meat, even were it placed between them. other words, the relation of nationalism to international ism is the relation of the members to the body. It is. He articulated the most overt association between Romanian nationalism and anti-Westernism, claiming that Romanian Catholics, Romanian Greek Catholics, . The three case studies here focus on the tensions between nationalism and internationalism as . nationalism and internationalism, between cooperation and independence. relationship crucial for any sort of European federation?.
For example, the representatives of the labour aristocracy who have been bought off by imperialism — the Right wing of the Social-Democratic parties in various countries and the Right-wing of the British Labour Party — belong to this type of proletarian renegade. However, under certain historical conditions, oppressor nations may become oppressed nations.
A case in point is when Hitler invaded and conquored France, Belgium and Holland. Then in contrast to bourgeois national traitors, the Communists of those countries, guided by the foregoing principles placed themselves heroically in the very forefront of the national restence in the fight against the fascist aggressors.
The same European countries ensalved by the Marshall Plan of American imperilaism may serve as another example. The reactionary bourgeoisie of these countries, at the same time, also continues to suppress the national revolutionary struggles in the colonies with the aid of American imperialism. In such a situation, the Right-wing of the Social Democratic parties in the European countries and of the British Labour Party continues on the one hand.
The Communist parties relentlessly fight these renegades. Such are the varied concrete programmes and policies which proletarian internationalism adopts on the national question in different nations and under different conditions.
These programmes and policies are determined by the basic common interests of the masses of the people of the given nation as well as by the interests of the masses of the people of all nations. In other words, they proceed from the basic common interests of all mankind, and at the same time they are in full accord with the class interests of the proletariat.
Such is the concrete application of the world outlook of proletarian internationalism in different historic conditions. Having gained a clear idea as to bourgeois-nationalist and proletarian internationalist concepts of the nation, we can understand that bourgeois nationalism and proletarian internationalism represent two different classes, two antagonistic world outlooks, ideologies and slogans.
They conform to the two great class camps of the whole capitalist world, and manifest two different policies on the national question and especially two different world outlooks.
Any Communist who descends to the position of bourgeois nationalism is betraying Communism. Thus we can also understand that, in view of the bourgeois-nationalist concept of the nation and its programmes and policies in dealing with the national question, any imperialism, whenever possible, will certainly carry out aggression and oppression against other nations and certainly will not honestly assist other nations in achieving independence and liberation.
Sometimes an imperialist country may help an oppressed nation to fight against another imperialist country; however, the imperialist country does not do this for the sake of the independence and liberation of the oppressed nation — it does this, rather, to make use of the oppressed nation against its rival, to escape from its own disasters and to attempt to establish its own imperialist rule over the oppressed nation after its rival has been squeezed out.
No oppressed nation can achieve real liberation and independence through the so-called aid of imperialist powers. Capitalism is prone to financial crises, and one occurred in In a nationalist environment with barriers between countries — from tariffs to currencies — a financial crisis in one country has the strong potential of being moderated in other countries. The crisis of tore through the world. The highly integrated banking system, designed to facilitate the free flow of capital and therefore international efficiency, facilitated the free flow of a contagion.
The system had lost its ability to protect against contagion. What had been the vehicle of the internationalist spring turned into a multinational disaster. The effects of are still far from contained. The crisis clearly revealed the core weakness of the interdependent system.
But the very success of interdependence had been gnawing away at the system for decades. It is true that barring serious malfunction, intensified international integration can increase economic growth on the whole. These problems were not clearly visible until After and the decline in economic benefits of internationalism on the whole, the problem of classes and nations came to light. The decline of some classes, such as those that worked for businesses that moved their production elsewhere to take advantage of lower wages, was clearly visible as the tide receded.
Some nations, such as those in southern Europe, discovered that economic integration was not so much an opportunity as it was a prison. It was discovered that with interdependence and integration, individual nations had lost control over their destinies.
An impersonal system that seemed to be uncontrolled determined the fate of nations and their populations. It also was discovered that the idea that nations were obsolete might be true for elites, who followed capital where it went, but being Greek was very different from being German, and being Chinese was very different from being American.
Internationalism and Nationalism
The nation mattered because where you lived determined how you would experience life. And that experience gave you far more in common with your countrymen than with foreigners.
Greek bankers and German bankers may live similar lives. The year did not simply reveal the underlying weaknesses of the internationalist position, it also generated a nationalist counter-response. Those below the median income and those who lived in shattered countries were not going anywhere. They were trapped in a reality about which their government could do nothing. The international system was hurtling forward to a frightening and unknown destination. The comfortable ones assumed they would do fine.
And they knew that whatever solutions would come would not be a massive global redemption where everyone wins. It would be a hard-fought battle among their own. This was the crucial shift. It was a shift from thinking in terms of humanity as a whole to a focus on those with whom they lived and the things and people they loved.
This meshed with the cultural. Over the years, the argument had been made that national cultures and practices were irrelevant. It was the ideology of internationalism that mattered, an ideology that deplored all distinctions.
Distinctions of ethnicity, religion and nation were the hangovers of the catastrophic world that had led to the rise of Hitler. Yet the Greater Han-ism he advocated had a reactionary character. He then revised his nationalism characterized by Greater Han-ism and turned toward revolutionary nationalism characterized by his active opposition to imperialist aggression and his adoption of the three policies of alliance with the Soviet Union, alliance with the Chinese Communist Party and support for the workers and peasants.
Nationalism, Internationalism and New Politics - Geopolitical Futures
Thus he turned toward New Democracy and we Communists therefore adopted the policy of collaborating with him. This collaboration was absolutely correct and necessary for national liberation and was in accord with the interests of the proletariat at the time, even though it was an unreliable, temporary and unstable alliance which was later undermined by the shameless betrayers of Dr.
This was an excellent illustration of the progressive character of revolutionary bourgeois nationalism in colonial and semi-colonial countries during the new era of world Socialist revolution. It was of enormous revolutionary significance. They swung from the anti-imperialist struggle to capitulation to imperialism, from alliance with the Soviet Union to struggling against it, from unity with the Chinese Communist Party to attacks on the Party, from supporting the workers and the peasants to slaughtering them.
It therefore became necessary for the Communist party, in order to defend the interests of the nation, to adopt a firm policy of opposition to the Kuomintang reactionaries, who were headed by Chiang Kai-shek and Wang Ching-wei.
If this were not done, it would be a grave mistake. On the other hand, the communists in these countries should enter into an anti-imperialist alliance with that section of the national bourgeoisie which is still opposing imperialism and which does not oppose the anti-imperialist struggle of the masses of the people. Should the Communists fail to do so in earnest, should they to the contrary, oppose or reject such an alliance, it would also constitute a grave mistake.
Such an alliance must be established in all sincerity, even if should be of an unreliable, temporary and unstable nature. The experience of the revolution in other countries as well as in China fully confirms the correctness of the scientific Marxist-Leninist conclusion that the national question is closely linked with the class question and the national struggle within the class struggle.