Michael M: Honestly, I was hesitant about wading into the national question matter that you raised. Because it is an incredibly complex matter which starts from the definition of 'what is a nation?". This postulate as expressed here, will inevitably spark differences. None will be easily resolvable because inevitably statements will require historical detailing. But perhaps a couple of simple points can be usefully made without need of much external referencing.
i) I liked Jim F's response to the issue of India and Pakistan at several levels. My parents were refugees from Pakistan, but were Hindu by religion and not by nation. They belonged to the Sindhi proto-nation. Some of the current problems of India are directly traceable to the fact that India is a multi-national state whose development into a fuller fledged multinational pruning down into some dominant nations was interfered with by the entry of English, French and Portugese colonists. Subsequently these adventurers became adept at finding their proxy comprador agents who did their bidding. That process continued through and India never underwent a break from foreign economic control. Despite the advent of some forces that could have been said to represent a form of a 'national capital'. This is a big and long tale, but perhaps we can agree - that one fundamental error that Marxist *must* avoid is the equation of religion with nationality. I think Michael you try to avoid that trap, but there are some places where you fall into it. India is not - as that very cunning Modi claims - a bi-national nation between Muslims and Hindus. That was a mythology from the times of the colonists that the English perpetually nurtured. It was bought by that scoundrel Gandhi - who played the British imperialist cards for them. It was the British who divided India leaving factories on one side of the border, while leaving the raw materials on the other. Factories in Calcutta - jute in "Pakistan". ii) There are areas where the historical developments favour a sort of bilateral agreement where two national capitalists groupings come to an interim agreement - as perhaps can be traced out in Canada. Here both sets of capitalists (British and Quebecois) have a primary benefit from their 'own' working class. But these "agreements" are subject to the pressures of (a) the national capitalists wanting in their greed more privilige, and their firms needing to expand (b) the national working class wanting 'rights' which extend to national rights - as an expression of their recognition that they are being suppressed. But in the 21 st century they are being primarily suppressed by capitalism. Some will use the language of nationalism to express their sense of oppression. iii) In areas where there are planted colonies, such as was South Africa - if there was withdrawal of mother imperialist country fostering that planted colony - then there was a possibility of moving forward. That happened with South Africa: " The South African government has attempted to meet this threat by armed raids into the territories of these states, by blockades - as in the case of Lesotho in 1982 - and by bribery - as with the offer to Swaziland in 1982 (later withdrawn under domestic pressure) of the "homeland" of KaNgwane and part of KwaZulu. In 1979 the South African government elaborated the concept of a "Constellation of Southern African States" (CONSAS), under South African domination, embracing 11 states stretching up to the Equator; the aim of this abortive project was not only to strengthen South Africa's security but to furnish its economy with an extensive common market. This project stimulated 9 southern African states to form the Southern African Development Coordination Conference. (SADCC) with the aim of reducing their economic dependence upon South Africa. The CONSAS project was then revised into the form of a "Confederation of Southern African States" to embrace only South Africa and the "independent" homelands. The Organisation of African Unity (OAU), established in 1963, with the aim of promoting solidarity among African states and eradicating all. forms of colonialism from the continent, fully supports the national liberation struggle in South Africa. International loathing of apartheid has led not only to unofficial, but often effective, boycotts of South African goods, but to the isolation of South Africa from many aspects of international life. It has been excluded from participation in the Olympic Games, and from virtually all international sport except cricket and rugby, It has been expelled from the International Labour Organisation, the World Meteorological Organisation, the Universal Postal Union, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and only the veto of Britain and the United States has averted its expulsion from the United Nations Organisation. In 1982 the World Alliance of Reformed Churches suspended from membership the Dutch Reformed Churches of South Africa because of their support for the "heresy" of apartheid." http://ml-review.ca/aml/CommunistLeague/SouthAfrica1.htm In that circumstance - the narrow based white owned capitalists of South Africa recognised - ultimately - they could not survive in the "old way": "large-scale capital-intensive capital no longer has its interests served by apartheid, and that opposition to the abolition of apartheid comes principally from small-scale labour-intensive capital, from the white petty bourgeoisie and from the white working class. Thus, the dominant section of capital - large-scale capital-intensive capital - is likely, as the strength of the revolutionary forces grows, to reject the course of "fighting to the end" against the forces of national democratic revolution and being destroyed, in favour of that of seeking a negotiated settlement with the African National Congress for the acceptance of the basis of the latter's programme - the abolition of apartheid and the establishment of "parliamentary democracy" based on universal franchise which would enable white capital to continue to function. The achievement of such a settement could well involve the use of the state machinery of repression to suppress violent opposition from the forces of the ultra-right representing white small-scale capitalists and backed by sections of the white petty bourgeoisie and white working class." iv) That state of 'self-destruction' - has not arrived in Israel. It is unlikely to arrive as long as the USA retains its Reagan era objective of using Israel as its central pawn and weapon-head in the mIddle East. (Point 6 at: https://redphoenixnews.com/2023/11/06/on-palestine-the-palestine-liberation-movement-and-usa-imperialism-a-marxist-leninist-view/ ) . As I had rather sadly concluded there: "11. A united movement of the proletarians of both Palestinian and Israeli is the only way forward. This however is a difficult task. Its leadership is still awaited." v) On a more general note - recognising the rights of nations is not - in my understanding, something that should be viewed by Marxists as a hopeless endeavour in the 21st century. I believe - I may be wrong Michael - but that seems to be your concern in your note. But I believe FWIW, that Marxists should note two key things and point out: (i) National sentiments do not die easily and move peoples into articulating national aspirations for years (read hundreds of years) after such thoughts are said to be 'anachronistic' or 'dead'. They can be revived in either a progressive movement, or into dangerous semi-fascist currents. It depends on what the trajectory is. (ii) By which I mean, the national questions can only be solved within a framework of the immediate without delay, move into the socialist revolution. That is what *did not happen* in South Africa. They went through a democratic and anti-apartheid revolution, but it stopped there. That is what could be said of places like North Vietnam when it succeeded in the national liberation of the whole of Vietnam. Be Well, H -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#30052): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/30052 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/105672267/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
