GenZhouArchive

u/Means-of-production - originally from r/GenZhou
Part 2 of this post. I know this looks long, but according to word counter this should take about fifteen minutes to read.

In the original post, I was happy to read and interact with your agreements and criticisms of my original critique. Now, I will deal with the solution, on how patriotism and nationalism is to be handled in second and first world countries, in particularly in my homeland Australia and the United States.

1. Differentiating between the two forms of Nationalism
2. Nationalism and National Liberation in Settler-Colonial States
3. The task of Australian Communists and the Australian National Revolution
4. Nationalism and National Liberation in the United States
5. The Question of National Self-Determination of various nations in the United States
6. Footnotes

I would refrain from using the word "Patriotic", seeing as that implies support for the existing social order - though "Nationalist Socialism" sounds... well, I don't need to explain why. For the purposes of this I will use the term Socialist/Communist Nationalism.

We know that a Communist can and must be at the same time be an Internationalist and a Nationalist - though Communist Nationalism is far different from Reactionary Nationalism. National Liberation - that is, the movement wherein one imperialised, colonised or otherwise oppressed nation or community seeks to liberate itself from a foreign overlord - is a core part of Marxism-Leninism; this I am sure we are all aware of and I have stressed in my previous post. However, in the past, there have been national-liberation movements across the world, some of which have taken on a Socialist Character. In fact, almost all major movements in the last one hundred or so years have. Yet, none of these have taken place in the settler colonies of the world, save for maybe Korea. Of all the historical settler-colonies that have existed, much of them have been liberated from their colonial overlords long ago. South and Central America are free from Spain and Portugal, Asia is free from Japan, the Balkans and Arabia are free from Turkey, Eurasia is largely free from Russia, South Africa overthrew its white minority leadership. Of the settler colonies that remain - The Commonwealths of Canada, Australia, New Zealand (Aotearoa) and the United States of America - only one of them is not still under the rule of a foreign leader de jure. It is also in these countries, as well as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that the most amount of Capital is concentrated in the modern era - these states we refer to as the "Anglosphere", or, the "Imperial Core".

Revolution in the United Kingdom does not need to deal with the question of Colonialism, since it is an isle inhabited by its indigenous peoples. For this piece we will be focusing on settler-colonies.

Is it possible to be a Communist and a Nationalist in these states? Yes. But it is important to differentiate between Reactionary Nationalism and Socialist Nationalism.

1: Differentiating between the two forms of Nationalism

The main component of Nationalism is a deep love of one's country and a desire to see it do well and prosper, sometimes to the detriment of other countries - this we call National Chauvinism, and we reject wholeheartedly.

Nationalism can be used as a tool of subjugation or of Liberation - of this we are all aware. The difference between each can be easily identified, namely, in whether or not they uphold the social order of the day, and what that social order is. A key example of this is in Australia and the difference between Communist Nationalism and Reactionary Nationalism. Australia is a British Settler-Colony, and to this day a direct de jure puppet of the British Empire, de facto a puppet of the American^(1); thus making it a second-world country according to the three worlds theory. Do all Nationalists and "Patriots" in Australia seek to liberate Australia from its status as a second-class colony of foreign masters? Hardly!

Some of them do carry the Eureka Flag, but do they mourn the martyrs who died at that stockade? Do they celebrate the victory their martyrdom paid for? Do they celebrate Ned Kelly's^(2) legacy as our own Robin Hood, as our own Koba, are they outraged at our government that routinely sends our sons and daughters to bleed and die in foreign fields on the orders of uncaring masters? Do they see any of the vast beauty our motherland holds, do they tremble in anger at seeing it plundered by foreign capital? Are they outraged at the massacring of our native peoples, the first nations of this land, and their continued subjugation? No, they do not! These reactionaries do not celebrate Australia, they celebrate being white IN Australia!

Any challenging to the current conditions in Australia would threaten the social cohesion of our country, would challenge the doctrine of white supremacy that this country was founded on, which, to the reactionary, is wholly unacceptable. They wave our national flag, the one stained with the Union Jack, rather than our Eureka cross - quite literally adopting the iconography of white supremacy and colonialism. The same applies to reactionary Nationalists in America, Canada, and New Zealand, all of which are home to "Nationalist" groups who do not serve their countries, but rather, serve the interests of their national or International Bourgeoisie - upon which it can be called into question whether or not these "Patriots" are even Patriots at all, selling out the majority of their homelands to a gilded few. As Communists, it should be obvious to us that this is not Nationalism or Patriotism in the slightest, but National Chauvinism, reactionary nationalism, as they seek to uphold the current (or past) social order. On that note, we can say safely that it is not, in fact, reactionary to be a Nationalist in a Settler-Colonial state, provided one is a Socialist Nationalist.

2: Nationalism and National Liberation in Settler-Colonial States

Across Australia's history, never have the Australian people ever truly been in charge of it. We are still a colony, for all of our history we have been under either direct or indirect rule from London or Washington. Many egregious crimes have been committed in our past, but all of them, or a majority of them, were perpetrated by British Colonial authorities, or ordered by governments subservient as puppets to Britain or America. They, quite literally, happened under the Union Jack, which still stains our national flag today. A class analysis of Australia reveals that little has changed since 1788:

There are multiple phenomenon to be observed in this analysis of Australian classes and how they have changed the historic relations between them:

• 2.1: While Convicts were certainly settlers themselves, they were by no means eager to be in Australia. They themselves were victims of capital, often charged with petty crimes such as the theft of food or other vitals - while normally they would've been sentenced to death, Australia was thought of as hell on earth, and so they were sent here. Torn from their families and homelands, many Convicts outright defected to join indigenous resistance groups active in the country, particularly from 1788 to ~1815.
• 2.2: Class society was present in Australia from the founding of the first colony at Botany Bay - the Colonials, the Convicts, and the Indigenous Australians. The British Colonial Authorities and Richer Free Settlers often cooperated with each other at the expense of the Enslaved Convicts and the Indigenous Population - tensions that eventually boiled over into the 1854 Eureka Stockade and the formation of Australia's incredibly strong Union Culture. Poorer Free Settlers and Immigrants, which began to arrive around the time of the Napoleonic Wars, were also cast aside by the higher classes of Australian society as part of its growing Bourgeoisie.
• 2.3: Similarly, as the Australian proletariat began to form, it consistently sided with the aforementioned Coolies and Indigenous Resistance, as well as other immigrant labour. During the Eureka Stockade^(4), miners refused to allow British Colonial Authorities to divide the crowd by racial lines, insisting the Chinese labourers striking with them were one of them. This tradition of solidarity continued through the rest of the 19th century and the 20th to this day, and is especially strong with Unions.
• 2.4: In the modern day, this class arrangement has hardly changed. Poorer "settlers" and first, second or third generation immigrant labour make up an overwhelming majority of the Proletariat, whilst the ruling class is overwhelmingly white, and overwhelmingly backed by foreign capital, particularly that in the United States. This racial character of our wider Class Society is no doubt a remnant of the colonialism, and evidence of its continuing effects, particularly in the lower social-economic status of indigenous communities.

Basic knowledge of history tells us that the current colonial government of Australia is in direct combat with the very existence of indigenous people, and its continued existence is an existential threat to the survival of Indigenous Australians. However, this class analysis also reveals another thing: that for a majority of Australian Proletarians, indigenous or not - that is, the majority of society - the status of Australia as a Colonial State is also unsatisfactory. The class society of 1788 has by no means disappeared or even transformed in any significant way. In America and India, for instance, the petty Bourgeoisie in those countries were able to spearhead national liberation and ascend to becoming the Big Bourgeoisie - this has not happened in Australia. The Big Bourgeoisie in Australia is overwhelmingly composed of foreign, not domestic, Capital. Excluding banks (much of which are formerly state-owned enterprises) and joint anglo-australian mineral concerns - which export a majority from Australia as part of the movement of finance capital and raw material - the largest corporate groups in Australia are non-Australian. Even seemingly domestic Australian corporations, such as Macquarie Group, a Banking and Infrastructure Firm, began as a subsidiary of the British Hill Samuel & Co, Ltd. Foreign monopoly on Australia is so extensive that a majority of Australian raw resources is exported abroad - mostly Asia and Europe - and in the media, which is dominated by the American Murdoch Dynasty and the Australian Packer Dynasty.

This is not to say that domestic Capitalists and Bourgeois do not exist in this country, it is not difficult at all to follow the lives of 19th century Businessmen and how they became the absurdly rich billionaires today - all of them began as what we could consider "Rich Settlers", and made the natural progression through a colonial capitalist society to become the bourgeoisie and then the big bourgeoisie - though, ultimately, they serve the interests of Capital, which is in the interest of the major Bourgeoisie, the international masters of finance.

3: The task of Australian Communists and the Australian National Revolution

In summary, Australia is a second-world nation oppressed by foreign masters and has never ruled itself. It is an imperialised nation that is granted the privilege of being able to oppress some minor nations itself (Papua New Guinea, Timor and Nauru to be specific), and to partake in the subjugation of other, third world nations. Reactionary Nationalists in Australia are not and do not represent the interests of Australia as a whole, and are, therefore, the opposite of patriotic, of nationalist - they are National Chauvinists. It is therefore the task of the Australian Proletariat, black and white, indigenous and convict, to unite for the mutual interest of destroying colonial capitalism and taking control of their homeland. While White Australians may not be indigenous to this land, there is no doubt that the process of history has made them apart of it, though the former point is still valid, Australian workers must bear in mind that indigenous Australians have suffered substantially more than they have. I am technically an eighth-generation Immigrant from what is now Germany, but I bear no connection to Die Deutsches Vaterland. The liberation of a Colonial settler-state can only occur with the full participation of all members of its proletarian class, regardless of race or national origin. In a colonial state, the most revolutionary act one can embark on is its destruction. The Australian revolution must be a national one.

4: Nationalism and National Liberation in the United States

The United States is not like Australia. As such, a special analysis of both countries must be carried out.

In my original post I heavily criticised the policy of "Patriotic Socialism" as it was espoused by that of Haz in the video "Patriotic Socialism: America vs. America". I should like to make it clear that I do believe that Communist Nationalism is possible in the United States - just not as Haz believes it.

In the first post, u/Professional-Way1833 shared a criticism of my view that patriotism is 100% justified in the face of an external invader that seeks to economically and politically dominate one's country. They agreed with me, but went on to say that :

...to some extent, this is what the PS [Patriotic Socialist] people are saying. They are saying 'The American people ARE attacked by an outside force. They are attacked by the bourgeoise and government.'

The workers of America black or white, bear no responsibility for the government, because in the USA, the working masses have ZERO control over it. It oppresses the world, it oppresses the masses in it's own border. It oppresses POC, and also white workers. Sure, white workers are oppressed less, but they are still oppressed, and the imbalance of oppression is changing.

Whilst I cannot say that I completely know every argument those that espouse the doctrine of Patriotic Socialism are making (I was only responding to one video), this is an objectively correct assessment and I believe a key point to understanding the role of Communist Nationalism in the American Proletarian movement. In America, modern day American proletarians, white or not, bear no responsibility for the crimes of the past because they were not in control when they happened, they did not perpetrate them; they did not order them - this I have already said myself about Australia. Over time, countless peoples have made America their home. For a majority of American workers they, although not indigenous to the lands they inhabit, have become apart of them. This is the material reality that we find ourselves in. It is indeed a tragedy that countless indigenous nations, civilisations and peoples were systematically eradicated in the name of white settlement. The effects of such actions still linger, although the direct actions of genocide, ethnic cleansing, enslavement and so on have largely ceased. There is still displacement. There is still erasure. But such crimes cannot be undone, only healed from.

The fundamental error in "Patriotic Socialism" I find that I have not already addressed was brought up by comrade u/Mrfish31. He said:

No, honoring and respecting communists (eg the black panthers, workers movements) and abolitionists (eg John Brown) is not "patriotic", being proud of "the American tradition of rebellion". These people were literally the opposite of "tradition". They were enemies and traitors to the USA (A good thing!) and in many cases were executed by the USA. The "American tradition" is white supremacy and slavery. To be patriotic in such a country is to implicitly support it, no matter how much you insist that you "actually just support the right parts of it's history".

I elaborated upon this a bit further in my reply to u/Professional-Way1833, but essentially: "Patriotic Socialists" believe that organisations and individuals (such as the Black Panthers, for instance) made advancements because of the US, rather than in spite of it. John Brown's rebellion was crushed by the United States state apparatus, civil rights leaders, labour activists, unionists and Communists were actively persecuted by the United States Government. These people and movements should indeed be celebrated and honoured, but not because they were Americans, but because they were Communists, abolitionists, labour organisers, unionists and civil rights leaders. Geronimo fought against the United States. Eugene Debs did as well. Patriotic Socialism calls for the celebration of American tradition - rebellion, progress, Liberty and Democracy, etc - in spite of America's genocidal present, but fails to understand that such rebellion and progress happened in spite of the United States, engaging in direct conflict with the United States and what it stands for. Perhaps in ideas, yes, these individuals and organisations fought for something "American", but in concrete practice, they fought directly against everything that is American. This is something u/MrFish31 pointed out. In ideas, yes, the United States can be considered to be or have been a vanguard of democracy and liberty, freedom et. al, but in practice it is a vanguard of imperial colonialism and white supremacy.

So, what is to be done? as the two aforementioned users both correctly pointed out, white American workers are still oppressed. Not nearly as much as indigenous nations and african-american communities, but still oppressed regardless. The "Patriotic Socialists" assert that the Working class in the US is being oppressed by an "outside force", that being the Bourgeoisie. However, this take is close, but not completely correct. The Bourgeoisie of the United States, as the world's foremost Imperial power, are not oppressing American workers the same way they oppress the workers, of, say, Australia or Mexico. Capital is largely imported to the USA, not exported. The Bourgeoisie are only "outside" the working class, not the nation itself. Likewise, the workers out outside their government, which is not and never was intended to be representative of the workers, of course, it is merely the apparatus in which the Bourgeoisie conduct their operations. The answer to this, then, brings me to return to my analogy to the USSR: do as the Soviets did and build political power outside of the Government of the United States, until you are capable of directly challenging the American State for political dominance - upon which a revolution begins and the class war becomes a civil war. Again, I return to my old conclusion: the United States of America was founded as a Liberal-bourgeois republic and has existed as such for close to 250 years. It has run its course. The time has come for American proletarians to sweep it aside and replace the Bourgeois Republic with a Socialist one.

5: The Question of National Self-Determination of various nations in the United States

There are many nations and communities within the United States, many of which are vying for liberation, each of which have separate but similar grievances and demands. In Australia, most indigenous tribes and communities do not have a concept of statehood, and although the law of self-determination must be respected, it is unlikely that any new countries will emerge after an Australian revolution. In America, this is not the case, owing both to the national composition of America and its geographical components. The Indigenous peoples of Australia largely lived nomadic lives, viewing themselves as "caretakers" of the land rather than as owners. They maintained a complex system of crude "international relations" with their immediate neighbours, but that was about it^(5). Indigenous Americans, on the other hand, did form states and nations - the Iroqois Confederacy, iirc, was an inspiration for the United States Congress. Regardless, these nations were conquered by the United States. They fought bravely for their survival, but were ultimately defeated - and yet, they survive, still striving for liberation and survival today. In addition to this, there exists the question of Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Alaska. Then there comes the racial question and the division of white from black working class comrades. What is to be done?

A Rainbow Coalition. I must confess, I had not heard of such a concept until I was writing this. But regardless, the concept is the most viable so far to achieve national and economic liberation in the United States.

The reason why such a concept is not suited for Australia is because our country, for better or worse, is overwhelmingly white - around 71.1 - 89% of the population, the remainder being a mix of indian and southeast asian, with around 2.8% (~750,000) being indigenous. In America, only 60.8% of the population is white, the remainder being a very diverse mix of african american, hispanic, asian, and so on - all of whom have a long history of being at varying levels of relations with the United States Government - seldom good. I remember reading a while ago, around the time of the George Floyd Riots, a theory work by u/theDashRendar about the dillemma of the ruling class at that time (link to a reading I did of it), and they made a great point about how never since the Russian Revolution had there been a revolution where the agents of the state may rebel against it. I believe this parrallel works here, too. The Russian empire was also filled with hundreds of ethnic groups, each desiring their own representation - and yet, they were organised into one, united, cohesive Union - not a New Russia, but a Union of Soviets. If American revolutionaries with to maintain the territorial integrity or borders of the current United States, so be it, but the socialist republic that emerges out of it must not in any way reflect the empire that preceded it. And, ultimately, the law of self-determination is ultimate. Unless they're trying to form a capitalist state, of course.

In America, the National Question is answered as follows: Workers of all Colours must unite to overthrow the bourgeosie in their country. But they will not do so by mimicking the current power structure, "traditions" and organisation of the preexisting state. They will do so by building a united front of all races and nations, as did the Bolsheviks, to overthrow the Bourgeoisie and build in its place not a Socialist version of the United States, but a Socialist State in America. That is the task of American Communists: Smash the Capitalist US, build a Socialist America.

Commissar

Sydney, Australia

2021

Footnotes:

1. Australia is still a British Commonwealth realm - our head of state is still Queen Elizabeth II. In 1975 the United States' CIA, in conjunction with the British Mi6, staged a "constitutional coup" to remove Prime Minister Gough Whitlam - officially over his minority government and use of power, unofficially over him ending Australian involvement in Vietnam, his desire to nationalise American-owned mines, to shut down the US spy base Pine Gap (which is still in operation to this day and serves as the largest American intelligence base in the Asia-Pacific Region), and to join the non-aligned movement. Luckily, we didn't share the same fate as Chile, and Whitlam was replaced with the opposition leader Malcolm Fraser who pulled significantly closer to the US out of fear they'd remove him too, famously saying: "We are allies with the United States to protect us from the United States".
2. Ned Kelly was an Irish-Australian "Bushranger", essentially an outlaw, known for leading a gang of criminals to rob banks and participate in other criminal acts involving livestock theft - however, they were very particular about it in that they wore distinct bulletproof plate armour fashioned from ploughshares, and only targeted state property, Squatters (Australian Kulaks, basically) and police officers. When they did hold up a particular site, they would destroy debt records and redistribute some of the spoils of the robbery to the people they'd inconvenienced by holding them hostage, and - and how Australian is this - they sometimes bought drinks for the men. Kelly was hanged in 1880, despite some 300,000 people (out of 850,000 in the Colony of Victoria at the time) signing a petition demanding he be set free. His last words were "Such is life", basically "Eh, fuck it." He is a controversial figure in contemporary Australia, though he and his image and what he stood for is held in high esteem by many working class Australians - even the Australian Communist Party uses his likeness. The bourgeois state apparatus condemns him as a criminal, but he is undoubtedly an Australian worker's hero.
3. "Coolie" is a colloquial term to refer to indentured labour that were essentially slaves captured from other British colonies in the indo-pacific area. Some were Chinese, though a majority were from India, Bengal, Myanmar and the Pacific Islands. Though not officially slaves, they were effectively slaves.
4. The Eureka Stockade was a labour rebellion in Ballarat, British Colony of Victoria (Now the Australian State) in December 1854 - January 1855. Striking miners staged an armed rebellion in the goldfields there (this was during the Australian Gold Rush), protesting low payments for mined gold, high mining taxes, no democratic representation, police brutality and discrimination. Though the original 5,000 at Eureka were defeated, the crown was forced to concede to all of the Miner's demands a month later in January 1855, when a crowd three times the size of the original rebellion rallied.
5. Indigenous Australians numbered around ~200 or so "nations" across the Australian continent, Tasmania and the Torres Strait Islands. Each one had its own customs, language, culture and so on; vague, loosely defined borders and a loosely similar set of policies regarding interacting with neighbouring tribes. Each tribe, for instance, had a "Totem", such as an animal they would not hunt - out of respect, neighbouring tribes would also not hunt such an animal. There were, of course, scuffles and conflicts between various tribes, but none that resulted in the outright conquest of one tribe by another. Though they lived largely nomadic lives, there is evidence they engaged in Farming, and had a basic understanding of ecology, as did Indigenous Americans.