I could maybe see, but there is no "American" culture because America was founded by psychotic puritanical Christians who lynched anyone carrying a whiff of culture.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:17:03 No. 574974
Any leftism patriotism would also not necessarily require it, but would heavily benefit from an outright rejection of the other side of our bourgeois founding figures. Yes, there were quite a few of them who were progressive. But the reality is that the founding also involved the Southern plantation aristocracy whose iron grip on American politics led to a near 100 year raincheck on the question of slavery, which ultimately erupted into the greatest war America has ever fought, i.e. the one it waged with itself.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:18:37 No. 574976
>>574970 The fact that the United States was founded by slave owners is superfluous. However, just because the US is a bourgeois state doesn't mean a socialist state can't be founded in North America by the American proletariats. China used to be an absolute monarchy where the emperor used the Mandate of Heaven to justify their brutality against commoners while the Russian Empire was totalitarian where the Tsar and the noblemen lived in fancy palaces while peasants toiled in the farmlands in harsh conditions and even had their grains taken away from them thus leading to starvation. Yet, Russia would become the birthplace of Marxism-Leninism while Chinese peasants fought decades of war against warlords, KMT and the Japanese in order to create a socialist state in China. A socialist America is possible and socialist states are always established from the ashes of bourgeois states.
Mao Tse-tung
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:19:01 No. 574977
>>574970 >>574974 This.
Yes, you can be a "patriotic socialist" but not around the fucking US state and it's symbolism. That would be like if Mao donned the flags and the symbolism of the Qing empire and was patriotic around that.
Socialist patriotism centres around socialist futurism, not around the bourgeois past.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:20:46 No. 574981
>>574974 (me)
There is also the question of American traditions, which aside from Thanksgiving are not so necessarily set in stone as America really has been a country composed of waves of immigration. If you set a cut-off date for "real" American traditions, it inevitably rewards the same sentiment of those groups like the nativist Know Nothings. In the context of America (and decidedly not Europe), the question of nativism is absolutely asinine considering our country's history.
These patriotic socialists just want their cake and eat it, too. You are talking about a country of 330 million people and one of the most diverse in existence. It's the fever dream of early 20's college student males who never joined a fraternity but still want to seem badass chads while espousing communist politics they think are necessarily tied to SJWs.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:21:16 No. 574982
>>574976 Giant strawman.
Of course a socialist state can be founded in the US, but that doesn't mean that Patriotism around the US state and it's legacy and symbolism is not fucking stupid.
Imagine if the USSR worshipped it's Tsarist Past or PRC worshipped the Qing Empire, rather than center their patriotism around a socialist futurism.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:21:31 No. 574983
Karl Marx to Abraham Lincoln January 28th 1865 >We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large majority. If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery. From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class. The contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the labor of the emigrant or prostituted by the tramp of the slave driver?
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:22:06 No. 574984
>>574976 The Bolsheviks weren't patriots for Imperial Russia and the Tsar you knuckle dragging retard.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:22:25 No. 574985
>>574983 Dude, that was written during a fucking civil war. It wasn't the US fighting against some foreign occupying imperialist power, it was Americans against Americans.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:25:19 No. 574986
>>574983 (me)
Furthermore, the only reason Hazlerites support the Union in the context of the American civil war is because of Marx's letter. If not for that letter, you might see Haz-types engage in full throated support for the Confederacy and their gallantry in opposing Northern industrialists who wished to crush and take away the assets of the Southern plantation ruling class.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:30:26 No. 574990
>>574986 100% Hazlerites are cucks that will cherrypick anything to justify their social conservative duginist LaRouchite r/acc agenda.
Weirdest part of it is that most of the people that shill it are not even americans.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:31:18 No. 574991
Dankey Kang said it best I think, patriotism is just an obfuscation of class struggle to deceive magatards into believing you actually care about the same america they do
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:36:12 No. 574997
>>574996 see
>>574994 >>574984 They do this after a revolution happens, not for a pre-revolutionary society.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:38:37 No. 574999
>>574996
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:41:52 No. 575001
>>574974 >>574977 >>574981 Socialism has always come out of love for one's people, not of their crucifixion on the device of modernity as trotskyists, maotists and other left-wing fanatics. America can easily be redeemed, while it is a truism of the origins of
the united states lay in the wholesale slaughter of the indigenous population, this does not diminish the objective significance of the United States. Since its foundations in the chartering of the Declaration of Independence from
the British Empire, the united states had acquired for itself a real place among the nations of the world, which even if unique in the intensity and barbarism, is like all nations founded on the basis of robbery and exploitation, and like all nations it contains within itself the conditions for redemption. Therefore, your argument is invalid.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:42:38 No. 575002
>>574982 >>574984 Yes, the Bolsheviks were patriots for their past, their culture, and deep traditions, who happened to have also developed under the Russian Empire. It is you who is inventing the strawman that they were somehow "patriotic to tsarism"
Lenin, On the National Pride of the Great Russians:
>We love our language and our country, and we are doing our very utmost to raise her toiling masses (i.e., nine-tenths of her population) to the level of a democratic and socialist consciousness. In fact, the imperialist war was painted as an unpatriotic commitment to the international financiers, capitalists and enemies of the people who dominated the nation.
Lenin, On the National Pride of the Great Russians:
>Where these selfsame landed proprietors, aided by the capitalists, are loading us into a war […]. Such war only serves to strengthen the gang of Romanovs and Bobrinskys who are a disgrace to our Great-Russian national dignity. Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:44:10 No. 575003
>>574985 The simple fact of the matter is that the United States is almost two and a half centuries old, and those who presently inhabit the united states are not settlers or colonists. The birth of the United States has seen the development of various local and quasi-national traditions with deep roots, from Appalachian Americans to the Black Belt. They have long since become indigenized, and is in fact their uprooting at the hands of the American bourgeoisie oligarchy that constitutes a proletarianization of America
The condemnation of America as a settler colony thinly disguises the hatred and repulsion of baizuo leftists towards their own people it adulterates the concrete demands of Native Americans, for more land and more autonomy, twisting it into an impossible "land back" position that only insulated, infantile ultra-left radicals like you could stand behind.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:47:46 No. 575009
>>575001 >Socialism has always come out of love for one's people And love for one's People has nothing to do with love for the concrete American state and it's symbolism.
That's why the PRC and the USSR abolished both of those and established new states, with a new socialist futurist patriotism that purged a whole slew of the cultural aspects of the old regimes.
That's why Soviet patriotism wasn't just Russian patriotism, and why it didn't use the symbolism and historicity of the Tsarist empire.
That's why Mao did the cultural revolution.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:49:34 No. 575011
>>575009 >And love for one's People has nothing to do with love for the concrete American state and it's symbolism This has nothing to do with what I said, I never proclaimed support for the American state, thanks for agreeing with me though.
The symbolism always belonged to the American people, not the state.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:50:53 No. 575014
Lmao>progressive
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:52:11 No. 575016
>>575003 What the absolute fuck does that have to do with the American civil war and Marx's letter? At what point did I mention Lamb Rack radlibbery? The reality is that you and your probable clique don't even understand the American civil war beyond Marx's letter. It's almost as disgusting as Voosh cherry picking Mao or Lenin quotes to support the Democratic Party, except in this case it's for Dugin and his Eurasianist shit. Nah fam.
>>575005 That was my bad, I'm
>>574985 Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:53:30 No. 575018
>>575014 Like abolishing slavery
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:54:55 No. 575020
>>575011 >I never proclaimed support for the American state Yes you did
>hile it is a truism of the origins of the united states lay in the wholesale slaughter of the indigenous population, this does not diminish the objective significance of the United States. Since its foundations in the chartering of the Declaration of Independence from
the British Empire, the united states had acquired for itself a real place among the nations of the world, which even if unique in the intensity and barbarism, is like all nations founded on the basis of robbery and exploitation, and like all nations it contains within itself the conditions for redemption.
>The birth of the United States has seen the development of various local and quasi-national traditions with deep roots, from Appalachian Americans to the Black Belt. They have long since become indigenized, and is in fact their uprooting at the hands of the American bourgeoisie oligarchy that constitutes a proletarianization of America The condemnation of America as a settler colony thinly disguises the hatred and repulsion of baizuo leftists towards their own people it adulterates the concrete demands of Native Americans, for more land and more autonomy, twisting it into an impossible "land back" position that only insulated, infantile ultra-left radicals like you could stand behind.
These are a defence of the US state, not the American People.
I guess that's why the USSR used Tsarist symbolism because hey, that always belonged to the people.
It was wonderful how the PRC did the same thing and did not create new symbolism instead.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:55:51 No. 575021
>>575018 That was decades after. Also took their time. Not once did abolishing slavery cross Washington's mind, adn the founding fathers that did were too cowardly or too greedy to try and put it in motion.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:55:55 No. 575022
>>575018 That was considered unpatriotic at the time to destabilize America for the sake of the negroes, as it were. Abolitionist politics were widely regarded by American peasantry and workers as the realm of overeducated New Englanders, and the vitriol spewed against it paled in comparison to its support. It was only the entitlement of the Southern aristocracy to consistently wrest even control of Northern politicians from the Northern people that feelings outside of the South began to turn.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:56:20 No. 575025
>>575018 Which required huge resistance to and agitation against the US state from within, usually organized in the Townhalls that the US state had suppressed early on and from black abolitionists and their allies.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 21:58:51 No. 575027
>>575016 You attempt to paint socialist patriots as having no understanding of the civil war beyond Marx's latter, but in reality, we have a very good understanding of the civil war, whose world-historic repercussions did not go unobserved by socialists all around the world. It was at the same time a deeply national war against the British imperialists, who threw their support behind the confederacy. From the commencement of the titanic American strife, the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class.
>>575021 It was under this banner that the oligarchy of 300 000 slaveholders was vanquished by Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class.
From the farmers alliance and the populist party, to the role played by the labor unions and the communists of the 1930s, America has hosted a long gallery of heroic struggles which have gone on to be appreciated by Marxist Leninists around the world. This gallery extends up to the present.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:00:22 No. 575029
>>575027 Abraham Lincoln was the hero of millions of people worldwide
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:01:22 No. 575032
>>575009 >And love for one's People has nothing to do with love for the concrete American state and it's symbolism. A nation is not a State
You cucks and noobs need to read Marxism and the National Question which defined what a nation is
<Thus, a common psychological make-up, which manifests itself in a common culture, is one of the characteristic features of a nation. <A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm You should absolutely be patriotic for your nation as currently you don't have one and your class needs to constitute itself the nation.
Marxists are not retarded cosmopolitans that think there's "one world, one people". That's literally Goldman Sachs philosophy and neoliberalism
But because Marxism (in the West) is deeply influenced by liberalism so called Marxists walk around thinking cosmopolitanism is a part of Marxism
<The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality. Marx, Communist manifesto
As for the retarded argument the Amerifats are having regarding patriotism and socialism the 'patriot socialists' have the correct line
Communism is nationalism without chauvinism as described by Marx in Communist manifesto.
It's how so many diverse nations were able to live in harmony under one Soviet state
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:02:31 No. 575033
>>575027 >It was under this banner that the oligarchy of 300 000 slaveholders was vanquished by Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class. 1st grade reading level. Lincoln fought to preserve the union. Part of that was freeing the slaves, because internal tensions up north threatened to break the union apart.
They gave concessions to those who organized against the US to preserve itself, and fought to keep the union intact. Also, abolition at this time helped secure the economic dominance of the industrial bourg up north.
Even so, it didn''t give a shit about the well-being of black people afterwards, even to this day. There was nothing generous about it.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:03:42 No. 575035
>>575027 Lincoln was based for sure, but let's not forget that he won merely 39% of the vote in 1860, and 55% in 1864. The truth is that most Americans didn't support him and a sizeable minority despised him as a warmongering murderer. I only point this out because you are doing the opposite of what the Confederacyfags do with pretty much the same result, a shitty obfuscation of what really happened to support your contemporary politics as if the ghost of Lincoln holding Marx's letter is goading you on.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:03:52 No. 575036
>>575032 >A nation is not a State Yes I know. That's what I am saying. You, however, conflate the US state and the American people (nation).
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:04:13 No. 575037
>>575027 Ok and? I am no historian, but I do know that Lincoln got elected decades after the creation of America, and even with all the good that he did abolishing slavery, it was not his priority. Still, what does it matter to the conversation that in America there wee communist movements? It has nothing to do with the compatibility of American nationalism with Communism.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:05:03 No. 575039
>>575036 Im not anon u think Ur talking too and I can tell you right now I do not conflate the US bourgeois State with the many American nations
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:06:30 No. 575043
>>575039 Okay, but the discussion about "socialist Patriotism" is not whether or not Americans should love their people or be patriotic around a socialist project. The discussion with whether or not they should be patriotic around the current state and it's history and symbolism.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:07:05 No. 575044
>>575035 (me)
Also, the Hazlerite position on the American civil war is, just their position on China, completely in opposition to the MAGA crowd they think are the real revolutionaries in the West. As always, the Hazlerites claim they need to coopt the Trumpist working class struggle yet are clearly the ones who are completely out of touch with what Trumpists actually think.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:08:22 No. 575048
>>575042 Lol. I can sense the butthurt from here.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:09:08 No. 575049
>>575044 (me again)
Like really, imagine a scenario where some excited Hazerlite is telling some MAGAtard on his Disc0rd channel about how based Lincoln was because he got a letter from Marx. I can already see the disappointment on their face when they get their undesired response.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:10:15 No. 575051
>>575047 Noooooooooo that's Black Nationalism and we don't like that :0
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:16:27 No. 575056
>>575038 >why though? Because nationalism is an incredibly powerful force and it can be either directed by chauvinist nationalism or a communist nationalism which is still national in character but not in the book sense of the word
Nationalism without chauvinism saw many nations living in harmony under the Yugoslav state and many nations living in harmony under Soviet state
It's absolutely not and it shows you don't understand the Marxist conception of the nation. Please for the love of fuck go read Marxism and the National Question
When a revolutionary force finally arrives amongst the Amerifats it'll be a patriotic one authentically representing the people as the Bolsheviks did, the Cubans did, the Yugoslavs, Vietnamese, Chinese and Koreans did
For instance the Bolsheviks accused the capitalists of bringing the Russian nation to ruin with world war and civil war, the Chinese communists showed the Chinese nation how the 'nationalists' let in Japanese occupiers
Something approximating American patriotism would be to represent the American people and display how the US bourgeois have betrayed the American nation(s) by being globalist faggots offshoring jobs and industry to make a cheaper penny whilst sending American men and women to die in pointless wars for the bourgeoisie
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:19:49 No. 575061
>>575056 >Because nationalism is an incredibly powerful force Agreed. What does that have to do with the worship of the US state and it's symbols though?
It is and I have.
I agree. But you hella shouldn't do with with the symbolism of and worship of the history of the US STATE
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:20:19 No. 575062
>>575061 >What does that have to do with the worship of the US state and it's symbols though Nobody here is talking about the US state except for you schizo
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:20:26 No. 575064
>>575060
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:21:56 No. 575067
>>575056 >Nationalism without chauvinism saw many nations living in harmony under the Yugoslav state Yeah, until a guy shoved a bottle up his ass and showed created ethnic tensions that ultimately destroyed Yugoslavia
In all of those cases the land was one nation, relatively homogenous. That is not the same in America. There are different nations, all struggling. A good example would be the many Native American nations, or """""""tribes""""""".
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:22:10 No. 575070
>>575062 >while it is a truism of the origins of the united states lay in the wholesale slaughter of the indigenous population, this does not diminish the objective significance of the United States. Since its foundations in the chartering of the Declaration of Independence from
the British Empire, the united states had acquired for itself a real place among the nations of the world, which even if unique in the intensity and barbarism, is like all nations founded on the basis of robbery and exploitation, and like all nations it contains within itself the conditions for redemption.
>The birth of the United States has seen the development of various local and quasi-national traditions with deep roots, from Appalachian Americans to the Black Belt. They have long since become indigenized, and is in fact their uprooting at the hands of the American bourgeoisie oligarchy that constitutes a proletarianization of America >The condemnation of America as a settler colony thinly disguises the hatred and repulsion of baizuo leftists towards their own people it adulterates the concrete demands of Native Americans, for more land and more autonomy, twisting it into an impossible "land back" position that only insulated, infantile ultra-left radicals like you could stand behind. These are all about the US state, not about the US people.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:23:33 No. 575071
>>575070 Stop conflating class struggle with patriotism, as patriotism has a long history in america and you cannot pomo your way out of the preconceived connotations it has, chinlet
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:23:55 No. 575072
>>575070 Guess you missed where he talked about various local traditions and cultured that developed since, as the descendants became indigenized
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:26:26 No. 575076
>>575071 >>575072 >they also mentioned the people briefly That's my entire point, dullards, this entire framing conflates "The United States" (the state) with the people living within it.
The entire conversation is about whether or not we should love the US and IT'S history (which is distinct from the history of the American people). This thread argues for the legacy of the US state, not the US people.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:28:51 No. 575079
>>575064 whatever dindu, get back into the gulag that cotton won't pick itself
national patriotic socialism won't be so bad once you get used to it
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:31:50 No. 575087
>>575082
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:33:07 No. 575090
>>575088
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:34:27 No. 575096
>>575080 >>575082 >>575084 >>575085 >>575086 >>575087 Great another serious thread derailed by a false flagger replying to himself
fuck off
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:34:51 No. 575097
>>575067 >Yeah, until a guy shoved a bottle up his ass and showed created ethnic tensions that ultimately destroyed Yugoslavia They were building for years. In part due to Tito's retarded market socialism that allowed the nation's to slowly close off against each other like Croatia and Slovenia where chauvinism began to creep in ("why do we subsidise the other lazy shitbags?)
And then again because retard Tito sought imf loans from the West.
Once the Soviet Union collapsed the West refused to extend imf loans and essentially created conditions for civil war by declaring that only countries that secede from Yugoslavia can get loans
All the while CIA and mi6 were spreading black propaganda to fuel ethnic tensions>>575061
Perhaps stop getting your history from retard YouTubers
>>575061 >Agreed. What does that have to do with the worship of the US state and it's symbols though? Is that what the Amerifats are arguing for
I doubt it.
The point of a socialist patriotism would be to adopt national symbols that would be prominent in the socialist state. So it would mean elevating people like…
I dunno… Maybe Fred Hampton or other such types as the authentic expression of the American nation(s)
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:34:53 No. 575098
>>575094 >you cant get try
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:35:23 No. 575099
>>575096 what are you seething about cope fag?
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:35:44 No. 575100
>>575098 you are my reply guy
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:35:58 No. 575101
>>575088
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:37:15 No. 575105
>>575097 >Is that what the Amerifats are arguing for Yes.
>Maybe Fred Hampton or other such types as the authentic expression of the American nation(s) I agree, but no one mentioned him thus far, right?
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:37:35 No. 575107
>>575100 Oh, its the o b s e s s e d fag who sides on the must retarded arguments possible.
Great litmus test as to whether this thread is worth anyone's time.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:45:19 No. 575114
>>575107 lmao you raged quite the last thread you were in reply guy
you gonna do it again?
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:45:30 No. 575115
>>575111 But its true, landback is literally the only thing you radical anarchist dindu sheboons support, and you oppose patriotism because you're mad your great great grandmother was a whore for big American cock
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:46:16 No. 575116
>>575115 >>575113 Reported as /pol/
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:47:32 No. 575120
>>575116 >REEEEPORTED The snitches and feds expose themselves
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:55:43 No. 575131
This debate is culture war nonsense
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 22:57:52 No. 575137
>>575131 welcome to leftypol you must be new here
unironic egoist 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:01:43 No. 575140
>>575131 leftypol: cultural war is stupid
also leftypol pol : engages in a over 50 post long pointless "discussion" over whatever cultural patriotism is good or not
leftypol never change
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:03:23 No. 575141
>>575140 I agree, but the discussion isn't about whether cultural patriotism is good
unironic egoist 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:05:45 No. 575144
>>575141 i mean im seeing haz fags defending america patriotism in this discussion.
and others saying american patriotism can not happen or is a bad thing.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:08:56 No. 575149
>>574951 Don't care hazfag. Not going to be a patriot for this retarded first world shithole
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:14:13 No. 575153
>>575144 The discussion is about what kind of American patriotism is good and whether it emphasizes the history and symbols of the people or of the state.
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:16:59 No. 575155
>>575153 sounds like pointless aesthetics
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:24:10 No. 575164
>>575155 >>575156 Eh, it is an issue that will have to be settled on the American Left going forward, tho
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:34:43 No. 575178
>>575175
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:39:23 No. 575187
>>575186
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:53:10 No. 575203
>>575202
Anonymous 2021-10-31 (Sun) 23:58:26 No. 575211
>>575208
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 00:22:33 No. 575222
>>575221 This is true, but you fuggen have to divorce that popular history from the history of the US state, because if you don't, you use the achievements of the American people to legitimize the US state.
As such it must be understood that most good things in US history was indeed against the US state, and has little to do with the founding fathers, the amerian flag, ect.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 00:46:48 No. 575239
>>575237
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 00:48:19 No. 575240
>The fact of the matter is that for all we can say of its founding, America has a mighty and authentically progressive tradition that has been present from the beginning. The war for independence threw off the imperial yoke and founded a republic that for the first time, based itself on the same enlightenment ideals that would be weaponized in the forthcoming anti-slavery crusade, and the struggle against European colonialism worldwide. The baizou anarcho-gonzaloist burn-it-all-down approach, on the other hand, has done nothing but isolate and alienate the left from the people of America since the 1960s. Ok we get that you don't have an opinion of your own and just quote e-celebs, but let's delve into each of these ideas. Firstly, to suggest that the American Revolution was ENITRELY progressive is reductive to say the least. Without a doubt, you had folks such as Thomas Paine who got the "common sense" pamphlet handed out to the American people to convince them to favour a republic as opposed to a kingdom, the man was also an abolitionist and did believe in drawing from indigenous americans forms of government, but to suggest that this state was progressive AS A WHOLE is bullshit. Despite the fact that you did have the "common sense brigade", you also had folks who fought the revolution to KEEP the institution of slavery alive. This was due to the British slowly starting to eradicate slavery on its own soil and its own colonies. That's not to say that the Brits were the true heroes, but rather to suggest that Yanks were far from these enlightenment thinkers.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2011/05/23/was-the-american-revolution-fought-to-save-slavery/ Lest we also forget that during the War of independance, the USA was far from the only Republic that was fighting off the Brtis. The Vermont Republic was actually founded on Thomas Paine like ideas and made slavery ILLEGAL from the get go and fought against both Brits (and british backed proxies) and the USA. Not only that, but they actually ALLOWED ex-slaves and African Americans to vote. It was far from perfect, but it was a lot more progressive by comparisson to the United States, which wound annexing Vermont and placing federal laws on them which allowed escaped slaves who were going to vermont to be captured and sent back to slave owners, and for slavery to be re-introduced back into the state.
https://www.vpr.org/programs/2020-02-20/the-history-of-slavery-in-vermont-across-new-england https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Republic Yeah damn bro, why would people be fucking mad at a government which constantly fucked with/ continues to fuck with the lives of immigrants, minorities, gay people and the working class and then get pissed at them to ask them to be "patriots". How about you actually have some empathy instead resorting to buzzwords?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:00:47 No. 575251
>>575240 It's cherrypicking at best, reactionary whitewashing of the US state at worst
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:04:18 No. 575257
>>574951 >In spite of these autistic brain worms parroted by the baizuo, the reality of the American people is not going anywhere. The actual relationship between patriotism and socialism historically becomes clear once the track record of the 19th and 20th centuries are examined, showing that socialists and communists have consistently been patriotic and deeply attuned to the national realities of the countries they hail from. The only reason why the question why patriotism has now come to the fore is because up until recently it has been a given. It is still a given in the vast majority of countries today. And yet here you go on talking about abstracts? What fucking national traditions? America is a country formed of over 50 DISTINCT STATES, some of which were their own republics/ nations before joining or being annexed into the Union. Each of these states have their own distinct cultures and traditions trying to create a sort of abstract pan-americana is fucking nuts. Patriotism itself is constantly utilised by liberals who, despite the fact that they themselves are aware of Americas historical shortcomings and heinous crimes to its own people, try to nonetheless push propaganda and "what has this country become, it was supposed to be x and y".
You can look at musicals like HAMILTON where they try to portray the man as a progressive, or the show boston legal WHICH GOES OUT OF ITS WAY to talk of US war crimes and appeal to the same enlightenment values that YOU are currently espousing. The fact that America has been founded on so many contradictory ideas and policies is one of the reasons its a mess to this day and why these liberal ideals have been warped and used against the American working class by both liberals AND conservatives.
(boston legal clip here)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd5vRphPqnk Your appeal to patriotism has been done before, what makes you think that shilling for an abstract pan-americana and vague appeals to tradition are actually going to carry through this time? Unless you actually have a new VISION of America and want to SEE a new nation form, then drop the Stars and Stripes for Hammers and Sickles. Promote a NEW identity founded and draws upon Americana, that goes against the current one.
Again, what the fuck do you mean by this? Patriotism has taken different shapes and forms over the centuries, and the rhetoric and praxis from old ML theorists isn't as applicable NOW as it was back then. Lenin and Mao's hailing of the American Revolution is drawn into serious question given what we now know about its contradictory nature and motives behind it. How is it American exceptionalism when one looks at the American people and government and analyses how their minds have been warped and how this indoctrination of "I pledge allegience to the flag" to reject patriotism when it's been used to brain wash and justify the worst acts against humanity the world has ever seen. People have the right and are justified to reject American patriotism based on the countries history.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:06:28 No. 575259
>>575256
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:15:07 No. 575267
>>574951 >Socialism in America will have American characteristics. By assuming that only the third world proletariat is capable of attaining a revolutionary character, so-called Maoists (read: Ma-autists) in America commit the inverse error of western social democrats of the early 20th century. Both share a lack of dialectical thinking, because they assume that America and her people are an "exception". They might label socialism with American characteristics "Browderism", but it is in fact they who are the Browderists, if only inversely. America does have the potential to start a revolution, but I doubt they're going to be the first that does so. America is not only cucked by a massive propaganda appartus, deep state shitting, FBI cointelpro up the wazoo, but it's also screwed over by its urban geography. Americans are mostly kept in the rank and file of the suburbs, where there is hardly any MOP to be seized, and most of the manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas. Oh sure, you get your warehouse worker here and there, and farmers and miners etc. but for the most part America has exported its capital and MOP overseas where most revolutionaries cannot seize it. What the fuck are these suburbanites going to seize? The fucking shopping mall?
>>Though not in substance, yet in form, the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle. >Twenty-seven years later in his Critique of the Gotha Programme, Marx stated: >>It is altogether self-evident that […] the working class must organize itself at home as a class and that its own country is the immediate arena of its struggle. >Mao stated: >>Can a Communist, who is an internationalist, at the same time be a patriot? We hold that he not only can be but also must be. Yes, an international revolution is all well and good, but we also have to understand that this was theory written within the 19th-20th century. If you want to create a new form of patriotism, sure, but it must be for a country or a community that has yet to exist. As I said before, America has a proud proleteriat history, but drawing inspiration from the founding fathers and the contradictory nature of "Liberty and justice for all" is a lost cause. America has always been at war with itself trying to find its own national identity. Socialist American partiotism for the most part means sweet fuck all, and trying to convince the entirety of 50 states to adopt your way of thinking is a bunch of idealist universalist bullshit. You're applying 20th century thinking to 21st century conditions and realities.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:15:55 No. 575269
>>575265 >no one was claiming the "american project" is inherently progressive. <This can't be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is that for all we can say of its founding, America has a mighty and authentically progressive tradition that has been present from the beginning.
eugenics-kun 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:18:58 No. 575272
Oh joy, this faggotry.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:19:46 No. 575274
>>575271 >no where did they say "the "american project" as inherently progressive" <Never let these baizuo maoists forget the progressive contributions the great American project has made to history.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:21:46 No. 575278
If george washington sailed the ocean blue to behead the king of England himself, then maybe I'd buy into this garbage of an ideology just a little bit
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:24:41 No. 575282
>>575279 >the progressive contributions =! inherently progressive <progressive contributions are not progressive
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:24:51 No. 575283
>>574983 >Never let these baizuo maoists forget the progressive contributions the great American project has made to history. like what tho
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:34:06 No. 575288
>>575286 >the progressive contributions =! inherently progressive <the progressive contributions are not inherently progressive
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:45:57 No. 575302
>>575297 >A country can be "progressive contributions"
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:49:28 No. 575307
>>575305 <reeeeee I didn't say that
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 01:51:02 No. 575309
>American being a Chinese patriot
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:40:34 No. 575380
>>575374
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:41:56 No. 575381
I still havent seen any examples of what america has done that was progressive besides being the last European country to abolish slavery, and even then it was a half hearted attempt to retroactively justify a civil war
eugenics-kun 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:47:05 No. 575389
The Hazbots are so clearly trying to ingratiate themselves with the coming fascism in America. There's no "revolution" and not even reform there. It's just rehashed Hitlerism for the 21st century, another part of the Blackest Reaction. They really went overboard and showed that they're about bringing people back to the regime when this socialist patriotism faggotry started.
eugenics-kun 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:49:01 No. 575392
And as many pointed out, it's quite hilarious that the people trying to boost this "American patriotism" meme are fucking krauts that don't know shit about American history, who want to impose their German shit on this country, and that has been an ongoing project. These same people like to believe the krauts have an "actual democracy" in their rigged-ass system that was built so that the establishment would always win. I groan every time someone wants to do PR in American electoral democracy. That would be an even worse clusterfuck than the shit we have with bipartisanship.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:50:13 No. 575394
>>575378
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:50:47 No. 575395
>>575393
eugenics-kun 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:52:04 No. 575400
>>575390
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:53:41 No. 575405
>>575387 >established a republic in opposition to monarch >abolished slavery >women's suffrage >civil rights >labor unions
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:55:22 No. 575407
>>575401
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 02:56:51 No. 575411
>>575405 >I would rather go back to Cromwell and adopt his symbols That's right. The commonwealth was better than the US ever was.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:01:52 No. 575417
>>575413 >>575414
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:03:23 No. 575419
>>575387 >established a republic in opposition to monarch except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted , shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.their fight not the implementation of the civil rights laws that inspired people.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:08:59 No. 575426
>>575422 >what exactly are you arguing against here? >and? the justification for it has nothing to do with the argument. the statement was a reply to: >>I would rather go back to Cromwell >so you're a reactionary got it
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:09:30 No. 575427
>>575423
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:10:44 No. 575428
>>575426 >At least Cromwell actually killed a monarch instead of making profitable deals with him Also, the commonwealth had the Levellers that were waaaaaay more basado than anything the burgers had for a long while
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:10:53 No. 575429
>>575026 Shoutout to Brown and Debs. The fact that their legacy is still disputed to this day is an indictment against America's progressiveness"
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:13:56 No. 575434
>>575430 >you realize they were part of the USA as well right?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:15:46 No. 575436
>>575428 >The Levellers came to prominence at the end of the First English Civil War (1642–1646) and were most influential before the start of the Second Civil War (1648–49). Leveller views and support were found in the populace of the City of London and in some regiments in the New Model Army. Their ideas were presented in their manifesto "Agreement of the People". In contrast to the Diggers, the Levellers opposed common ownership, except in cases of mutual agreement of the property owners. tbh I need to up my English history game, I just threw out Cromwell because I know he chopped king Charles' head off
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:17:03 No. 575440
>>575439
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:19:32 No. 575445
>>575436 Yeah, the Levellers and Diggers were fucking basado.
The weirdest thing about them is that when they wrote their texts "private property rights" meant rights TO property, meaning that they thought everyone had the right to be given property.
They were weirdly radical.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:20:08 No. 575448
>>575444
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:21:41 No. 575454
>>575445 >The weirdest thing about them is that when they wrote their texts "private property rights" meant rights TO property Extremely based. I, as an impressionable 20 something american prole, am now a marxist-leninist-cromwellist
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:22:34 No. 575456
>>575454 Cromwell wasn't a leveller though
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:23:41 No. 575458
>>575456 I, as an impressionable 20 something American prole, an now a marxist-leninist-levellerist
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:30:57 No. 575466
>>575423
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:32:12 No. 575468
>>575466 Thank god someone said it
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:33:20 No. 575470
>>575434 They will never understand, you are preaching on deaf ears
They just want to waste time by being as provocative as possible.
It's fitting that Kanye West is their leader's favorite musician.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:34:37 No. 575473
>>575470 Sigh, frankly the mods should really clean behaviour like this up
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 03:58:18 No. 575484
>>575430 >care you show how this is somehow a counter to what was being said? >how does this counter anything
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 04:17:50 No. 575509
People who claim that America is progressive for abolishing slavery seem to ignore the vast institutions and culture dedicated to pushing the ‘Lost Cause’ narrative and iconography. The fact that John Brown is still labelled a terrorist and have far less statues than Lee renders the progressiveness of the Civil War moot.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 04:39:29 No. 575531
Just ignore the US stan obsessing over his snowflake definition of progressivism
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 04:54:40 No. 575537
ITT<ummmmm actually all i said was that US sometimes did some things that were okay and some of the people that lived in the US that the state murdered were also kinda based, p-please don't hurt me :'(
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:02:09 No. 575540
Anyway socialist patriotism why not. But I hereby propose the motion of excluding the US of this. The first reason is that everyone hates America. The second reason is that I don't see how made up countries like 150 years old could be nations while they are real people (indigeneous) who actually have a culture and could claim this territory. The third reason is if a made up country can be nation in such a short time we could make up new countries of our own on this land.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:07:21 No. 575543
>>574951 1) socialist internationalism
2) "America" already has a specific meaning to most people that is extremely opposed to socialism. No contradiction, but there is a serious antagonism and your movement will be coopted immediately by moneyed interests. From a pure practical standpoint, which I think is your whole argument, it's nonsense.
No one says "you shouldn't want to improve your country;" but you say it needs to be a main selling point. To think that patriotism is socialism's only hope in America is a megacope. You are seeing all the nationalism in this country and wondering why can't we get some of that. Answer: lots of money that the left will never have is spent on capitalist nationalism.
We must turn Americans into socialists instead of recruiting brainwormed imperialists into our movement
Stop with all the idpol
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:09:29 No. 575544
>>575536 feel free to start arguing at any time
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:09:47 No. 575545
>>574951 First world nations are the real failed states, because they are too successful in destroying their own proletariat. They can have no Revolutions until the conditions improve. Being a patriot can be translated into being a retard who loves their failed state, or being a person who wants his country a better future. The latter case? Sure, be a patriot like that. The problem is, patriot in majority of cases means the former.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:11:49 No. 575546
>>575537 sounds like cope from a loser that can't make an argument
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:22:22 No. 575550
Man, this aversion conditioning is working marvels.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:24:01 No. 575552
>>575544 >>575546 Argue against what? You've retreated back so far that your current position is just
>the US state did a few things that were okay, largely because it was forced to, and those are things we should keep in mind and not forget What is there to argue against? Your entire position has become an innocuous truism with basically no content.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:39:12 No. 575557
>>575556
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:49:26 No. 575562
>>575560
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 05:56:41 No. 575569
>>575566
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 06:27:15 No. 575579
Stop it both of you
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 06:37:25 No. 575583
>>575364 I miss the old Caleb.
Grillpilled Schizo 2021-11-01 (Mon) 06:41:14 No. 575587
>>574951 >Baizuo Stopped reading there. Log off. You will never be a socialist. You are just a hyper-online China cargocultist.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 07:53:32 No. 575614
>>575587 haha the mean chinaman word for you hurts your feelings lol
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 08:09:08 No. 575621
>>575614 leftypolers = btfo
wigs = split
infrared = rising
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 10:10:14 No. 575672
ITT>Retards that can't tell the difference between a nation (a people) and a State (a politically created entity)
Grillpilled Schizo 2021-11-01 (Mon) 10:31:09 No. 575683
>>575614 No, not really. It just shows how little self-awareness the user of the word usually has, especially when they open a discussion on such blatantly pointless, tiring and hyperonline topic.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 11:07:58 No. 575691
>>575672 Don't confuse form and essence
The nation is not a people, a country is the essence of a people
The nation arises out of the state and is merely the what formally represents the people
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 11:09:05 No. 575692
>>575683 >everyone that uses the term baizuo is actually a white angloid himself C O P I U M
O
P
I
U
M
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 11:27:21 No. 575700
>>575691 How to tell me you haven't read Origins of the family private property and the State by Engels without saying "I've not read origins".
Whatever definition you're using is not the Marxist conception of the State
Here is the Marxist conception of the State
<A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm If the nation arises out of the State… how come the State in USA (erected by the bourgeois of the european-american nation) were able to subjugate the native American nations in USA?
And if the "people" (ie. a nation) arose out of the State….. Who exactly was there to create the State prior to the States construction?
You're claim is absurd and ridiculous
<And this institution came. The state was invented. Engels, Origins,
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/ch04.htm The nation does not arise out of the State. It's the complete opposite
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 11:30:26 No. 575701
>>575700 Fucks sake
I typed State not nation…Should read
Here is the Marxist conception of the Nation
<A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 11:49:39 No. 575710
>>575701 So to clarify as this discussion is autism on methamphetamines
A nation
<A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. A State
<With the onset of class society and private property a thing standing "above" society needed to be created: to perpetuate private property and manage inevitable violent class antagonisms from the dispoessed classes It's quite clear you can be patriotic for your people and culture and your historical traditions (ie. your nation).
To deny Native-Americans today their patriotism in expressing their history/culture/territory/ language/economic life and psychological make up would be a form of national chauvinism by the European-American nation
Despite this (and I think this is what the retarded Amerifats are arguing over) you can be patriotic for your European-American nation (ie. the white nation including even the non-whites who subscribe or align with this nation). A love of your people/culture/(certain)history/economic life etc.
You can be patriotic for this nation but you cannot be patriotic for the USA bourgeois State
And if Communists representing the European-American nationcame to power in USA tomorrow it would be their duty to offer the Right of Self Determination and the Right of Secession to the other Nations inside USA. (the many native americans/the black nation if they wanted their own nation)
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 12:05:21 No. 575715
So I can't speak for Haz, Maupin, or their disciples, but when I hear the term "socialist patriotism" in the American context this is what I imagine and advocate for:>Recognize that America exists as an authentic national entity composed of many constituent sub-groups (including First Nations, the earliest Anglo colonists, black people, later migrants from around the world, Chicano and other Hispanic people). >each of these groups have both a unity and a distinction from one another (not unlike the various ethnicities that compose Chinese civilization), all are authentically American, all have the right to cultural self expression (yes, even those icky "settlers") >Recognize that none of these groups can realistically be suppressed or forced to renounce their identities, at least not in the foreseeable future (though obviously our long term goal should be to cause people to see these identities as unimportant relative to their united identity as citizens of an American socialist republic, and by extension the world proletariat) >If we are to accept this reality, we also need to accept that any socialist project in America will need to establish a sense of American national identity that is compatible with socialist values and goals >This will require us to draw on all progressive forces which appear in American history, to uphold these as emblematic of the American national character (or at least what it ought to be), and serve as the basis around which Americans should orient their sense of national identity >Most of these elements of course emerge from America's lower classes and oppressed peoples. These are no less American than the reactionary forces which opposed them. John Brown was just as American as the Virginia judge who sentence him to death, etc. >Some however, emerged from its ruling class in very specific contexts, e.g. the War of Independence (which was in the grand scheme of things a progressive development imo), the Civil War, America's involvement in WW2. Embracing these elements should not be avoided just because they were supported by the ruling classes at the time. Obviously however we shouldn't obfuscate or ignore the reactionary elements involved (e.g. the persistence of slavery after the War of Independece), but simply recognize that these did not negate the overall progressive nature of these figures, movements, and events. >It should go without saying that any incorporation of these elements into the ideology of American socialism should be done critically, with an awareness and rejection of their reactionary elements. This should also be done alongside the condemnation, in strongest possible terms, of racism, colonialism, imperialism, national chauvinism, and American exceptionalism. These need to be vigorously struggled against if socialism with American characteristics is to have any chance of success, and we need to actively pursue measures to undo their lasting legacies in the present. >It should also be obvious that patriotic socialism in America in no way requires us to support or endorse the existing American state or its policies.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:07:58 No. 575876
>>575574
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:08:44 No. 575877
gay infrared thread, do not interact
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:32:06 No. 575909
>>575715 >Obviously however we shouldn't obfuscate or ignore the reactionary elements involved (e.g. the persistence of slavery after the War of Independece), but simply recognize that these did not negate the overall progressive nature of these figures, movements, and events The problem here is that the ummm "progressiveness" of the US is so arbitrary and so pitifully meaningless compared the the evils that it did that it's comparable to praising Hitler because he developed the Autobahn and let his people go on vacations and also he's was nice to his dog. To praise those things are to leave out so much critically important iand pertinent information that it's akin to a sort of white supremacist historical revision.
Example:
>America set up a republic that had a small franchise of only rich white landowners over 30 (smaller than most republics that had preceeded it and certainly smaller than most that would come after it) <one of the reasons they set up this republic was because the Crown had denied them westward expansion. The US and their settlers proceeded to murder and dispossess about 60 million people. We can have another
>The US fought to end slavery <because at this point it had become economically inefficient and ending it helped the interests of the northern industrial bourgeoisie. The US then put Black people through poverty that often was worse than slavery itself, keeping them terrorized in an apartheid system that only dejure recently ended, and defacto never did. In fact slavery inside the penal system is still legal, so slavery was never abolished. Do you see? The supposed "progressiveness" of each of those things instantly fade away once you no longer look at them in a vacuum. In fact, to want to embrace the US state based on these "good" deeds requires so much rewriting of history, so much ignorance of context, that it can be directly dangerous and lead people to worship a state and the symbolism of a society that has been the most genocidal, most imperialistic in world history. It's depravity unmatched.
So use whatever you want that was positive and revolutionary from the American people, but never should you ever dip into rhetoric that legitimized and pays homage to a supposed positive legacy of the US state, because that doesn't exist.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:35:27 No. 575916
>>575890
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:38:27 No. 575921
>>575890
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:52:22 No. 575940
>>575921 The Hawaiian Monarchy getting annexed by the US wasn't progressive
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:52:43 No. 575943
>>575934
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:53:24 No. 575944
>>575921 And why should we be patriotic for the republic that every marxist agrees needs to go?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:54:14 No. 575946
>>575940 Okay, but then this statement is false
<however a republic a step in the right direction from monarchy this is undeniable Then it is deniable.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 15:55:06 No. 575949
>>575944 we shouldn't. I'm arguing that we shouldn't.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:05:25 No. 575966
>>575909 >The problem here is that the ummm "progressiveness" of the US is so arbitrary and so pitifully meaningless compared the the evils that it did that it's comparable to praising Hitler Sure, which is why I'm not advocating "praising the US", or claiming that the US as it has hitherto existed is an overall progressive force. What I am saying is that America as a nation =/= the US government, and that opposing the latter doesn't mean rejecting the former.
>To praise those things are to leave out so much critically important iand pertinent information that it's akin to a sort of white supremacist historical revision. I didn't say leave out any information. On the contrary I explicitly said that the bad needs to be considered and taught alongside the good. We can celebrate the good without celebrating the bad.
>The supposed "progressiveness" of each of those things instantly fade away once you no longer look at them in a vacuum. No they don't. A progressive change is a progressive change, regardless of whether or not it fails to completely resolve a contradiction, or whether it was motivated by some form of self interest. History is a gradual process, contradictions are resolved slowly, and are largely driven by groups acting in their own interest. These two premises are central to the Marxist theory of history. Pointing out that abolition was driven by the self interest of Northern capitalists, and that it was followed by 150 years of systemic racism that continues to this day does not detract from the progressive character of abolition. This would be like saying that the USSR wasn't progressive because they didn't succeed in abolishing money or the state.
>In fact, to want to embrace the US state I don't want to embrace the US state, I want to construct a sense of American national identity that is compatible with socialism.
>but never should you ever dip into rhetoric that legitimized and pays homage to a supposed positive legacy of the US state I agree, but I don't think that's what I'm doing here. I'm not saying "the US government is good because of abolition". I'm saying that we should hold up abolition and figures associated with it as a basis for an alternative sense of American nationhood.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:08:47 No. 575969
>>575960
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:17:56 No. 575978
>>575966 >A progressive change is a progressive change So you're responding to something that is not my point.
What yoy have to establish is how the establishment of a republic that murders 60 million people is overall a progressive thing. How do you arrive at that? You can't just say it was progressive and then ignore all context.
So tell me: what makes the establishment of a white oligarchy that murders 60 million people and perpetuates white supremacy in different forms even until today, had slavery longer than the European monarchies and became the greatest most violent empire in history a progressive thing?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:19:39 No. 575980
>>575974
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:26:18 No. 575986
>>575980 running out of arguments now? 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:27:31 No. 575988
>>575986 No you are?
Is your argument simply that progressive things have happened *inside* the US? Is that where we're at?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:27:46 No. 575989
>>575988 feel free to start arguing at any time
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:29:14 No. 575990
>>575989 answer the question, weakling
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:30:49 No. 575991
>>575990 make an argument copeoid
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:32:57 No. 575994
>>575991 Tell we what I'm arguing against, otherwise I don't have to present an argument.
Is your position that the US has done progressive things or that progressive things have been done within the borders of the US?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:40:17 No. 576002
>>575994 >Tell we what I'm arguing against read most of the thread its not my fault all you've been able post is hurt feelings
I've not made either of those points
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:44:40 No. 576006
>>575966 >Pointing out that abolition was driven by the self interest of Northern capitalists, and that it was followed by 150 years of systemic racism that continues to this day does not detract from the progressive character of abolition. Yes it does. It demonstrates that abolition was pathetic and barely did anything for black people and that patting yourself on the back for it is a gross misunderstanding of history and what black people have experienced historically. Non-slavery in the US was only better in rather inconsequential ways for black people, and as such point to this as a progressive achievement comparable to anything the USSR did.
How little abolition actually achieved is something americans should be ashamed of to be honest.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:46:44 No. 576010
>>576002 Okay so what does it mean that the US has "fostered many progressive forces"?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:49:22 No. 576012
>>576010 what are you confused about?
many progressive forces have come about as a result of the United States
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:52:49 No. 576018
>>576012 Okay, so how do we know those forces are progressive?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:55:45 No. 576022
>>576019
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 16:59:49 No. 576026
>>576012 Even more reactionary forces came about as a result of the United States.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:01:09 No. 576029
>>576026 Yeah and the fact is that most of the progressive forces that came about as an ummmm "result" of the US vehemently hated the US and actively resisted them.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:01:37 No. 576030
>>576029 than you US for making us hate you
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:05:05 No. 576035
>thank the tsars for making everyone hate them and causing a revolution, man tsarist russia was so amazing for making everyone hate it so progressive 👏
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:06:25 No. 576039
>>576035 Is this standpoint epistemology?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:06:49 No. 576041
>>576035 Okay, so a person can do nothing progressive in their lives, right? But we know that they're progressive if other progressives like them, yes?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:08:24 No. 576044
>>576036
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:09:46 No. 576046
>>576042
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:14:19 No. 576050
>>576048 >many progressive forces have come about as a result of the United States
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:19:38 No. 576054
>>576052
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:25:33 No. 576061
>>575978 >What yoy have to establish is how the establishment of a republic that murders 60 million people is overall a progressive thing. How do you arrive at that? First off, I'm not sure where you're getting that number from, but it's massively inflated. 60 million is similar to the figures given for the entire pre-contact population of both North and South America. There were far, far fewer natives living within what would become the US in the 18th and 19th centuries. Second, the establishment of a bourgeois Republic in an era where feudalism is the dominant social order, and monarchy the dominant form of state, is progressive by definition. The fact that this same republic later went on to play a reactionary role doesn't negate this. If we were to apply your reasoning, we would also have to conclude that the 1911 Chinese revolution was not a progressive development because it eventually resulted in the regime of Chiang Kai Shek. However this is not the view held by Chinese communists, who regard the 1911 revolution as an important step in China's development and world history. Historical materialism tells us that the contradictions in any given social order give rise to epochs of revolution, revolution gives rise to new social orders with new contradictions, which in turn give rise to new revolutions. Anything which advances this process is progressive.
>>576006 >It demonstrates that abolition was pathetic and barely did anything for black people Black people didn't feel that way at the time. Even if they lamented the lack of reparations or the failure of Reconstruction, you will not find one that wasn't ecstatic at the destruction of the Confederacy and the end of slavery. Marx himself recognized the huge importance of abolition, as did virtually every communist who followed him, both American and non-American.
>to this as a progressive achievement comparable to anything the USSR did I'm not comparing it to the USSR. I'm saying that abolition was still a progressive and important development, the struggle for which Americans can and should derive a sense of pride from. Even if it didn't immediately resolve the contradictions brought about by slavery and racism (nor could it have been expected to, since history simply does not work this way). With that in mind, the legacy of abolitionism, it's rhetoric, figures, and imagery, is something communists should draw on when trying to establish a new sense of American national identity.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:29:23 No. 576062
>>576052
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 17:29:51 No. 576063
>>576060
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:02:39 No. 576117
>>576061 >60 million is similar to the figures given for the entire pre-contact population of both North and South America. Precolonial America was about 140 million people. Colonialism in the Americas killed about 120 of these, around 60 in North America.
So low-ball it and let's say only 20 million of these were in heartland USA, just for shits and giggles.
Is the establishment of a bourgeois republic "progressive" if that bourgeois republic is established explicitly to conquer indigenous land and genocide 20 million people? How the hell can something meaningfully be called progressive if the world had been a better place if it had never happened?
100% that negates any and all ways the establishment of that republic could ever have been progressive. Who gives a shit about abolishing monarchy if genocide and privatization of communal land is the way you do it.
Oh you interviewed them, did you?
Plenty of black people were on record that abolition barely did anything for them and in fact, life as proles in a deeply white supremacist society was a much more precarious one. At least slavery had provided some food-security and lodging and some safety from arbitrary lynchings. Capitalism and abolition offered none of it.
If it was an improvement, it was one that was so small as to basically be meaningless, and for you to be prideful of it is to be ignorant of it's realities.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:04:11 No. 576119
>>576074
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:05:46 No. 576120
'Patriotism' in America is so intertwined with Reaganite politics that the concepts cannot be seperated in the cultural, and thus political realm
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:06:03 No. 576121
>>576074
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:09:40 No. 576124
>>576078
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:11:05 No. 576127
>>576124 I'm that other guy.
You're 100% right that's entirely what I meant and it's the only reasonable reading of what I wrote.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:11:40 No. 576129
>>576128 >>576127 No claim can be proven outside of math.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:12:55 No. 576132
>>576129 Since when did the anglo logical positivist cucks take over leftypol? where did all the hegelians go
Fuck off
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:14:43 No. 576137
>>576135
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:16:43 No. 576143
>>576132 >>576134 That's not positivism and it's just a truism of how epistemology work.
I can provide things that *support* my statement, but I think it is trivially true as you yourself admit that even the most reactionary institutions have spurred progressive forced at least by happenstance.
Like, I can begin to provide the innumerable examples of that, but ultimately that would never be "proof". but what would be much more productive would be a single counter example.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:18:36 No. 576149
>>576146
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:23:09 No. 576155
>>576144
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:28:18 No. 576163
>>576157
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:30:42 No. 576166
>>576159 >>576144 >>576155 >you got patriotism in my egoism >you got egoism in my patriotism Patriotic American Egoistic Socialism, here we come.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:34:22 No. 576174
>>576170
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:34:35 No. 576175
>>576117 >Precolonial America was about 140 million people. Colonialism in the Americas killed about 120 of these, around 60 in North America. Gonna need a citation on that one, the highest figure I've ever seen was 100 million.
>So low-ball it and let's say only 20 million of these were in heartland USA, just for shits and giggles. That would still be a pre-contact figure, which wouldn't account for the massive decline in the native population which happened in the 100 years between the establishment of contact and the earliest settlements in the continental US. The settler population of the US itself didn't even reach 20 million until the 1850s, and by then all the evidence points to settlers massively outnumbering natives.
>Is the establishment of a bourgeois republic "progressive" if that bourgeois republic is established explicitly to conquer indigenous land and genocide 20 million people? Yes.
>How the hell can something meaningfully be called progressive if the world had been a better place if it had never happened? Because "progressive" in the Marxist usage is not a synonym for morally righteous, peaceful, or pleasant. It refers to anything which advances the historical dialectic, which sweeps away an old social order, and introduces new forces which bring society closer to communism. In this sense the American Revolution was progressive because it established conditions of capitalist modernity on the American continent, conditions which are necessary for proletarian revolution.
>Oh you interviewed them, did you? I've read their work, maybe you should too. Black abolitionists like Frederick Douglass were vocal supporters of the Union cause, as were communists like Marx. Nobody would dispute the notion that abolition did not go far enough, but that doesn't make the actual destruction of slavery something to denounce.
>life as proles in a deeply white supremacist society was a much more precarious one. At least slavery had provided some food-security and lodging and some safety from arbitrary lynchings Damn, imagine being so gripped by vulgar anti-Americanism that you defend slavery.
>and for you to be prideful of it is to be ignorant of it's realities Not in the slightest. Abolition was a necessary precondition of black liberation, one that was only achieved at the cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives. Celebrating this achievement and honoring the sacrifice of those who brought it about does not require us to forget its failures. This would be like saying that you can't celebrate the 1911 Chinese revolution or venerate Sun Yat Sen without also endorsing the current Taiwanese government. Meanwhile the CPC celebrates that revolution and its leader, despite the fact that they themselves were the targets of brutal repression at the hands of the state it begat, and are currently locked in a struggle against it. This is because Marxists recognize that history moves in fits and starts, through a series of gradual, limited, and often temporary advances which only produce wholesale transformation when taken together over the course of decades or centuries. Institutions and forces which were progressive in one context become reactionary in another. Each step on the road to liberation is deserving of celebration, especially by the people who brought it about.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 18:58:50 No. 576209
>>576175 >Because "progressive" in the Marxist usage is not a synonym for morally righteous, peaceful, or pleasant. And that's not the way I'm using it either. I am pointing out that this was genocide that privatized communal lands, like a GIANT enclosure of the commons, except many times larger than what happened in England.
Would you call the enclosures progressive? Would you say that it doesn't matter if anyway if you actually add GENOCIDE on top of that.
If you think that's a defence of slavery, then you're not very smart. Alternatively, you might not be very honest.
When was slavery abolished in Haiti? When were black people liberated in the US?
Abolition has nothing to do with Black liberation. Sure, it was fine, but it's effects were so neglible it's comparable to being proud of the Squad of "Build Back Better". All of them do almost nothing.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:01:58 No. 576213
>>576175 And if all we're talking about is "progressive" in the strictly Marxian sense where genocide and imperialism technically is progressive, why on earth would we be proud of any of that?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:03:44 No. 576215
>>576214
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:20:18 No. 576246
>>576209 >I am pointing out that this was genocide that privatized communal lands, like a GIANT enclosure of the commons Your mistake is in assuming that the existence of modes of production which bear a superficial resemblance to Marxist communism could or should have been preserved. Some indigenous societies practiced various forms of communal land ownership true, but they did this because it suited their level of technical development. It was not a social system that could ever have hoped to transcend or defeat industrialized capitalism. Had they been left to their own devices, there is no reason to believe that they wouldn't have followed the path of virtually every other society and developed their own forms of state violence and class oppression. Indeed the beginnings of this could already be seen in their practice of slavery, and even more clearly in the pre-contact social structures of their southern neighbours the Aztecs. Thus the destruction of their way of life, while horrific, contemptible, and without any conceivable justification or moral merit, was not "reactionary" in the strict sense of the term. Moreover even if it was, this does not negate the progressive aspects of the establishment of a bourgeois republic, because whether something is progressive or reactionary depends on the context, and a single entity can be both in different ways, or progressive at one time and reactionary later on.
>Would you call the enclosures progressive? Yes actually, since it displaced large numbers of peasants, both creating the free labour force that would become the proletariat and making the continuation of feudalism virtually impossible.
>If you think that's a defence of slavery I'm not sure how else to interpret you saying that slavery was better than freedom in some ways. Were there any black people who would have preferred to return to slavery? Who were indifferent at getting their freedom? I would love to see historical accounts which attest to this.
>Abolition has nothing to do with Black liberation. So you believe that black liberation could be achieved without abolishing slavery? Of course you don't, because that's insane. Therefore it follows that abolition was a precondition of black liberation. That statement is true regardless of whether or not the leaders of the union had black liberation on their minds (which they obviously did not).
>>576213 >why on earth would we be proud of any of that? We wouldn't be, but recognizing the progressive character of say, the American Revolution and celebrating this aspect of it is not a celebration of genocide. You can a thing's positive aspects without supporting its negative ones. If we are to apply your reasoning, then celebrating the USSR would mean celebrating the persecution of gay people, and celebrating the French Revolution would mean celebrating denying the vote to women.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:32:12 No. 576272
>>576246 >Your mistake is in assuming that the existence of modes of production which bear a superficial resemblance to Marxist communism could or should have been preserved. Well, they should have. Because even if they through primitive accumulation or some shit developed into bourgeois states AT LEAST those resources wouldn't have been used to fuel the most evil empire that the history of humanity has ever seen.
The world is worse in every way imaginable for human beings because of settler colonialism, and no, none of that is "progressive".
That abolition essentially changed so little as to be meaningless. A whole lot of black people stayed on the plantations they had worked as slaves as ummmm "apprentices" or as wage workers. Many moved into company towns and worked the same mines they always had. For many many black people there was zero meaningful difference, and thus to pat yourself on the back about it like it was an achievement is misguided.
Yes it was in Haiti.
100% they are. They are one and the same. No revolution, no genocide, at least not at all on the scale that actually carried out. To celebrate the American revolution IS to celebrate genocide, they're 100% intricically connected to each other. The Founding Fathers rebelled so that they could expand westward and genocide and also keep their slaves. There is no revolution in the US that exists independently of this fact.
Sure, we can say that a lot of these things "progressed" the dialectics. But it is disgusting to call the enclosures a good thing or something we should be proud of. It's disgusting to as that imperialism and genocide is something we should be proud of, even if these technically are taking us closer to communism.
They are things that we should loathe in spite of the fact that they are progressing the dialectics, and to think otherwise is inhumanly sociopathic.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:41:34 No. 576286
>>576272 >The world is worse in every way imaginable for human beings because of settler colonialism, and no, none of that is "progressive". But you can exactly ask nicely the men with guns to stay away from that which they can take. It's not a matter of morality. If I know you are carrying a winning lottery ticket and there is a reasonable expectation that nobody will see me shank you for it, you are losing the ticket.
Now is that evil? Yeah, but it couldn't have gone any other way.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:44:14 No. 576291
>>576286 Does evil become less repugnant if it was inevitable?
Does suffering become morally neutral all of the sudden if there is a profit incentive behind it?
Should we just lay down like dogs and accept history as passive observers?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:48:33 No. 576293
>>576272 >Because even if they through primitive accumulation or some shit developed into bourgeois states AT LEAST those resources wouldn't have been used to fuel the most evil empire that the history of humanity has ever seen. Sure Anon, because we all know that without the American Empire everything would be just fine and dandy. It's not as if imperialism and genocide are the products of our mode of production, it's not as if another imperialist power may have emerged in the absence of the US. It's all because America.
>The world is worse in every way imaginable for human beings because of settler colonialism Frankly I don't see how feudalism could have been transcended without it. Primitive accumulation was a necessary step for capitalism, and thus communism, to even be possible.
>That abolition essentially changed so little as to be meaningless That obviously isn't true. Even if it took decades to manifest itself, without abolition there is no great migration, no black middle class, no civil rights movement, no end to segregation, no black liberation. The fact that there may prove to be centuries separating abolition from true black liberation doesn't make the former any less essential.
>For many many black people there was zero meaningful difference If that's true then you should be able to provide me with historical evidence attesting to this. The situation you are describing predominates in the years immediately following abolition, but Reconstruction changed this considerably. For example during the Reconstruction era there is a sudden explosion of black people in positions of power, including in government. The backlash to Reconstruction and the establishment of Jim Crow was a reaction to the progress made by black people, which was only possible because of abolition.
>Yes it was in Haiti. Haiti abolished slavery. The only difference was that they did it themselves, something which was only possible because they were a majority. American slaves tried to rise up on numerous occasions, and were soundly defeated each and every time. It took the entire might of the most powerful and developed part of the US four years to defeat the slave owners. There's little chance that the slaves themselves could have done this.
>They are one and the same. France didn't grant women the right to vote until 1944. Does this mean any celebration of the French Revolution is also a celebration of the disenfranchisement of women?
>No revolution, no genocide That's demonstrably false. Canada remained loyal to Britain and carried out essentially the exact same policies of genocide and forced assimilation.
>and also keep their slaves That's a half truth. Britain didn't abolish slavery in its colonies until 1833, by which point about half the US had already done so. There was literally a period where slaves in Canada could only escape by running to the US. It may be accurate to say that the Southern planters had the preservation of slavery in mind when they rebelled, but it definitely isn't true for the merchants who were running things in the North. They began abolishing slavery at the state level almost immediately after achieving independence, and the contradiction between them and the planters would eventually result in civil war.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:51:30 No. 576298
There is no progressive nationalism in the imperial core. Nationalism can only be progressive if it is in opposition to imperialism.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 19:54:24 No. 576300
By the way, this thread is such a joke.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:09:26 No. 576316
>>576308 Semi-true.
A nationalist will often fold as soon as he sees a flag burning or a monument getting torn down.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:12:37 No. 576319
>>576298 >imperialism what is imperialism? is it like wanting your country to compete with other nations and do better then them? how is that a bad thing? just like a business will do what it can to do better then the competition sometimes to the point of driving the competition out of business nations operate on the same principle as do all human interactions where people compete to get the promotion or do to better then their peers.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:14:00 No. 576323
>>576319 > just like a business This is a jk, right?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:14:17 No. 576324
>>576308 Nationalism can be either progressive or reactionary. It is progressive where there is a national struggle, the overthrow of a foreign imperialist power.
USA is the foreign imperialist power. Therefore the nature of American nationalism is reactionary in nature.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:16:01 No. 576326
>>576324 So then how do you explain the position of Maupin, which is both nationalist and anti-imperialist? It's almost like real life doesn't follow these arbitrary rules.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:17:49 No. 576329
>>576326 Maupin is revisionist lol
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:17:59 No. 576330
>>576326 NTA, but Maupin can have some legitimately retarded takes because of his views, so he really isn't the best example.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:18:19 No. 576332
>>576293 >It's all because America. Yes. America is *UNIQUELY* genocidal and imperialist in history. There is no Empire that is similar to it.
This is because the American frontier had material incentives to, and as such created a culture where racism and genocide was one of the easiest and most sustainable means to accrue wealth. This created in America a culture that is uniquely racist, uniquely genocidal and uniquely evil. No other civilization has ever come near it, and no other culture could be expected to be as evil and genocidal, as the American Empire has been, as the material conditions that created this uniquely genocidal culture only existed on the American frontier (and maybe in south Africa but w/e)
That is not to say that things would have been perfect without the US, but the world would have been without the most genocidal, most racist, most imperialist force the world have ever seen (as no other empire could have been expected to replicate it).
And yes, that would have been a relatively much better world.
So, how much settler-colonialism did the USSR and PRC do in other to transcend feudalism?
What are you talking about. There was a black middle class, even black slavers, before abolition. There was a civil rights movement too. The rest, however, STILL have not been addressed. The US is STILL a segregated society. It still has legal slavery (13th amendment). It still has no black liberation. Abolition changed so little as to be irrelevant, because as Haiti proved, you don't even need to have abolition BEFORE black liberation. it's not a prerequisite at all. Both can be achieved at the exact same moment.
Jim Crow was made to make things they way it had been for a while.
The reason to took so long to pass, was that immediately after "abolition", there was no meaningful difference, and white people realized this.
Therefore, it was only when black people actually tried to assert themselves, that it was necessary to do anything about it at all.
Your point here and how long it took to pass Jim Crow proves MY point.
So if the French revolutionaries had a neighbouring country, filled with women that they wanted to disenfranchise and the King told them not to, and they then rebelled against the king specifically to invade that neighbouring state and disenfranchise women, then yes, I would say that to celebrate that revolution would also be to celebrate the disenfranchisement of women.
Nope. They were not good to their First Nations, but they were waaaay better to them, and as a result they still make up like 5% of the Canadian population. There is no comparison between the two. Had the US never rebelled there would have been a shitton more American Indians around.
Up until 1800 only 4 of the 13 colonies banned slavery those only doing it AFTER the Philipsburg Proclamation, to prevent royalism amongst the slaves. Most of the founding fathers themselves had slaves. The literal leadership of the revolution had an interest in the preservation of slavery, and England itself had banned it Britain and in India. They had good reason to expect that abolition would come to the Americas soon, and as such they rebelled.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:24:03 No. 576340
>>576323 no, where was i wrong in what i said?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:24:13 No. 576341
>>575027 >>575033 >If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that t. Abraham Lincoln
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:24:25 No. 576343
>>576332 >Yes. America is *UNIQUELY* genocidal and imperialist in history. There is no Empire that is similar to it. Britain killed 1.8 billion Indians and is the country that created the concentration camp
https://mronline.org/2019/01/15/britain-robbed-india-of-45-trillion-thence-1-8-billion-indians-died-from-deprivation/ Now add up the dead Chinese, Africans, Irish, Asians and the 2 world wars they were massively responsible for starting
British people can still be patriots though unless you think the average Brit (working class)has had much say in the political system created here since the 1800s
Americans just cope cos they prefer armchairism which is why even your communist parties are utter dogshit and any tangible opposition to imperialism that could exist is nonexistent in USA
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:26:34 No. 576347
>>576340 Nations aren’t businesses, fam.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:26:57 No. 576349
>>576343 British nationalism is also reactionary
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:28:04 No. 576350
>>576343 Yeah, British communists absolutely also should not uphold the legacy and symbols of the British empire.
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:29:16 No. 576351
>>576343\I have a theory the more imperialist the nation = the less likely a revolution and the more imperaiized a nation= the more likely a revolution
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:29:38 No. 576352
wait why is my comment n green text wtf
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:31:56 No. 576358
You can be a patriot but not an american patriot
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:37:13 No. 576363
>>576350 >>576349 British "nationalism" is reactionary but patriotism is absolutely (as expressed by British nationalists) not the authentic expression of the British people
For instance, in recent years British 'nationalists' celebrated the Trump wave even wearing his red hat's on many occasions
Now Trump is someone that joked about fucking UK in a trade deal
We see nationalism is not really nationalism in the Communist sense of the word but they are just willing compradors and servile dogs for imperialism
A British communist patriotism would uphold working class history and it's champions as the true expression of the British nation
Though yes I agree you could not uphold items of the current British State as expressions of this patriotism
<The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality. <The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word. National differences Marx, Communist manifesto
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:38:42 No. 576365
>>576350 >patriotic British socialism >It’s the monarch on a hammer and sickle flag Fucking LEL
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 20:57:26 No. 576399
>>576332 >America is *UNIQUELY* genocidal and imperialist in history. No it isn't. They killed far fewer natives (in raw numbers) than the Spanish did. The only reason they were able to near completely eradicate the native population was because of how small it was to begin with, largely thanks to diseases introduced by the Spanish. In Cuba the native population was destroyed even more thoroughly than in the US, and slavery lasted even longer. Yet somehow still Cuba has found way to be both patriotic and socialist.
>So, how much settler-colonialism did the USSR and PRC do in other to transcend feudalism? They had the benefit of being established in the 20th century, when primitive accumulation had already led to industrialization in the West. Both the USSR and PRC imported technology from the West to fuel their own growth.
>There was a black middle class Yes, mainly in the North, where slavery had already been abolished.
>There was a civil rights movement too Which was entirely located in and operated out of the North because it was literally illegal in the South.
>The rest, however, STILL have not been addressed. Sure, much of these contradictions remain unsolved. However you can't seriously tell me that abolishing slavery wasn't a huge and necessary step in this process.
>Abolition changed so little as to be irrelevant Thats a ridiculous notion, and it wouldn't be seriously entertained by any Marxist thinker, white or black.
>Jim Crow was made to make things they way it had been for a while. No it wasn't. It was designed to counteract the gains made by black people under Reconstruction, a period in which the US government deployed federal troops to the South to protect black civil rights. During this period there were black people being elected to numerous public offices. There were literal coups carried out to prevent black officials from passing any policy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilmington_insurrection_of_1898 The idea of a black person holding public office in a Southern state prior to abolition would have been unthinkable, I'm pretty sure it was literally illegal.
>So if the French revolutionaries had a neighbouring country, filled with women that they wanted to disenfranchise That's ridiculous. We recognize, as all sane people do, that you can celebrate something's positive aspects without celebrating it's negative aspects. This is why a celebration of the French Revolution is not a celebration of keeping women from voting, and why a celebration of the American Revolution is not necessarily a celebration of genocide.
>Nope. They were not good to their First Nations, but they were waaaay better to them They were not. There was less violent conflict (though of course this still happened) but this was largely because the population here was even sparser than in the US and displacing them was easier. Canada had the exact same policies of displacement, discrimination, and forced assimilation as the US. Indigenous people in Canada, and even the Canadian government, still recognize this as a genocide.
>as a result they still make up like 5% of the Canadian population Thats because there were/are fewer settlers, and indigenous people are a fast growing demographic.
>Up until 1800 only 4 of the 13 colonies banned slavery And by the time Britain banned it most of the Northern states had as well, thus putting to bed the notion that they rebelled specifically to keep it.
>The literal leadership of the revolution had an interest in the preservation of slavery As individuals sure, but history is made not by individuals but by broad social forces. Clearly the classes that they represented, at least in the North, did not have a strong interest in the preservation of slavery.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:15:40 No. 576427
>>576399 >No it isn't. They killed far fewer natives (in raw numbers) than the Spanish did. No they haven't. They've been the global hegemon for what, 80 years now? Under their hegemony, far more people have died under capitalism than under any other system, probably in the multiple of billions.
Yes, but not about it's pre-socialist order, jesus.
But not in the east. There is nothing to say that technology cannot be developed under statemanagement of a society developing out of feudalism. Capitalism was never a necessity, nor was it destiny, it was just what happened.
Maybe an okayish one, sure. Neccessary? Not technically, but okay. Huge? No. Black people still got lynched, they were still poor, they were still segregated, often they still worked in the same mines or plantations as before abolition.
You mention some of them being elected to office afterwards. Sure. But that's not an indicator for real progress for the community as a whole. No, Barack Obama wasn't actually a big achievement for the Black Nation. No, he didn't help racism. Largely, white people in the south accepted abolition because it meant very little, and when it meant anything they rebelled against it until the US state stopped caring.
Abolition itself was such a minute accomplishment that it's comparable to the establishment of the EPA. Nice? Sure. Big enough to be proud of? Hardly. You'd have to ignore a huge part of the picture.
Okay, give me a single good reason why Germans shouldn't celebrate the good parts of Hitler then.
Sure, but even genocide happens on a spectrum. It's not just "a state commits genocide" or "a state doesn't commit genocide". Scale matters, and you admit that there is a difference in scale.
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:27:05 No. 576451
>>576427 >But not in the east. There is nothing to say that technology cannot be developed under statemanagement of a society developing out of feudalism. Capitalism was never a necessity, nor was it destiny, it was just what happened. the east was stuck in a medievial style mode of production until east asia went state cap
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:34:43 No. 576465
>>576451 Sure, but that was litterally in a word where dominant capitalism was already established and where you needed access to that foreign capital.
I'm not trying to say that the adoption of capitalism didn't help a bunch of countries, it was.
I'm just saying that capitalism was never DESTINY. It wasn't the only way. It became the only way, but in the 14th and 15th centuries, things could have swung the other way.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:35:12 No. 576467
>>576427 >Under their hegemony, far more people have qdied under capitalism than under any other system Any other hegemon would be the same. All the capitalist empires carried out similar crimes, and would continue to do so if they were the dominant power.
>Yes, but not about it's pre-socialist order That isn't true. José Marti Perez is regarded by Cubans, including communists, as a national hero and is widely celebrated. The same is true of comparable figures in Latin America like Simon Bolivar, who lends his name to the socialist, anti-imperialist revolution in Venezuela and the country of Bolivia.
>Capitalism was never a necessity, nor was it destiny, it was just what happened. Well then you aren't a Marxist. Marx was pretty clear that the bourgeois revolutions were a driving force of capitalist modernity, and that capitalism was necessary before communism became possible. This was still true in the feudal countries which became socialist, since they only succeeded thanks to technologies developed under capitalism, and were generally the result of social conditions imposed by it.
>No. Black people still got lynched, they were still poor, they were still segregated, often they still worked in the same mines or plantations as before abolition. Yeah except they weren't literal property with absolutely no rights, that the masters could dispose of however they wanted. The insane intensity of racism in the South prevented many of their rights from being recognized sure (though only after federal troops had been withdrawn), but the great thing about not being a slave is that you can go somewhere else where the persecution is less intense. Hence the Great Migration.
>But that's not an indicator for real progress for the community as a whole. It is when practically all of them were slaves just a few years earlier. You can't compare it to Barrack Obama because the context is completely different. Going from being property to having a say in running the country is a massive improvement. If it was truly meaningless then there would have been no need to drive black politicians from office with violence and intimidation.
>Abolition itself was such a minute accomplishment You still haven't provided a source from a single black author that even claims this.
>Okay, give me a single good reason why Germans shouldn't celebrate the good parts of Hitler then. They can, and do. I'm sure the average German is proud of the autobahn as a great feat of infrastructural engineering a great accomplishment for their people. I'm sure they regard. There's nothing wrong with this, and being proud of the autobahn is certainly not an endorsement of the holocaust. The difference is that the historical role of the Nazis was overwhelmingly reactionary. That isn't true of somebody like Lincoln, whose overall historical significance is progressive.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:36:25 No. 576469
>>576427 >Largely, white people in the south accepted abolition because it meant very little They didn't accept it. They violently resisted it with every means at their disposal. It was imposed on them through force of arms after four years of bloody conflict and hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 21:51:49 No. 576495
>>576467 >José Marti Perez is regarded by Cubans, including communists, as a national hero and is widely celebrated. The same is true of comparable figures in Latin America like Simon Bolivar Okay, but both of those have a claim to being heroes MUCH better than the founding fathers or the republic they founded explicitly to commit genocide.
Yes, and that is a point on which I believe the historical research proves Marx wrong. Because you're right that I'm not a Marxist in the vulgar sense that believes is strict determinism of stage-theory. The way things happen didn't happen because they were destined to, and they weren't the only ways to do it.
The position you're dipping into here is Accelerationism, not Marxism. Capitalism never was a necessity, nor was it ever progressive.
That's what a lynching is. That's what happened after abolition too. I mean sure, it was a good thing that Black people could create their own spaces, but THAT is what should be celebrated, not that the US stopped stepping on their throats as hard as they had done before and did nothing real to help them after that as if that's an achievement. It's not. It's pathetic how little it achieved, if Black people did not themselves use it to achieve something.
For one individual. For the black community as a whole? Nah.
Beyond white fragility and unwillingness to see even black individuals prosper as individuals.
Okay, so they fly Nazi Flags and say Hitler did good for doing the Autobahn, and you can celebrate Hitler for doing the Autobahn? Is that what they're doing?
Tell that to the natives
https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/janfeb-2013/lincoln-no-hero-to-native-americans/ You go to American Indians and tell them that Lincoln overall was a progressive.
>>576469 AFTER the US stopped even trying intervening in the south haha
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:11:11 No. 576538
>>576465 except even before the domination of cap world it was shown a cap stage was nesccary in the east. After all one of the most succesful dynasties and arguably the turning point that could have changed east asian destiny from being imperialized in the 18th centurary was the song dynasty and that dynasty was heavily developing the trends towards capitalism. the song even had joint stock companies lol.
post dynasties after the song meanwhile did not follow the economic stages and returned to neo feudalism like the qing did. And lets just say that the qing era was known for its extreme stagnation
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:16:06 No. 576558
>>576538 Okay, I don't know about the East in particular, maybe what you're saying is true, but general stage-theory is a little out-dated in Marxism, even Marx even kinda spoke against it:
A lot of what is being said here would have been true for the central European communalist federations as well, and it's very possible that if they had won out that a step directly into socialism from feudalism was possible.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:18:41 No. 576567
>>576558 This is also why the native First Nations were never destined to turn into capitalist countries btw.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:44:22 No. 576675
>>576117 MUH 140 GORILLION
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:48:18 No. 576684
>>576567 >This is also why the native First Nations were never destined to turn into capitalist countries btw. yeah and the native americans were either stagnant or were wipied out
yeah but in the end they didnt. the fact that the capitalist world was able to outcompete them was evidence enough that the feudalism to socialism stage was insufficent. And additionally the fact that the only actual thing that can compete against the capitalist world, china further shows that the whole going from feudalism to socialism is a bad idea, since china was only able to do this by going through its long ass cap stage, and not through feudalism to socialism.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:50:18 No. 576691
>>576684 I normally don’t support the hatecriming of asian americans, but for your yellow on the outside white on the inside subhuman ass, I’d make an exception
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:54:39 No. 576707
>>576691 normally im a guy who hates banannas and want them to be gulaged
but wow i guess im not anti bananna enough
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 22:55:36 No. 576711
>>576684 >the fact that the capitalist world was able to outcompete them was evidence enough that the feudalism to socialism stage was insufficient. There's ummmmm a little more to the story than that, isn't there?
That post is a huge strawman though
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:02:26 No. 576733
>>576722
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:07:48 No. 576748
>>576743 >Nah, I am a patriot and there is nothing you can say to make me hate my people and my people
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:08:00 No. 576749
>>576711 <i mean depends you can make multiple counters to what i said but uh i dont think they are good counters the fact that the system was prone to revionism and fell because of that, and the fact that alot of the systems were prone to revionism and fell because of that is still a flaw in the system and shows that the system failed to compete
The fact that the capitalists had a head start is still evidence that the capitalist outcompeted the socialist system. Simply because the capitalist system was able to appear first and start everything and it was only later that socialism was able to appear as a reaction to it. For if the socialist system was able to outcompete capitalism then the history of humanity would have been different and instead of feudalism to capitalism we got to feudalism to socialism. But instead the feudalism to socialism never happened and instead feudalism to capitalism happened instead and took over everything and caused the hellscape we are in right now.
also inb4 someone misunderstands what i mean im not saying lol capitalism system beat socialism economically in the 15th centurary because socialism didnt exist
What im saying is that if capitalism was able to appear first and was associated with the nations that ended up conquering and destroying everything, and socialism wasnt able to appear, then it shows the whole feudalism to socialism idea is nonsense.
Why
because with capitalism appearing first it was able to pretty much cause the cap dominated world in the first place to the point feudalism to socialism wouldnt counter.
Hell the fact that feudalism and socialism wasnt able to appear at all in other countries furthers this
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:08:27 No. 576751
>>576495 If you want to pig headedly insist that abolition and bourgeois revolutions are not a revolutionary development then I can't stop you. Just know that pretty much every Marxist disagrees with you, including black American ones.
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:09:00 No. 576753
>>576749 feudalism to socialism wasnt able to appear at all in other countries furthers this
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:11:49 No. 576760
>>576751 I want you to walk up to Black Marxists and tell them that abolition was a revolutionary act and changed enough for black people to warrant white people patting themselves on the back for it 150 years later like it wasn't just an incremental change, yes.
Some are definitely. The French. The British. The Chinese. 100%.
The American? No. That was predicated on genocide and expropriation.
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:13:01 No. 576761
>>576723 send gordan chang to the gulag sir
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:18:54 No. 576780
>>576749 I think that encapsulation and the limitation and sanctionic of trade from the capitalist bloc in the era had a lot to do with it, I don't think it was just because they didn't go through a capitalist stage *on it's own*.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:19:48 No. 576783
>>576773 >nationalism is not the people
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:21:20 No. 576789
>>576760 I challenge you to find me a single black communist who thinks that we should not celebrate abolition. You realize that black people have been doing exactly that of their own accord since it happened right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juneteenth unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:21:34 No. 576792
>>576780 yes and the fact that the capitalist world was in the condition to do so in the first place is still the capitalists outcompeting them and showing the feudalism to socialism was a dead end
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:23:19 No. 576798
>What im saying is that if capitalism was able to appear first and was associated with the nations that ended up conquering and destroying everything, and socialism wasnt able to appear, then it shows the whole feudalism to socialism idea is nonsense.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:24:44 No. 576800
>>576789 >You realize that black people have been doing exactly that of their own accord since it happened right? Well what else have the US given them to celebrate?
unironic dengist 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:24:45 No. 576801
>>576798 wait what do you consider medievial socialism to be ?
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:26:50 No. 576805
>>576801 The artisan-yeoman-peasant communalist transnational alliances that coordinated and planned their economies and organized themselves in horizontalist structures.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:27:05 No. 576807
>>576800 The irony of a (probably) white radlib telling black people how they should feel about their own history is palpable.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:32:15 No. 576819
>>576807 That's not their history, that's white history. The Abolition part is the part where white people where the actors and black people where the passive ones, that's why you like it and why it's the acceptable history you like to go back to. Like you "solved it" for black people, even though it was an incremental step done by a genocidal maniac that would have fought the war to preserve the union even if it meant freeing no slaves anyway.
Like imagine pointing to a genocidal warmonger who didn't care about black people and claim that is something to be proud of just because he didn't oppress black people as bad as the guys before him had done.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:33:22 No. 576822
>>574951 nationalism is superior to patriotism. a nationalist at least has the coherent idea of the nation behind him. he can set himself to the task of
nation building , a task which can be either progressive or reactionary. but patriotism is always, everywhere, reactionary. patriotism is unthinking stupidity of the highest order - "i like my country because it's mine!" - it is nationalism without content, nationalism disavowed. there is a reason that every bourgeois politician is proud to declare himself a patriot, but many rankle at the idea of being called a nationalist. a contentless appeal to "patriotism" to match a contentless appeal to "values".
you can always identify a fraud because he marks himself a patriot. a nationalist takes a risk - see the Scottish nationalists for example. they know that by calling themselves "nationalists" they run the risk of being seen as rightoids, but they don't shirk their task. They say openly: no, we have a vision of the Scottish nation built on geography, not on ethnicity. They set themselves the task of defining a new nation with a pick'n'mix of components of a very old one. Having no such vision and no such convictions the bandwagon jumper thinks they can fall back on "patriotism", a charade which will be seen through at once by everyone: nationalist, communist, and utterly confused alike.
translation convention.
Оте́чественная is not
patriotic , even if that's how it's translated.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:33:53 No. 576826
>>576807 Imagine what Natives would think if you walked up to them and told them all about what a great guy Lincoln was for not oppressing Black people AS HARD as before when he genocided them.
Anonymous 2021-11-01 (Mon) 23:39:56 No. 576843
>>576837
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:02:22 No. 576898
>>576826 I wouldn't say that, I would say that Lincoln was a progressive figure whose role in the destruction of slavery should be celebrated while also acknowledging and denouncing the role he played in oppressing indigenous people.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:06:28 No. 576908
>>576898 But that's impossible. You can't do that. You can't celebrate Hitler for improving infrastructure and aiding Indian independence, when he also genocided people.
Like, these things have to meaningfully negate *genocide*.
Did abolition do enough for black people to excuse genocide? Fuck no, Abraham Lincoln is not worthy of adoration in American history, especially not if you want to not come off as genocidal maniacs to native people.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:11:49 No. 576921
>>576914 >But apparently because it didn't immediately cure racism its bad 100%, abolition should have done a thousand percent more than it did, the fact that you live in a society so evil that all black people can be thankful for are pittances is not my fault.
WEB Du Bois directly compared the period after reconstruction to Slavery once again, and figured that the US simply never could or never would do enough for black people as Reconstruction has clearly failed to, and as such black people needed their own spaces.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:12:50 No. 576923
>>576914 >both as agitators for the cause and as soldiers in the Union army. And I mean, then hail THOSE GUYS what the fuck do you use your time praising Lincoln and the US state for?
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:15:49 No. 576928
>>576908 i mean you can do this with the simple application of the words ceteris paribus.
If you can say: "would genocide have occurred on the same scale if Lincoln were replaced? yes. would slavery have been abolished as quickly if Lincoln were replaced? No." then the fact Lincoln committed genocide can be set aside: genocide is something you're stuck with regardless, the choice becomes "genocide and slavery" or just "genocide".
(the comparison to Hitler is particularly helpful because Hitler's actual domestic record was woeful.)
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:17:12 No. 576933
"set aside" was perhaps too brash an expression for the point being made. though reflective of the fact that politics is fundamentally black and white. friend and enemy. if Lincoln is a friend, we set aside genocide, and if he is an enemy we set aside the abolition of slavery.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:18:44 No. 576936
>leftcom arguing with succdem over just how many Native American deaths is acceptable to still jerk off imperialist settler nations
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:21:50 No. 576941
>>576928 >>576935 Problem is: There are many actors that participated in the emancipation process that did ZERO genocide.
Why not praise those, and not the guys who gave into their demands and that supplied them (with equipment gotten from centuries of colonialism, genocide and slavery btw)?
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:43:48 No. 576984
>>576941 That's a reasonable compromise, though I find it silly to celebrate the abolitionist cause without celebrating the person who directed it but whatever.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:46:53 No. 576990
>>576941 Exactly.
Why praise the asshole leader of the Union who justified his civil war through moralistic appeals to humanity (the basis for the neoliberal order we know today) instead of the actual escaped slaves in the underground railroad and such?
I guess it wouldnt be good enough optics for the magafags infra-caleb are trying to attract.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 00:50:01 No. 576994
>>576984 But that's my entire point. There are plenty of fucking amazing people to be celebrated in US history who did a lof of good for a lot of people. When Americans are based they're SUPERBASDO.
But like it's only gonna hamper us if we divert that to people and institutions that, frankly, weren't all that awesome compared to others.
>>576990 I think there is an element to that.
I think for some Haz people, the point is not so much about the progressive things that the US has done, but about trying to justify nationalism through cherry-picking the few nationalist figures that somewhat did a few progressive things.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:00:30 No. 577020
>>576994 >But like it's only gonna hamper us if we divert that to people and institutions that, frankly, weren't all that awesome compared to others. Part of the issue is that as with any neighbouring peoples, and nations with a history of conquest of one by the other, positive figures in one culture are inevitably going to be negative figures to others. One man's Great is another's Terrible etc. This is not a one way phenomenon in the American context. Take Metacomet for example. He was a Wompanoag chieftain who led a war of resistance against English colonization of Massachusetts in the 17th century, a cause I'm sure most would agree he should be celebrated for. However his warriors also unleashed indiscriminate violence against the settler population of New England, brutally murdering entire families and razing whole villages to the ground. His role as a fighter against colonialism is inseparable as is role as a butcher of women and children. That being said, I would not for a second begrudge the modern day Wompanoag for celebrating him as a great leader and symbol of anti-colonial resistance. This is because I understand that for them, he represents resistance to colonization, and not indiscriminate violence against non-combatants. By that same token, to white and black Americans, Lincoln represents not genocide but the destruction of slavery.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:06:20 No. 577037
>>577009 Ugh, I mean without going into the differences between anti-colonialist violence and colonialist violence in moral terms, let's just agree that if there is a non-genocidal alternative, that guy is prolly better, yeah?
Here is Daniel Shay.
Think of him like proto-socialist George Washington. Based man. Nice than Washington.
Love America, love Shay.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:11:01 No. 577047
>OMG here is some heckin based random settleroid who once said something based before being immedaitely executed, we need to listen to him instead of anybody from AES
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:12:59 No. 577051
>>577037 Shay was breddy based, but he didnt fly the american flag like these mouthbreeding cultists want to. If they had their way, they'd be lionizing and making Nathaniel Bacon a martyr, because "revolting against the government in this situation was ackshually progressive"
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:16:56 No. 577058
>>577047 What does US AES look like?
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:17:13 No. 577059
>>577037 >I mean without going into the differences between anti-colonialist violence and colonialist violence in moral terms I'm not saying that they are equivalent. I'm saying that if a Wompanoag person says that they like Metacomet because he resisted colonization, I'm not going to tell him he shouldn't. This is despite the fact that the very thing he is being celebrated for also includes horrific violence against non-combatants from the same community to which I belong (insofar as I am a "settler"). That's because I understand that this sentiment comes out of an admiration for his resistance to colonialism, not an admiration of killing women and children.
>let's just agree that if there is a non-genocidal alternative, that guy is prolly better, yeah Fair enough.
>>577051 >but he didnt fly the american flag like these mouthbreeding cultists want to I don't think American socialists should fly the American flag, even if they frame themselves in patriotic terms.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:21:56 No. 577066
>>577058 I don't know what exactly but I know it's not going to be a Politburo hall with portraits of Daniel Shay, Ethan Green, and Huey Long
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:32:06 No. 577093
>>577058 Non-existent. In order for there to be an AES on the territory of USA, it needs to be completely destroyed, along with a third of its population, if we're lucky.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 01:45:27 No. 577115
>the question why patriotism has now come to the fore is because up until recently it has been a given. It is still a given in the vast majority of countries today.
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 02:04:17 No. 577140
>>577132 Actually Existing Socialism
A term used by the CIA to undermine socialist movements from the start by declaring them utopian
Anonymous 2021-11-02 (Tue) 02:05:17 No. 577141
>>577140 No, It was originally used by the socialist bloc in defense of their societies against Utopian smoothbrains.
Anonymous 2021-11-03 (Wed) 04:21:40 No. 579274
>>578803 This is an amazing mindset,
Patriotism is the fitness of the nation, and therefore there can't be anything more patriotic than socialims. Welfare is lifting weight and collective property is going on a diet.
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 13:11:42 No. 584749
As problematic as "socialist patriotism" in the imperial core might be, it nonetheless is stupid to minimize the U.S. Civil War's progressiveness. Furthermore, blacks definitely partook in the abolition of slavery in active ways. Read W.E.B. DuBois.
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 13:19:25 No. 584766
>>584749 Someone post that full pic, she may be a dumbfuck radlib but she I bet she has a fat ass .
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 13:41:22 No. 584815
>>584749 >pic my god
i cant blame my neighbors for being grillpilled if this is the quality of political discourse they should expect
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 15:03:56 No. 584915
>>584856 Damn I gueds I really do have to learn Spanish
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 15:05:19 No. 584921
>>584913 Fruit juice is good and Quakers are great activists, lot of guts for Orwell to say this whike being an imperialist snitch
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 15:10:37 No. 584930
>>584913 It do be like that.
I hate any form of eceleberry, thottery, petty drama (like that haz bullshit) or other degenerate bullshit being associated with socialism.
Why can't everyone just be like Luna Oi?
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 15:23:14 No. 584958
>>584749 >How do socialists ensure that their definition of patriotism is the one which becomes the hegemonic usage By achieving state power and promoting our understanding of patriotism. Obviously prior to that, our notion or patriotism will never be mainstream, but that doesn't mean it can't have a powerful effect on the working class.
>Could the usage of patriotism backfire, because the majority of U.S. proletarians and people live in urbanized and more "cosmopolitan" areas? Of course, insofar as such a message may attract people who view socialism as a means to promote their patriotism rather than the reverse. Such was the nature of people like Mussolini and the national syndicalists, who went on to spawn fascism. At the same time however, it's not as if such people would have remained socialists anyway.
Anonymous 2021-11-06 (Sat) 19:03:55 No. 585297
Does this thread mark the return of Infrared to these boards?
Anonymous 2021-11-07 (Sun) 01:59:53 No. 585729
>>584930 >luna soy Hopefully this is ironic
Anonymous 2021-11-07 (Sun) 04:05:52 No. 585829
>>585726 Luna Oi responded to this pretty damn well in the sense that the "research" that was conducted might not have been up to scrutiny and might have been framed in a certain way, and was also documented by AN AMERICAN ORG. No input from vietnamese resources are actually used in this article. Waving flags when a leader of a country shows up to negotiate etc. can be attributed to diplomacy. Australia and China were technically at war with eachother during the 60's/70's during the Vietnam war, but China went out of its way to fly the Australian flags when Gough Whitlam arrived. I doubt that this means that every single person from China had an overall positive view on the land down under.
Look, Haz can be spot on when it comes to debating Nazis, not so much when he goes out of his way to criticize other leftists. But the lads plagued by misanthropy and seems to lack humility.
Anonymous 2021-11-07 (Sun) 04:08:57 No. 585835
>>584832 She's ripping off petty-booj coomers, how is that bad?
Anonymous 2021-11-07 (Sun) 04:10:46 No. 585837
>>585835 (me)
>>584818 Also nice testicles Anonymous 2021-11-07 (Sun) 04:24:30 No. 585850
>>585835 That's not special. She should be a libertarian and do that. And the only people who will clap for her are the same ones who congratulate Musk on getting richer.
All these fucking vampires do is demoralize actual communists in the first world and make us look like a joke to prospective ones. Not to mention the global south. Part of why I mentioned Luna. Not everybody has to be a retarded attention-whoring lolcow like Haz.
I literally don't want people like her (the pink hair) remotely associated with me politically.
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 11:15:29 No. 587682
>>585801 She will never notice you and she will never fuck you
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 11:33:39 No. 587684
>>585829 Infrared talked to many vietnamese communists and all of them hated luna oi
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 11:40:53 No. 587686
>>587684 Many, many people are saying this
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 11:51:17 No. 587690
>>587684 Many people, folks, many people are saying this! Believe me, it's very many very serious smart people! Tremendous.
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 12:08:53 No. 587697
>>587686 >>587690 ok marxoid, read heidegger
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 12:11:02 No. 587699
>>575387 > established a republic in opposition to monarch
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 12:26:08 No. 587704
>>576061 > Second, the establishment of a bourgeois Republic in an era where feudalism is the dominant social order, and monarchy the dominant form of state, is progressive by definition I’m confused here…
Where was feudalism the
dominant social order in 18th Century Western Europe? Feudalism =/= monarchy, mind you, nor is it when you have a large amount of yeoman peasantry. Furthermore, you can have arguably have a feudal republic if you just don’t have a monarch heading your feudal society and the United States wasn’t the first republican government anyway, the Italian city-states had independent maritime republics already in the Middle Ages. For fucks sake sabocat, the
Dutch had a fucking Republic for centuries before the American Revolution ever occurred, and the American revolution still effectively established in the South a literal slave society reminiscent of the pre-medieval/ancient world while in the North was a mercantile economy dependent both on the Southern slave economy as well as the “feudal” monarchies of Europe, alongside the global imperialist regime of Britain.
Ngl but there’s something seriously wrong with your understanding of history, you’re bleating out ideas like dogma and the problem with that is of course it leads to a distorted understanding of history based on some vulgar idea that history moves in very specific and solid stages.
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 12:27:54 No. 587706
>>587704 Hmm, well, I did do Error, feudalism WAS dominant in the German territories, Spain, France, etc. though ironically feudalism was not the form in Britain who the US was moving against anyway. Ironically the “progressive” qualities of the US Revolution usually harken back to it being a war of liberation against imperialism, rather than some idea that it birthed bourgeoisie society into existence which it didn’t.
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 15:46:01 No. 587835
>>587699 >Idky this is treated as some progressive movement if you can't tell how a republic is superior to a monarchy I don't know what to tell you.
>the society were NOT the bourgeoisie, but a landed gentry no the US property didn't work the same as European property rights the founders we're bourgeois.
>whose economic basis was NOT wage labor but slave labor wrong again slavery wasn't even that prominent when compared to the rest of the economy and it was the progressive nature of the republic that led to the abolition of slavery.
>explicitly fashioned to resemble the Roman Republic based
> Will you seriously claim the Roman slave society was progressive compared to 18th Century Europe? never have.
>And even then, the Southern economy was dependent on the British Empire anyway, making the US economy as a whole dependent on Britain arguably until the Civil War doubtful and impossible to prove.
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 15:57:28 No. 587843
Truth
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 16:09:24 No. 587860
>>587684 >Infrared talked to many vietnamese communists and all of them hated luna oi >>587697 >read heidegger >>578803 >unironically posting opinion of Yugoslavia bombing enjoyer >>585784 >Heidegger >>587835 >wrong again slavery wasn't even that prominent when compared to the rest of the economy Implying that slavery was not prominent in a non-industrialised settler country whose entire economy was build on raw produce for export, you're so retarded
"Progressive " cus it "led to the abolition of slavery", what's next? you gonna call the Nazi Eastern conquest, lebensraum and the slaves of the Nazis also "progressive" because "eventually it would create the conditions that would lead to its own abolition"
People like you should be punched in the fucking neck
>>587835 >doubtful and impossible to prove that the USA and UK were dependent on eachother The first thing your cuck government did after their """"revolution""""" was collaborate with the remaining fucks of the Anglo-cuck empire to destroy the Haitian revolution.
Infracels are fucking braindead white boys who want to larp as an oppressed nationality. Fuck the USA, fuck your flag, fuck 1776 and fuck you.
The destruction of your empire is imminent inshallah
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 16:13:21 No. 587869
>>587835 >doubtful and impossible to prove. <TIL studying the economies of the UK and US in the 18th and 19th Century is impossible Hang yourself you dumbass Infranegger
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 16:13:42 No. 587870
>>587860 >but ah dindu nuffin Average infrared hater
Anonymous 2021-11-08 (Mon) 23:09:49 No. 588622
>>587869 are you this bust blasted you got called out on making baseless assertions that can't be shown to be true or false? cope
Anonymous 2021-11-12 (Fri) 19:08:04 No. 595422
The only occurence that'd make this shit crazier is if the WSWS guys suddenly decided to jump in the fray.
Anonymous 2021-11-12 (Fri) 19:10:39 No. 595427
>>574951 yes but have you considered that this country sucks and can eat my entire ass
Anonymous 2021-11-12 (Fri) 19:26:34 No. 595456
>>595451
sagesagesagesage Anonymous 2021-11-17 (Wed) 10:17:14 No. 602082
why did this patriotism business cause Unruhe to break from Maupin?
eugenics-kun 2021-11-17 (Wed) 13:48:45 No. 602192
>>602082 Maupin et al are signaling that they're herding people back into the regime, going out of their way to prop up the fake US-China war. Jason has his issues but he's been making a lot more sense here than the Maupinsphere.
COVID just destroyed the online left, because most of the left picked the wrong side, and the COVID matter has been successfully gamed so that a right-wing coup is the likely outcome in America.
Anonymous 2021-11-17 (Wed) 14:32:01 No. 602204
>>595504 >What is america without capitalism, imperialism and a horrific colonial past? A republic born out of opposition to monarchy
on of the many countries at the forefront of labor rights
a constitution and system of government that has been copied to most of the world.
Anonymous 2021-11-17 (Wed) 15:31:54 No. 602251
>>575079 >>575115 >>587870 >casual racism Average infracel
Anonymous 2021-11-17 (Wed) 15:32:24 No. 602252
daily remember for you libs that patriotism is nothing short of class collaboration in a capitalist dictatorship
7ko 2021-11-27 (Sat) 18:37:54 No. 620160
If there is to be a sort of S.W.A.C., what'd it be like in the U.S.?
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 18:40:10 No. 620164
>>620160 Republicans supporting UBI for homeowners
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 18:42:18 No. 620166
>>576341 Nobody fucking cares.
Seethe more Sakai cuck.
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 18:53:12 No. 620175
The only thing worse than some retarded burgermutt shilling for "patriotic socialism" is mautists like
>>574970 who shill for "patriotic socialism" but brown
Both deserve a bullet to the head
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 19:29:25 No. 620246
>>620175 He didn't shill for land back, he just said America is especially unlikely to have a successful left-wing nationalism
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 19:36:38 No. 620273
>>620246 "Patrotic Socialism but brown" isn't Land Back
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 19:38:30 No. 620276
>>620273 Whatever, he didn't shill for that either
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:06:21 No. 620353
Talking about US patriotism is impossible without reckoning with 'Americanism' which historically has had a very liberal (dare I say, revisionist?) tinge. It's often been used as a way of appealing to bourgeois interests (hence the recurring accusations of 'Browderism') and wash away our more radical and genuinely interesting history.
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:09:28 No. 620360
>>620353 Like, I live in Missouri and only recently found out that Joseph Weydemeyer, a correspondent of Marx and the one who actually coined the term, 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' served in a volunteer artillery regiment while defending St Louis from Confederate partisans! I never learned anything like that in public education (well through undergrad). Why don't we have statues of men like him?
Grillpilled Schizo 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:38:01 No. 620418
Does the pope shit in the wood?
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:45:23 No. 620425
>>620395 most of that imagery came from the browder era of the party! no US marxist can deny the appeal of that era, but what it was in service to ended up being a colossal failure. seeing both haz and maupin backtrack in favor of william z foster was kinda funny
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:46:19 No. 620426
>>620418 it's not 3 months old, more like 2, maybe 3 weeks; I'd be inclined to agree if discussion continues nowhere though
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 20:54:27 No. 620436
So why did all those posts get deleted? Did they contain any actual bad stuff, or did they get scrubbed just because they advocated for a sort of socialist patriotism? not even particularly in agreement about the socialist patriotism shit, but this is some peak snowflake act to basically render parts of the thread not readable
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 21:08:50 No. 620460
America fucking sucks, how can you be a patriot for this nation founded by liberal freemasons
Anonymous 2021-11-27 (Sat) 21:30:19 No. 620492
This whole shitshow's purpose was to point out that patriotism, since it's an idea, can be defined as anything anyone wants. It exposes idealists who wish to assign innate properties to nations based on feelings they have instead of objective material analysis, which is why (despite its proponents being huge retards) its been able to BTFO turbolibs such as LunaOi and the modern burger left, which has been reduced to middle class uyghas batching about how hard they have it compared to everyone else
Vlad Cash 2021-11-27 (Sat) 21:30:34 No. 620493
>>576341 Smells like Reddit
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 02:53:29 No. 621064
>>575002 > the Bolsheviks were patriots for their past, their culture, and deep traditions, who happened to have also developed under the Russian Empire. It is you who is inventing the strawman that they were somehow "patriotic to tsarism" That anon literally argued that they didn't do that and Americans shouldn't also.
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 03:01:08 No. 621075
>>620166 You clearly do if you bothered to post about it
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 03:04:19 No. 621080
>>602245 This
The only “Socialist Patriotism” worth supporting is patriotism for the few Americans with the grit, guts, and courage to resist this evil fucking empire, its goals, and every ruling class it’s ever had, whether they be slavers or industrialists or financiers
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 03:10:04 No. 621088
>>620492 Social patriotism is literally fucking retarded. Americans no longer even see themselves as "american" specifically, they call themselves californian or Texan. The only cultural aspect a future social America will have will be completely localist with a wider identity being reshaped by the new legacy of the revolutionary class and the class consciousness strata. Also may I ask? Are you Uighurbol?
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 03:11:43 No. 621091
>>602245 Yankee? Dixie? MY HEART IS IN JONES!
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 03:12:17 No. 621093
>>621088 > Americans no longer even see themselves as "american" specifically, they call themselves californian or Texan. It’s been that way for a long fuckin time boyo
Arguably they see themselves as Americans more now than over a century ago
Picrel
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 04:11:24 No. 621172
>>620492 The true idealism is thinking that people will ascribe anything to a given nation, irrespective of its history, because it's all just a spook anyways and people are supposed to know that. They don't know that and they won't sign up to invent a reality about such a thing. Socialists should forget about nationalism unless it is the nationalism of an established socialist state.
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 09:28:07 No. 621443
Pointless arguments over a word
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:26:09 No. 622056
>>587860 >heidegger bad ok turbolib shittard
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:28:01 No. 622064
>>574951 This. CCP was established to fight off invaders and colonizers.
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:37:03 No. 622093
>>621172 This. People who worship and make apologia for the US state and its history are inevitably going to have a white supremacist and colonial view of history and are going to look like genocidal lunatics to the several peoples and nations who have had bad experiences with the US state.
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:46:25 No. 622110
>>622093 I don't know how any sane person looks at the culture influenced by billions spent on right-wing nationalism i.e. the military flyovers at NFL games, country music, the cowboy movie industry and say "this could all turn into left-wing, collectivist nationalism."
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:49:58 No. 622115
>>622056 Idealism is for retards, Heideggers philosophy is just major Nazi cope
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 18:57:25 No. 622129
>>574951 America is basically a dumping ground for the developing world owing to decades of unchecked leftism and corporate opportunism. Your niche, Internet flavour of leftism isn't likely to change that any time soon or win anybody over. If you people meant a word of what you were saying you'd be standing against antifa and BLM and making yourself known in reality.
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 19:20:18 No. 622158
>>602192 (replying to days old post, I know)
how exactly is Maupin propping up a "fake US-China war."?
I agree COVID has more or less destroyed the online left but how is the anti-vax side the right side? The side that has mostly done nothing and when they do something, it's retarded shit like attacking the unions in Australia. I think COVID has fucked up the left so hard because it activated the fifth column in the movement that had been embedded , particularly in the 90s with libertarians/lifestylist/quasi-anarchists
Anonymous 2021-11-28 (Sun) 23:30:20 No. 622346
didn't sartre and marcuse draw from heidegger though, and be generally on the left side of history?
302 !!5GIs64qvtQ 2021-12-07 (Tue) 04:10:08 No. 634305
>>574951 >there is no contradiction between being both a socialist and a patriot in America Shut the fuck up liberal
Anonymous 2021-12-08 (Wed) 06:19:37 No. 635694
>>634115 >the US is just another country with a contradiction between owners and workers the enormous amount of power the US holds today is inseparable from how it attained that power over centuries.
do
cope
seethe
Anonymous 2021-12-08 (Wed) 15:51:34 No. 636067
>>634299 one day CalArts will answer for its crimes against aesthetics
Anonymous 2021-12-08 (Wed) 22:12:15 No. 636678
<Socialism with American Characteristics 2024: >Free Healthcare >Free Education >Free Housing >Free Internet >Free Public Transportation >Higher Infrastructure spending >Legalized Weed >Workplace Democracy >30 USD minimum wage >UBI >Cybernetic Planning >Patriotism >No more Regime Change Wars >Samoan Mommy Milkers
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 06:41:03 No. 644948
>>644946 >3 hours 44 minutes you seriously need to unfuck your brain
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 09:28:56 No. 645014
>>636678 SWAC peddlers always comes in two flavours, either Americanism with zero socialism or Socialism with zero Americanism.
Like what precisely in your list is only applicable in your America?
Hell, you could have at least insert some characteristics for a more decentralised syndicated economy like the American socialists like DeLeon and Debs advocates Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 13:25:33 No. 645210
>>645179 >some of you can't take it for granted that when OP speaks of Socialist Patriotism, he isn't talking about loyalty to the bourgeois state as it exists, but love of the people and the land that exist regardless of what specific form the state apparatus takes A lot of them can't even grasp this concept after it has been explained multiple times. Every thread where the topic comes up invites an bunch of ignorant posts saying how socialists shouldn't support existing institutions or bourgeois ideology, as if either is what socialist patriots advocate for.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 13:45:13 No. 645241
>>574951 People only care because of leftoids trying to put edge rightoids
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 13:51:53 No. 645253
>>645179 i dont love the people and i dont love the land. people and land are not mystical entities that deserve my veneration for existing, and the only reason why a common goal is even worth fighting for is because people tend to be selfish pricks without one. so fuck this rebrand of patriotism too. i can respect and tolerate my neighbours but my love is solely reserved for those whom i find to be exceptional.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 14:38:38 No. 645293
>>645179 I am not going to be browbeaten to love my nation in order to implement socialism. Class struggle is a bitter pill and will require internationalism and the proletariat will swallow it or die trying.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 15:30:49 No. 645337
>>645179 What I think a Real Communist™ movement really looks like is akin to an insurgency in a general sense of the term; i.e. an insurgent political movement.
The problem with some of the patsocs' weird envy of right-wing populism though is that right-wing populism is constitutionally incapable of building such a thing as evidenced by the "hard times create strong men" meme. Insurgent political movements are not the product of "hard times," they are the product of insurgent cultures. Conservatives simply promise people hard times, which just demoralizes people, making coherent politics even more difficult than normal. Total cynicism and spite is the conservative credo. Won't help you at all, in fact it will only make it a little easier for the kleptocracy to plunder and kill you – but I can't begrudge the conservatives too much because at least you'll go down with a little dignity left.
I even respect it more than what the brain bugs in the Democrats are offering, which is simply PR spin. See, to understand the Democrats, you have to realize that they're like a group of PR consultants who are brought in to throw flack in front of whatever the new massive fuck-up is, caused by the oligarchic class who rule the place. This also makes them unbelievably incompetent and they're also stupid enough to think that this approach won't lead to things spiraling completely out of control.
Effective insurgent cultures, on the other hand, offer people hope. People have to feel it in their hearts. That's the starting point that makes political cultures possible, even if times are hard. That's the fundamental difference.
But that's not in the cards. So abandoning hope, dropping out and embracing total cynicism is the only rational response. It's not going to help. But it's no sin.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 15:47:02 No. 645357
>>622110 >I don't know how any sane person looks at the culture influenced by billions spent on right-wing nationalism i.e. the military flyovers at NFL games, country music, the cowboy movie industry and say "this could all turn into left-wing, collectivist nationalism." I'm just surprised some people haven't become totally disillusioned yet. I'll partly chalk it up to almost all of the people involved in this little tendency being very young, and mostly men. I've also noticed that left-wing theorizing about domestic American GLADIO ops has started to become more of a thing. Like TrueAnon / Peter Dale Scott stuff. I'm going to corkscrew off into this dark underbelly for a second, because I think it's illustrative of part of the problem. We hear about 9/11 conspiracy theories and Waco, but not much about the Oklahoma City bombing. It's strange to me how forgotten it has become.
Because, for example, Tim McVeigh told his defense team – who then quickly recused themselves from the case – that he bought explosives from CIA contractor Roger Moore (not the actor). Terry Nichols later said that the explosives from Moore were used to detonate the truck bomb. Nichols also said that "Moore was clearly a government provocateur" and that Moore helped McVeigh scout out federal buildings to bomb. The ATF agents did not show up to the office that day.
McVeigh also repeatedly visited the home of a CIA contractor for days at a time, trained with a paramilitary group founded by a CIA pilot, ran weapons to likely CIA-backed anti-Castro Cubans and was seen several times with a German intel officer who lived with two former CIA employees. And that's just the cliff notes version of all the weird stuff around this case – up to the prosecutors working with McVeigh to change federal law around his execution so no autopsy would be performed as the witnesses who watched it on a grainy closed-circuit feed said they couldn't really tell what was going on.
Which leads to the theory that what happened was not that different in substance from bogus Viet Cong units that were sent out to rape and murder Vietnamese to discredit the National Liberation Front. It was not different from the bogus "finds" of commie weapons in El Salvador. It was not that different from South Korean troops massacring civilians during the Korean War as CIA agents watched and took pictures of the mass graves and publishing them in newspapers as North Korean atrocities.
It leads to the theory that McVeigh was simply a "good soldier" and a loyalist who did his duty to his country. He swore he wasn't brainwashed.
Feeling patriotic?
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 15:50:36 No. 645364
>>645337 >What I think a Real Communist™ movement really looks like is akin to an insurgency in a general sense of the term; i.e. an insurgent political movement. Yep, you got that right, that's basically the historical party and its invariant program.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 15:59:14 No. 645373
>>645337 What is an insurgent culture?
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:04:44 No. 645386
>>645347 Talk shit get hit bitch. Patriotic socialist would be tolerable if they weren’t so condescending and evangelical about it.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:05:49 No. 645391
>>645307 Yes. How many times must I quote Debs to you? Oh wait, you only care about Debs as much as you can abuse his legacy to fit your purpose.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:08:33 No. 645399
>>645396 >SWAC shill can’t even recognise THE American socialist Fucking pottery.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:13:25 No. 645408
>>645404
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:15:50 No. 645413
>>645391 >Oh wait, you only care about Debs as much as you can abuse his legacy to fit your purpose. I fail to see how I'm "abusing" Debs by saying that Americans should take pride in the socialist legacy of their country, or that they should draw on it for a renewed concept of American national identity. Again, Lenin drew on the Decemberists as part of Russia's revolutionary legacy, the SED drew on Hegel and Thomas Munster, etc. The fact that you keep bringing it up proves that you still don't understand what socialist patriotism even means.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:21:04 No. 645421
>>645413 None of this are particularly socialistic nor are this done after the revolution. I once asked you if you eat you deserts before your appetitizer but you were too much of a coward to response. All you do every time someone challenge you is cry about being misunderstood like a baby.
You and >>645410 are the same, tailists who want to rationalize your patriotism into something socialistic while trying to convince everyone it is the inverse.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:29:08 No. 645439
>>645435 >no one cares about yours randos you think are relelvant.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:31:44 No. 645443
>>645421 >I once asked you if you eat you deserts before your appetitizer but you were too much of a coward to response. More likely I just forgot or lost interest. But I'll ask you now, why does this have to wait until after the revolution? Why is it a bad thing for American workers and socialists to begin constructing a transformed sense of American national identity right now? If this helps to galvanize their opposition to the status quo, if it mobilizes people into the worker's movement, then why is it bad?
>All you do every time someone challenge you is cry about being misunderstood Because more often than not these "challenges" are just lazy strawman accusing me of believing things I don't believe. Idk how many times I can explain that socialist patriotism does not endorse the ruling classes concept of the American nation or its historical narrative, thay it does not endorse America's ruling institutions or policies, etc. Yet every thread opens with a fresh batch of morons claiming exactly this and accusing socialist patriotism of endorsing these beliefs.
>rationalize your patriotism into something socialistic while trying to convince everyone it is the inverse On the contrary I was a socialist well before I was a patriot, and once held a position of dogmatic opposition to all forms of nationalism. Even today I would never subordinate the ends of the global class struggle to the narrow interests of my national proletariat, let alone any abstract concept of the Nation.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:33:51 No. 645448
>>645439 His rise in union politics mimic the rise of organized labor in America, even taking part in the Pullman Strike. He even started his career being skeptical and critical of socialism. But once he went to jail for his union millitancy, socailists sent him theory to read and he came out of jail a socialist.
Heavily influential in Socialist Party so much so that he was their presidential candidate 4 times, he was even part of the founding of the IWW. While so many other socialist party captiulated to their tailist tendencies by supporting their nation's entry into WWI, Debs viciously opposed and shamed others for their
patriotism which he eventually went to jail for.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:36:51 No. 645452
>>645443 >Why is it a bad thing for American workers and socialists to begin constructing a transformed sense of American national identity right now? If this helps to galvanize their opposition to the status quo, if it mobilizes people into the worker's movement, then why is it bad? Because it is not as effective as you think it is, retard.
Only because you haven't came up with positive examples of what socialist patriotism. Even when you do bother to come up with anything, I pointed out to you that these people literally
DEPISE America as a concept and worked against it.Yet you still persist to whitewashing their legacy for your needs like a fucking liberal.
Empty words from a empty preacher.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:44:25 No. 645465
>>645452 >Because it is not as effective as you think it is, retard. If it's just a question of efficacy then you should admit that you have no objection to it on principle.
>Only because you haven't came up with positive examples of what socialist patriotism. Vietnam, Cuba, the DDR, the DPRK, SFRY, and basically every other AES state.
>these people literally DEPISE America as a concept No they criticized bourgeois patriotism and nation states in general, but ultimately they wanted socialism and worker's power to become the law of the land in the US. Besides, I already explained why my position does not require 100% agreement with everything these people believed, but is a question of getting American workers to understand their own history as a basis for an alternative concept of America. Again, there is ample precedent for this among socialist movements.
>it.Yet you still persist to whitewashing their legacy for your needs like a fucking liberal. Was the DDR "whitewashing" the legacy of Thomas Munster when they put his face on their money? Or were they getting their citizens to realize that the German nation has a revolutionary, progressive tradition of which they should be proud and from which to draw lessons and inspiration?
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:44:47 No. 645467
>>645458 >doesn't know who Debs is >doesn't know tailism is >doesn't know how socialists build their national identity after the revolution >doesn't know about Browder and his Americanism of the 20th century >doesn't know about comparadors that the socialists in the periphery were against.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:48:28 No. 645477
I'll believe American socialist patriots are my comrades only when they advocate for global and total revolutionary defeatism. When they say they will lose the war on drugs, utterly abolish the FBI, the ATF, ICE, the border patrol and all their standing military with most of the police forces. Only then I'll believe they're honest.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:49:02 No. 645478
>>645465 >If it's just a question of efficacy then you should admit that you have no objection to it on principle. I never sad SWAC is bad just that it is worthless like the decolonised gang
Which again they build it after the revolution was over retard.
Prove it.
Was Munster an anti-socialist? Then yes it is. Else it is a nothingburger.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 16:59:05 No. 645485
>>645480 Revolutionary defeatism in the US also means the total opening of the borders as the imperialist structures that defend the imperial core are in the process of being dismantled.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:00:51 No. 645488
>>645478 >Which again they build it after the revolution was over retard. No it isn't. Lenin published "On the National Pride of the Great Russians" in 1914, where he lays out precisely the concept of socialist patriotism that I am advocating here.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/dec/12a.htm >Prove it. Prove what? The fact that no socialist state ever tried to abolish the nationality of its citizens? How about you show me one that did.
>Was Munster an anti-socialist? He was a priest who lead peasant revolts in the 16th century. I would say he would have been opposed to many DDR policies like state atheism. Despite this however he was still a revolutionary who contributed to the progressive tradition in German history, the culmination of which was the GDR. What you fail to understand is that history is a process, one which hopefully will result in communism. As such we need to recognize every event and figure who contributes to this process and helps make its end point a reality, even if they themselves were not a supporter of this end point. This is the difference between a Marxist understanding of history which views events through the lens of class struggle and a liberal one which views it through morality.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:02:35 No. 645492
>>645485 >Revolutionary defeatism in the US also means the total opening of the borders Why? More immigrants isn't going to bring down the American imperialist apparatus.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:02:49 No. 645493
>>645489
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:15:04 No. 645508
>>645488 >where he lays out precisely the concept of socialist patriotism that I am advocating here. He did not used it as a means to push for revolution in Russia retard. Instead he went for revolutionary defeatism and 'Peace, Land, Bread.'. Not "Hey guys we love Russia so much let us take over!" Lenin took the internationalist stance on WWI like Luxemburg and Debs. You are more Karusky than Lenin.
Look who is misunderstanding who now! Prove that these socialist revoluntaries were presenting themself as patroitic while starting a revolution.
State-athetism is not inherent to socialism. Try again.
But that doesn't mean we whitewash their legacy like liberals do when selling marxism to the masses. Was there things Munster might have disagree with DDR, of course. But they, as you said, shouldn't let the hypothetical burden them in their nation building. But i don't see how that justify fabricating and distorting actual (and recorded!) viewpoints and positions American revolutionaries had in order to sell socialism to the masses before you can even begin nation building.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:20:40 No. 645513
>>644948 >NOOO I CANT LISTEN TO A PODCAST FOR 3 hours 44 minutes Amerifat burger brain is terminally diseased and can't focus on one thing for longer than 5 minutes. Also you ousted yourself as someone that never read anything above 2nd grade storybooks
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:29:25 No. 645524
>>645508 >He did not used it as a means to push for revolution in Russia retard. He literally did.
<We are full of a sense of national pride, and for that very reason we particularly hate our slavish past (when the landed nobility led the peasants into war to stifle the freedom of Hungary, Poland, Persia and China), and our slavish present, when these selfsame landed proprietors, aided by the capitalists, are loading us into a war in order to throttle Poland and the Ukraine, crush the democratic movement in Persia and China, and strengthen the gang of Romanovs, Bobrinskys and Purishkeviches, who are a disgrace to our Great-Russian national dignity. >Prove that these socialist revoluntaries were presenting themself as patroitic while starting a revolution. Well feel free to read the Lenin piece I posted. In other cases socialism quite literally came *after* the revolution was carried out on nationalistic grounds, with Cuba being the prime example. In Vietnam's case Ho Chi Minh literally said that he came to communism through patriotism, not the other way around.
>State-athetism is not inherent to socialism. Yes but it was a part of the DDR's policy and Marxism-Leninism in general. Yet the SED saw no contradiction between a celebration of Munster and their own policies. Why? Because they recognized him as a link in the German revolutionary tradition which eventually produced the likes if Marx, Engels, and the DDR itself. Just like how they built statues of Rosa Luxemburg and posted soldiers to guard it, despite the fact that she was harshly critical of Leninism.
>But that doesn't mean we whitewash their legacy I never said we should. I have no intention to misrepresent what any of these people believed. I'm just saying that American workers should be aware of the progressive legacy of their country, and use this as the basis for a transformation of their national identity and to contextualize current struggles.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:34:46 No. 645532
>>645524 >He literally did. He only said why he does what he does, not how he does it. Again Lenin's infamous 'Peace, Land, Bread.' shows just how detached his praxis is from his supposed patriotism. You have yet to prove otherwise.
Castro became a communist after he took over. While HCM shed patroitism skin soon enough.
Lmao Idc then. Still a nothingburger.
Constructing a counter-hegemony is neither inherently patriotic nor does it need to. And I am tired of pretending otherwise.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:48:10 No. 645543
>>645532 >Again Lenin's infamous 'Peace, Land, Bread.' shows just how detached his praxis is from his supposed patriotism. In what way?
>Castro became a communist after he took over. And yet that never stemmed his patriotism but instead enhanced it. Cuba didn't even bother to change their flag.
>While HCM shed patroitism skin soon enough. He absolutely did not, and neither did the CPV.
>Constructing a counter-hegemony is neither inherently patriotic nor does it need to. I don't disagree, I just think that establishing a socialist version of patriotism would be an effective way to reach people. Certainly moreso than telling them that they need to renounce their nationality will.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 17:48:21 No. 645544
>>574951 Replace AmeriKKKa with Israel and you have the same fundamental problem. Both states are settler colonial states, established as much, with constructed national identities that are necessarily predicated on notions of "This is our land by providence, fuck anyone who was already living here, this is not their country."
The bulk of what constitutes Amerikkkan territory is actually land from which indigenous people were forcibly removed from. This is not to say that a multi-national state is not possible, it certainly is, and is a necessary objective as part of reconciliation, but it being fitted with the trappings of AmeriKKKan patriotism that celebrates slave owners and genociders would ALIENATE indigenous people and anyone else killed by the AmeriKKKan war machine.
Trots are especially keen on this idea of "defending the American revolution" but they don't also support notions of Patriotic Socialism. How can one remain committed to internationalism and anti-imperialism if they are a bourgeois nationalist? They can't. OP seems to be taking advantange of the mysticism around nationalism to falsely equate nationalism as a movement for liberation against colonial powers and bourgeois nationalism. The working class and marginalized groups, in America, are subjects of a post-colonial state, one that happens to also be the imperial core. AmeriKKKa enjoys much of the surplus value extracted from the third world.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 18:38:53 No. 645590
>>621443 It's being spearheaded by dengists. So yeah I wouldn't call this a success
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 18:41:39 No. 645592
>>645544 >AmeriKKKa enjoys much of the surplus value extracted from the third world. I don't this is up to date, most Americans are living in poverty
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 18:44:05 No. 645597
>>645543 Patriotism towards what? What is there to be proud of? The achievements of Americans were made mostly In spite of its national state and are now being coopted nefariously by it. It's all nothing but a piece of anglosphere.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 18:53:26 No. 645601
>>645597 >What is there to be proud of? The struggles of the working and oppressed peoples of America.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 18:59:18 No. 645605
>>645592 >>645544 >>645592 >I don't this is up to date, most Americans are living in poverty >AmeriKKKa enjoys much of the surplus value extracted from the third world Poverty is relative. The conditions of poverty in, say, Amerikkkan cities, are not even remotely equivalent to the conditions faced by the urban poor of the third world. Not even close. Though the working class is constantly shit on in the United States, it is comparatively speaking better off than that of the working class in the third world. Though access to basic necessitates, material advancement, infrastructure is still quite limited for the Amerikkkan working class, they still largely - though indirectly - benefit from the exploitative relationship that the imperial core has with other, weaker third world countries. An important example that must be taken note of are the prices of goods. The fact that you can get bananas for so cheap in Amerikkka is entirely due to the exploitative relationship that Amerikkka has to the third world. This is not an indictment of the working class in Amerikkka, nor is it it a moral accusation against them: it is simply a material truth that the working class of Amerikkka have benefited from imperialism. This does not mean, however, that the working class is complicit in imperialism, that individual working class people are morally responsible: they are not. That would be absurd.
Regardless of the conditions of the Amerikkkan working class, consider the fact that the entirely of Amerikkka's wealth, of which the working class has almost none of, is sourced from imperialist activity. Again, I must reiterate, this is not the fault or moral failing of members of the working class in Amerikkka. I want to make this point crystal clear because I am absolutely, 100% sure that someone is going to dishonestly attempt to frame my arguments as anti-working class.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 19:09:17 No. 645615
>>645605 >Poverty is relative. NTA, but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about what I worte here:
>>644114 Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 19:10:08 No. 645616
>>645605 This is why we do usually talk about or campaign on just 'poverty' but 'income inequality' and the like, anon.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 19:22:26 No. 645632
>>645601 >The struggles of the working and oppressed peoples of America. But what do American people really do know about that, or how does this history connect with their every day struggles and oppression? Leftists don't even really know, study or do the work needed to synthesize an historical corpus and gather enough intelligence on the present situation. There is a book of Howard Zinn but it's 40 years old and not really marxist. And how many people read Hinterland? Leftists who talk about patriotism don't even know their country or history, there's no material. Seems to me that "the struggles of working and oppressed peoples of America" refers to an historical and heterogeneous amalgamation of loosely connected political movements in order to pander to people who where brainwashed all their childhood to pledge their allegiance to a flag.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 19:42:50 No. 645659
>>645632 Part of the problem is that American workers don't know their history, and its incumbent upon revolutionaries to teach it to them. Malcolm X lamented how the black man in America had been robbed of his history, but the reality is that this has happened to the entire working class.
>Seems to me that "the struggles of working and oppressed peoples of America" refers to an historical and heterogeneous amalgamation of loosely connected political movements I wouldn't say so. There are direct connections between the abolitionists, and the early labour movement, and from there to the communists, the Civil Rights movements, etc. Certainly American communists in decades past consciously cast themselves as successors to earlier movements for social and class justice.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 19:44:55 No. 645662
>>645615 Stopped reading after the first few sentences. I address these points here.
>>645616 I am very cognizant of what you mean by income inequality but as a Marxist Leninist I have to point out that the point of abolishing capitalism isn't to create horizontal organization but to end the class system which is fundamentally exploitative. income inequality is a symptom of capitalism. The objection isn't necessarily to the inequality of income but instead to the fact that the working class has its surplus value stolen by a class of parasites who in turn deny the working class the basic necessities in order to survive.
CPUSA Anon 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:09:52 No. 645702
Well I was gonna make a whole new thread to discuss this, but seeing as this one got bumped I figure I'll throw my hat in the ring.Most Importantly, Patriotism is a game you can never win. <The RNC just gave its attendees purple hearts and accused the guy of wanting Terrorists to kill us. >The Dems tried to claim that they're against the war because "they love the troops so much they don't want them to die." <The GOP still accused them of hating America and the Troops. >The hatred of John McCain throughout his time in office proves Republicans really don't give a shit about veterans in general if they're seen as part of the "out group." Generic Patriotism doesn't even appeal to right wingers. rationally appeal to right wingers. They point out the hypocrisy of right wing politicians, they argue that conservatives are voting against their own interests, and they offer compromise after compromise to the right only to have it shot down. This is because the Right isn't based on any kind of enlightenment principles, but fundamentally supportive of hierarchy. It's how they square the circle in America of loving "freedom" and also loving Capitalism: they believe in the freedom of competition and conflict, the freedom of "the strong" to dominate the weak.>"Here's 1000 articles on why the vaccine is safe." >"Please, we're all Americans, get the vaccine." And here is where the alternative comes in.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:26:22 No. 645733
>>645702 THIS IS SCHIZO
THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM
its not an issue of strength, rather its a problem of cultural beliefs. If you act like this big bad stalinist to them, you know how the right will react, they will say that the left are evil stalinists that want to take away your private property, economic life, and etc. It would be a perfect opprutunity for the right wing to do another red scare.
The problem with the right wing is that these guys are people utterly indoctrinated to believing conservative values since youth. From the start that they are first born, to the end of their life they are constantly brainwashed to believe in conservatism through school, television and culture. As such its npot an issue of strength but an issue of culture and how do we solve this by destroying us culture. ONly when not a single aspect of us libertarian culture remains then socialism will happen
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:27:30 No. 645734
>>645733 >ONly when not a single aspect of us libertarian culture remains then socialism will happen but this is not going to happen so i dont really have any hope for america, except for a foriegn nation utterly beating the usa
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:31:54 No. 645745
>>645702 >Rather than emphasizing patriotism, I believe the left would better win over the ape brains through Stalinism. Stalin, after all, is respected by the Russian Right in spite of being a Communist. I believe this is because his strength could never be questioned. His discipline, his steel will, his determination, these all endear him to The Right. >Instead of trying to win them over with honey, The Left would do well to embrace some gleeful authoritarianism. Call the anti-vaxxers what they are, conspiracy addled idiots, and advocate a hardline stance on vaccines "Get vaxxed or fuck off" and half these cowards will jump ship to ingratiate themselves to a new hierarchy. Instead of waving American flags, proudly change the flag into that of a Soviet America. >Believe it or not, I think if one treats the right with contempt, if one has confidence in their own beliefs to the point that all others are invalid, if one nakedly expresses the opinion that the right should get in line or fuck off, they'll be quicker to embrace The Left. Most based post I've seen in a while, completely agree.
This Iron dicipline, taking up of the torch of science, embracing and defending the scientific method and dialectical materialism, understanding of the necessity of communism and our duty to bring this about, unity in marching forward to a planned goal, etc. is something that is lacking in the western left.
In this time of the neoliberal end of history delusion and chaos, people are yearning for a scientific and humanist solution to their problems, they want history to move forward, they want to help in this common struggle of humanity, they don't want empty promises, they want change. Stalin is the perfect symbol of this.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:41:00 No. 645756
>>645702 Always great to see your posts CPUSA Anon.
>With that said, it's a naive reaction to think the solution is to turn around and start waving the flag, singing "God Bless America" and the like. I agree to an extent. By no means do I think socialist patriotism must necessarily embrace all the symbolism and imagery of mainstream American nationalism, though of course some of it could be.
>I'd argue most normal people are passive patriots >The "active" patriots, the flag-toting psychos screaming "build the wall" can be equally alienating to normal people as the "fuck Amerikkka" types are. I agree here too, which is why I think the best position to take is not that of a bunch of obnoxious flagwavers, but of socialists who are also patriots. Of course the majority of our time should be focused on fighting for the needs of the working class, and our communication should focus primarily around people's everyday struggles rather than heady concepts of the nation. However, where and when the national question arises we need to have a positive answer and a vision for the future of the American nation. Moreover this vision and an education of America's radical history should be part of our political education.
>This is because Patriotism is fundamentally an ideal, and these ideals are so subjective as to be changed on a fly just to exclude you. I think that one of the misconceptions around the socpat position is that it's an attempt at tailism. Some ill conceived effort to win over right wingers and conservatives, the "active patriots" that you described. I would not say this is the case, in fact I think thay adopting some concept of socialist patriotism is necessary to avoid alienating those passive patriots that constitute the vast majority of the population. So I don't think it's an issue that conservatives will always try to paint us as unpatriotic, anti-American, etc. What matters is how the average prole sees us, and they will see us more positively if we actually offer an answer on the national question beyond America's negation.
>if one nakedly expresses the opinion that the right should get in line or fuck off, they'll be quicker to embrace The Left. I think this is misguided. The right doesn't just love hierarchy for its own sake, they love a hierarchy in which they perceive themselves to be at the top, which they post facto rationalize as "natural". I mean they will denounce all sorts of hierarchies that they perceive to be "unnatural", like say the politburo of the CPC sitting atop the Chinese state, or "liberal elites" or whatever else. If they simply loved hierarchy and wanted to embrace the dominant powers they would all become cultural liberals, since social conservatism has been objectively on the decline for decades. Besides, I don't think we should be trying to appeal to die hard conservatives anyway.
Anonymous 2021-12-14 (Tue) 20:52:54 No. 645770
Isnt this whole patriotism just a giant reaction against "death to amerikkka, kill settlers!" idiots? A way to unite a racially divided country using something which is already more or less the only uniting factor in the american proletariat?
CPUSA Anon 2021-12-14 (Tue) 21:21:51 No. 645814
>>645756 Gotta head to work in a minute here, but I wanted to address this point in particular:
>I think this is misguided. The right doesn't just love hierarchy for its own sake, they love a hierarchy in which they perceive themselves to be at the top, which they post facto rationalize as "natural". I mean they will denounce all sorts of hierarchies that they perceive to be "unnatural", like say the politburo of the CPC sitting atop the Chinese state, or "liberal elites" or whatever else. If they simply loved hierarchy and wanted to embrace the dominant powers they would all become cultural liberals, since social conservatism has been objectively on the decline for decades. Besides, I don't think we should be trying to appeal to die hard conservatives anyway. I agree that diehard conservatives shouldn't be our primary appeal. As for them finding the CPC to be illegitimate, I believe that has more to do with ethnicity/geopolitics than the nature of their governance. They're the "enemy tribe" as it were.
Its also a curious tendency among the right to have a begrudging respect for their enemies. You'll hear Osama quoted on /pol/ often enough, "If someone sees a weak horse and a strong horse, they'll want the strong horse."
In conservative forums you'll hear them complain that the Afghans thought the USSR "fought harder" than we do. There's this idea that we're "holding back" while our "enemies" are going all out, and they're upset that we can't mimic their perceived strength.
Hell, Trump trying to do some military parade like a third world strongman reinforces this: they
want to be the strong "bad guys" even if they wont admit it.
7ko 2021-12-14 (Tue) 23:45:09 No. 646058
>>645632 Midwestern Marx seems like they have already a project to get people there and to get leftists there interested in their own socialist history, if that is the sort of work which has to be done.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 01:15:25 No. 646178
>>645814 Idk m8. I don't think we should be in the business of psychoanalysis or trying to discern the hidden motivations of the right or what pathologies they secretly hold. Anything we come up with would be conjecture that could lead to making serious blunders in an effort to play off an nonexistent pathology. It should be enough to say that rightoids are the way they are because of their class interests.
Anonymous 2021-12-15 (Wed) 22:53:46 No. 647356
Bumping the truth
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 09:21:33 No. 652221
Can someone explain the difference between American Patriotism and Zionism? Every argument the patriots make could be used to justify the continuation of Israel.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 10:39:09 No. 652263
>>652221 They are both ideological constructs designed to politically mobilize a population in the service of a state. Zionism can be distinguished from American patriotism in that it relies on the specific Jewish identity, which has religious, cultural, ethnic, and political properties. In contrast, American patriotism relies on the political dimension of citizenship, but not exclusively.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 11:14:25 No. 652300
>>652268 Homemade mac and cheese is delicious though. I've never had it at Christmas but I definitely wouldn't be displeased to find it there.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 11:20:35 No. 652309
>>652268 How thin skin do you have to be to be this triggered? Just say 'Cringe' and move on with your life.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 12:29:33 No. 652358
>>574951 >I love my country, I love my people. I am a patriot. Log off, touch some fucking grass.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 12:42:28 No. 652371
>>652221 American patriotism is based on the pan-european identity (white) combined with a Promethean view of modernization (bourgeois way) by extermination and replacement aka Manifest Destiny in America. The manufacturing of the Pan-European identity (white) was vital if it wanted to prevent the religious wars in Europe being replicated in America and disrupting their settler project. It allowed for a United European (white) Front to fight off the natives and organize the Atlantic slave trade
Zionism is the inspired by American patriotism, but with an Jewish pan-european identity (white jews), that's the reason that they don't see Arabs and indigenous jews as "Israelis". But Atheistic European jews are seen as "israeli".
>>652263 American patriotism is just Pan-European Patriotism, being a white european was the only way you were considered a "citizen" of the state
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 05:54:53 No. 655029
>>645508 >He did not use [patriotism] as a means to push for revolution >Instead he went for revolutionary defeatism You're so retarded you can't see that these are the exact same thing. What (real, not fake, as Mao points out) patriot would support their imperialist government in a war aganist another imperialist government?
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:02:45 No. 655035
>>655029 > What (real, not fake, as Mao points out) patriot would support their imperialist government in a war aganist another imperialist government? Most of the Second International?
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:05:50 No. 655037
>>655035 How is it patriotic (aka loving your nation's peoples) to want your fellow countrymen to die in a pointless war? It's fake patriotism.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:11:54 No. 655042
>>655037 Then this becomes a very pointless discussion if you are using your very own exclusive definition.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:14:21 No. 655043
>>655037 rapidly approaching no true scotsman here
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:15:40 No. 655044
>>655042 It's not an exclusive definition, it's where the word COMES from, Latin "patriota" meaning fellow countrymen.
If you think sending your countrymen off to die on the Western Front for no reason is "patriotic" and "loving your fellow countrymen" then you agree with the 2nd International, lol
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:18:19 No. 655045
>>655044 >If you think sending your countrymen off to die on the Western Front for no reason is "patriotic" and "loving your fellow countrymen" then you agree with the 2nd International, lol I am just telling you what self identified patriots think and do. Go call them fake if you want. Not my fucking circus, not my fucking clowns.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:20:08 No. 655047
What a stupid, boring argument. This whole debate is a waste of time.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:21:55 No. 655049
>>655045 Yes, and you're taking these "patriots" at their word, rather than thinking for yourself whether it's "patriotic" to let your people die for no reason. I'll call them fake, and point out that you agree with them.
>>655043 It's not "no true Scotsman" since I'm not excluding these fake patriots for no reason. I'm excluding them because they literally do not fit the 'defintion'.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:32:24 No. 655053
>>655047 It started as a cope by American leftists who think they need to pander to conservatives, then others didn't want their own leftist ideas besmirched. I say we sit back and watch it become a Republican position of UBI for Blackrock apartment tenants and then say "told you so."
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 06:39:39 No. 655058
>>655053 It's not about pandering, it's not a utilitarian position of "we should utilise the bad patriotism to trick le conservatives". It's about realising that all communists have been patriotic for their country by opposing the state that is an outgrowth on top of it.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 08:03:10 No. 655096
>>655049 > I'm not excluding these fake patriots for no reason. I'm excluding them because they literally do not fit the 'defintion'. Holy shit, that’s what No True Scotsman fallacy means.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 08:49:16 No. 655113
>>655096 Three spheres and a c7be that identifies as a circle
Circles can roll
>OMG NO TRU SCOTTSMAN FALLACY!!!! I can hear your shitting and farting from over here son
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 08:52:11 No. 655115
I’m not cheerleading for the American empire until it makes socialism happen.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 08:56:18 No. 655118
>>655113 Who died and made you the sole arbiter of what patriotism means to everyone?
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 09:07:21 No. 655129
>socialist American patriot > posts that shitty song that rips-off God save the Queen with ugly black statues and a Freemasonic obelisk
7ko 2021-12-26 (Sun) 10:45:38 No. 661332
I'm sympathetic to some sort of socialist patriotism, but that the U.S. imperial core's proletarians do obtain a benefit, one that has decreased as the world advances to multipolarity, from their relatively privileged position should be acknowledged so that the necessity of opposition to the current hegemony is made more evident.
Anonymous 2021-12-30 (Thu) 07:27:09 No. 666565
>>620425 >seeing both haz and maupin backtrack in favor of william z foster was kinda funny What do you mean?
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 23:46:11 No. 668559
Imagine caring about inane rubbish like patriotism in today's world.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 23:54:44 No. 668575
>>668559 >Imagine caring about inane rubbish like patriotism in today's world. We all cope how we can.
Anonymous 2021-12-31 (Fri) 23:59:55 No. 668587
>>668575 Well I'll never understand patriotism.
Imagine wanting to share the flags, symbols, culture of the bourgeoisie. Not only is the culture nauseating, cretinous and dripping in filth, the countries we live in are not ours, they are countries for the bourgeoisie. I can accept patriotism to a certain degree in the USSR of course, Soviet workers were right to be proud of the USSR.
We need proletarian culture. In this sense, Mayakovsky, Lunacharsky, Proletkult and the LEF were right where some of the more "conservative" Bolsheviks were wrong. Of course it's important to learn from the past classics, but they stem from the exploiting classes and can't ever truly represent us.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:11:36 No. 668607
>>668587 no wonder you won't you're obviously over socialized and been pumped with neo liberal ideology
>Imagine wanting to share the flags, symbols, culture of the bourgeoisie well that isn't what this threads about so idk what you're on about
>Not only is the culture nauseating, cretinous and dripping in filth edgy teenage take
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:14:14 No. 668615
>>668607 >over socialized and been pumped with neo liberal ideology No idea what that rubbish is meant to mean. Everyone is pumped with bourgeois ideology, but thanks to becoming a communist I've unlearnt a lot of it, patriotism included.
Conservative communists will always be very funny to me.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:16:58 No. 668626
>>668615 >No idea what that rubbish is meant to mean. Everyone is pumped with bourgeois ideology, but thanks to becoming a communist I've unlearnt a lot of it, patriotism included Doesn't seem like it considering you have a typical neo liberal rootless cosmopolitan view of nationhood, total opposite to what all successful socialist states have had
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:32:59 No. 668666
>>668626 >rootless cosmopolitan Lmao, that was directed against those denigrating the USSR, Soviet life, proletarian internationalism, communist hegemony, against those who aimed to present the filth of NATO countries as superior. Such creatures were rightly hounded.
https://espressostalinist.com/2017/08/20/bill-bland-the-soviet-campaign-against-cosmopolitanism-1947-1952/ >>668642 Stalin was against nationalism in all its forms.
People who think Stalin was a nationalist have gobbled up the bourgeois-fascist portrayal of him after 1945. Before that he was presented the opposite way, which was also false.
We're never going to be able to outdo the bourgeoisie on the patriotism/nationalism front, and why should we? As a proletarian my interests and affinities are with the proletarians of all lands. Communists must always put proletarian internationalism first, not their countries. And the key thing here is that they aren't our countries. I may have a British passport, I may have been born here, I may have had all my known ancestors going back hundreds of years being born here, but it's not my country, not really. It is the country of the British bourgeoisie, and I want nothing more for them to be wiped out in red terror.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:35:06 No. 668671
>>668666 >Lmao, that was directed against those denigrating the USSR, Soviet life, proletarian internationalism, communist hegemony, against those who aimed to present the filth of NATO countries as superior. Such creatures were rightly hounded. based Stalin for hating the rootless cosmopolitans
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:39:11 No. 668678
>>668666 >Stalin was against nationalism in all its forms. so here
>>668587 you say
<Imagine wanting to share the flags, symbols, culture of the bourgeoisie >culture of the bourgeoisie >Stalin was against nationalism you realize the thread is about Socialist Patriotisms right?
>People who think Stalin was a nationalist never said that. You're arguing against a point no one has made.
this is wrong. Only socialists can out do the bourgeoisies on patriotism because only socialist can direct the economy to favor the patriot rather then profits. The bourgeoisies can only give lip service to patriotism while enslaving the nation to capital
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:44:16 No. 668682
>>668678 >only socialist can direct the economy to favor the patriot But I'm not interested in making the economy favour flag-waving jingos, I want to fulfill my needs and the needs of the entire proletariat.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:48:44 No. 668690
>>668682 >neo liberal view of patriotism rather then the successful marxist leninist view >"i don't want to direct the economy to favor the people" mask off i guess
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 00:55:07 No. 668699
>>668690 The "people" is a nebulous, anti-Marxist term.
We are not for the "people", we are for the proletariat, the untrammelled dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie, on a worldwide scale until the revolutionary process is complete and a communist mode of production established.
Marxist-Leninists are successful, not for being national flag waving cretins, but for being proletarian revolutionaries who correctly understand the needs of the proletariat, give organisation to class struggle, and carry out successful struggles.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:00:15 No. 668710
>>668699 >The "people" is a nebulous, anti-Marxist term. Where'd you get that one from? Your ass?
You're arguing semantics now. Also the proletariat are the most patriotic the Bourgogne are not
Marxist leninism is successful because it successfully tapped into the patriotism of the people better then any capitalist ideology could
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:05:21 No. 668720
>>668710 I get it from the rich anti-revisionist tradition of Marxism-Leninism.
Khrushchev defined the USSR as a "state of the whole people". But that is bourgeois-peasant dreck; the USSR as the 1936 constitution stated was a proletarian dictatorship and this must remain in place until the final worldwide victory of communism. Not the slightest concession to the bourgeoisie, the dreg remnants of the nobility and clergy, or even to the backwards/rich peasants.
The proletariat are also not the most patriotic lmao. The proletariat is where communist ideas are the strongest. This sort of thinking is like the Russian narodniks and SRs who worshipped the backwards peasants in the 19th century. Even if nationalism was rife among the proletariat (it isn't) it would mean nothing more than the presence of false bourgeois ideology.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:13:18 No. 668731
>>668720 So where do you counter anything I said lmao
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:34:07 No. 668765
>>668731 What do you want me to counter?
Proletarian internationalism is a higher cause than patriotism in bourgeois capitalist states. End of story.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:35:15 No. 668769
>>668765 Leninhat how do you feel about Dmitrov?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 01:40:04 No. 668773
>>668769 A good communist, undoubtedly of a far higher grade than all the Khrushchevite-Titoist shits. His defence at Leipzig is brilliant. But he made a mistake with the Popular Front theory.
There must always be proletarian hegemony and dominance, if we do have to work with non-communists for whatever reason.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:48:14 No. 668841
>>668765 >than patriotism in bourgeois capitalist states but you've been ignoring the actual topic of Socialist Patriotism as per the OP and trying to argue against "bourgeois patriotism" or Nationalism which has nothing to do with the thread End of story.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 02:58:29 No. 668846
>>668841 The OP is talking of being a "socialist and a patriot in America" and "I love my country, I love my people. I am a patriot". Reeks of fascism. America belongs to the American bourgeoisie.
Here's what I love; the proletariat, communism and revolution.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 03:03:33 No. 668856
>>668846 >The OP is talking of being a "socialist and a patriot in America" and "I love my country, I love my people. I am a patriot". Reeks of fascism. America belongs to the American bourgeoisie. Again the topic is Socialist patriotism in America, however you seem to want to argue against "bourgeois patriotism" and nationalism which has nothing to do with the topic. If this really hurts your feelings why are you in thread? Especially when what your arguing against isn't part of the topic.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 14:45:36 No. 669280
>>668856 America isn't the USSR lol, it's an imperialist bourgeois dictatorship that's a cunt hair away from fascism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 14:51:06 No. 669289
>>669280 >America isn't the USSR lol Neither was Russia in 1914 when Lenin wrote this:
<Is a sense of national pride alien to us, Great-Russian class-conscious proletarians? Certainly not! We love our language and our country, and we are doing our very utmost to raise her toiling masses (i.e., nine-tenths of her population) to the level of a democratic and socialist consciousness. To us it is most painful to see and feel the outrages, the oppression and the humiliation our fair country suffers at the hands of the tsar’s butchers, the nobles and the capitalists. We take pride in the resistance to these outrages put up from our midst, from the Great Russians; in that midst having produced Radishchev,[3] the Decembrists[4] and the revolutionary commoners of the seventies[5]; in the Great-Russian working class having created, in 1905, a mighty revolutionary party of the masses; and in the Great-Russian peasantry having begun to turn towards democracy and set about overthrowing the clergy and the landed proprietors. It's pretty clear that what Lenin is describe here is also what most socpats, at least here on leftypol, are endorsing.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 15:16:59 No. 669314
>>669289 There's a difference between that and the blind "I love my country" sentiment I see in this thread.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:42:12 No. 669403
>>669280 >>669314 sounds like you're just whining about the US at this point
can you actually make a coherent argument about the topic of the actual thread or not?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:48:44 No. 669408
>>669403 You can maybe have American patriotism when the proletarian dictatorship is established in the USA. But not currently. American communists need to raise the banner or class struggle, proletarian rule, armed struggle, and smashing the US state machine, not patriotism.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 16:56:09 No. 669417
>>669408 You can have patriotism for the US even before the proletarian dictatorship just as all Marxists states have
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:11:01 No. 669430
>>669417 If you want to devolve into chauvinism yeah.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:14:40 No. 669434
>>669430 and that's true why? because you don't like the US? lmao
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:16:38 No. 669436
>>669434 Dring dring patriotism is a class collaborationist and proletariat dividing feeling, of course it leads to reactionary stuff and retarded chauvinism
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:19:42 No. 669442
>>669436 >Dring dring patriotism is a class collaborationist and proletariat dividing feeling, of course it leads to reactionary stuff and retarded chauvinism and again you're completely ignoring the topic of this thread, arguing against "class collaboration" which has nothing to do with Socialist Patriotism
so once against why would Socialist Patriotism devolve into chauvinism?
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:21:58 No. 669444
>>669442 >why would Socialist Patriotism devolve into chauvinism? Because of historical experience. See world war one
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:27:10 No. 669446
>>669444 <why would Socialist Patriotism devolve into chauvinism? >historical experience. >See world war one how is a war fought between capitalists powers somehow an argument against Socialist Patriotism?
sounds like you're arguing against bourgeois patriotism or nationalism again, not Socialist Patriotism
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:28:16 No. 669447
"Baizuo" being an insult used exclusively by dengists makes it absolutely hilarious and not effective as an insult at all.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:29:01 No. 669448
>>669434 It means making workers susceptible to bourgeois ideology and nationalism. We don't need that for revolution, we need an articulation of our class interests.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:30:13 No. 669449
>>669448 You're arguing against bourgeois patriotism and nationalism again please stay on topic
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:30:20 No. 669450
>>669446 >how is a war fought between capitalists powers somehow an argument against Socialist Patriotism? Read a book, socialist patriots supported the war.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:32:15 No. 669451
>>669449 Under capitalism you're never going to be able to beat the bourgeoisie for patriotism and there's no need to really.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:36:45 No. 669452
>>669450 >Read a book, socialist patriots supported the war. again it doesn't seem like you're arguing against Socialist Patriotism but socialists who are patriots that supported a war 100 years ago
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:38:25 No. 669453
>>669451 Wrong. Only socialists can beat the bourgeoisie for patriotism because only socialism can direct the economy to work for the people and not for profits.
The bourgeoisie fail the patriots because their economy is a slave to capital
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:38:47 No. 669454
>>669452 You know the fact that the third international was created because socialist patriots betrayed their class for their country tells me that those new social patriots are either ignorant or full on glowies trying to divide once more the working class. Fed identity politics, occupy was wrecked by same bullshit, discourse is a little different but tactic is the same at the onset of a another massive war.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:40:55 No. 669456
>>669454 You're arguing against socialists supporting the bourgeois patriotism of their day.
Your logic falls apart as soon as socialist patriotism enters the scene
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 17:43:54 No. 669460
>>669456 >my patriotism is totally different guys sure agent
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:37:03 No. 669679
>>669463 NTA, but that doesn't make sense, as those Marxist Leninist violated the patriotism of their day. They demanded the death of the old, and the upholding of the emerging new, even if that necessitated the death of the previous nation state and it's complete replacement by a new socialist one, utterly divorced from the very conception of a "nation state".
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:40:51 No. 669683
If you want to wave the national flag and call yourself a patriot, then who cares. But don't confuse that with power, and it certainly won't save you from getting thrown in prison by the cops if anyone here ever posed a serious enough threat.
Anonymous 2022-01-01 (Sat) 21:44:40 No. 669688
>>669463 >>669679 Also, we literally lost, as we failed to be as voracious, collaborative, and aggressive as emerging neoliberal capitalism, and for that the world was swallowed whole and we lost everything. While the bourgeoisie took node after node, we squabbled amounts ourselves about "sovereignty" and "nationhood", while the bourgeoisie gave no care for such things and took what they saw as theirs.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 17:34:42 No. 670883
>>669679 but your post doesn't make since the Communists upheld the patriotism of what it meant to be Russian more so then the tsar could
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 17:35:26 No. 670885
>>669688 >Also, we literally lost sure but that wasn't caused by the patriotism of those states
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 22:48:39 No. 671268
>>669453 The capitalist economy works for the capitalists, not faceless "profits". It is not a faceless system, it is governed by a class; the bourgeoisie.
Anonymous 2022-01-02 (Sun) 22:52:25 No. 671275
>>671268 And it's not the economy which is a "slave" to capital, proletarians are wageslaves of capitalists.
sage Anonymous 2022-01-13 (Thu) 12:59:08 No. 689612
Unique IPs: 153