Revolutionary nationalism creates the conditions for proletariat international ism. You can't get workers to care about foreigners if they have no security, wealthy, or political power. Self defense, political development, establishing a cultural/spiritual identity should be the priority of any nationalism movements while separating from the enemy (whites)
@@mikiafu Yes and no. Jewish self determination does not mean the right to mass murder indigenous people, displace them, inflict an apartheid system against those indigenous people, and then genocide them.
Fred Hampton once said: “We say you don’t fight racism with racism. We’re gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don’t fight capitalism with black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism.” Love this video ❤
Fred Hampton was right and wrong. Solidarity was correct but you do not fight one exploitive white social system with another white exploitive social system.
My favorite part was from 25:18 - 33:51 describing Malcolm X and the Black Panther's evolution from black nationalism to broader class consciousness. Well done! Need more talks on this topic 🙌🏽
Malcolm X never gave up the black belt thesis tho. Malcolm going to Africa increased his pan africanism. It also turned him into what we would call today as a revolutionary nationalist.
Malcolm on his arrival from Mecca said about his organisation “White people can help but they can’t join”. Malcolm was very much a Nationalist. The blak panthers were always socialist and about class struggle. You really should do more research.
Why is it ok for Puerto Rico, Ghana, Grenada, South Africa allowed to fight against their colonial overseers on a national bases but black americans can not?
Because they were fighting on there lands. We are in America we have nowhere to call home. All we can do is destroy racial inequality, after that's done we could have black only communities.
@encouraginglyauthentic43 the so called 5 civilised tribes enslaved Africans in mass and to this day in many ways are still racist (evidenced by how reparationsare doled to natives with african ancestry). They owe black america reparations as well. Revolution is about land we are owed land. I also understand the limitations of nationalism with capitalism and imperialism alive and well.
the back to africa movement was a program underneath the UNIA not the reason of the organization, marcus garvey emphasized pan-africanism (something i haven't see you mention fully) which is international, the UNIA didn''t just have members in america, they also had members in the carribean and in europe
Malcom X parent were garveyites to say that malcom's black nationalism was different to marcus garvey's despite the overwhelming evidence of the contrary is just unscientific, it's entirely plausible to say that without marcus garvey malcom x never picks up his internationalist consciousness . Marcus garvey also spent a significant amount of time working with the poor working class.
But Garvey had no class analysis.. that was clr james Hubert Harrison problem with Garvey and malcolm didn't have his father in his life long enough nor his mother. So he definitely got it from the noi.
@omowale you saw the Dwight boy just shot up the dollar general on some racist stuff? And Uncle Sam is funding nazis in Ukraine. But these folks in the socialist appeal want us to give up our nationalism? Nah, I'll pass
I love these nice talks and it displays some great young voices, but I live in america. I like the talks, but SHOW me what these groups DO!! NOW. otherwise it just sounds good.
A good overview of white bourgeois Marxist critique of black nationalism. Seems to be pretty unaware of the proletariat base and international engagement of important Black nationalists organizations like the UNIA, the Nation of Islam and the black panther party
It doesn’t seem like you actually watched the video. She discusses the UNIA extensively. While she doesn’t go much into the NOI she does discuss Malcolm. That’s probably because the NOI is a pro-capitalist organization. The UNIA, however, was more complicated.
The Catholic Church, the US military and the NOI are all organizations primarily made up of workers. That doesn't mean they have workers' interests in mind. The exact opposite, actually
@@noonesishome that seems to be the rule, not the exception…. And if not Marxist, then radical or revolutionary in some other way (like the examples given below: Lolita LeBron and Marcus Garvey)
except repressed consciousness gives rise to class consciousness, tf you talking about? Also class consciousness doesn't just arise completely spontaneously, it's essential for there to be a class and politically conscious proletariat to spread class and political consciousness, that's why groups like these exist in the first place dawg.
@encouraginglyauthentic43 The concept itself isn't, but to truly be class concious is truly a long and gradual process. Not to mention that the social relations both race and class lead and give rise to eachother as apart of the mode of production. They cannot be abstracted because they are in a constantly changing dialectical relation.
"Trotsky described the nationalism of the oppressed as the outer shell of an immature Bolshevism"... really impressive, beautifully autistic - dung. And the competition is high in the well of permanent Trotskyism... That line of thought turned out pretty well in eastern Europe. Whenever there was an attempt to pamper petty nationalism (oppressed or not) in hope of swaying it to the communist camp it turned out horribly wrong. The petty nationalism's only use of that is to reap whatever it can from such a deal in hope of outliving the communism, so it can be the only thing it wants - an unfulfilled, petty nationalism. Just check out which countries are (and were) the Empire's most rabid, anti-communist lap dogs. In literally every one of them you'll hear the stories of "good ol' days, before the commies"... when they could freely wipe their Swedish/German/Austrian masters' asses and enjoy civilization. I'm not speaking about black nationalism in the USA - that situation is much different - but I also doubt that Trotsky had that in mind.
This is comparing Apples to Oranges, the difference is that in Eastern Europe there was set up nation states that ended up reproducing capitalist relations, that is not the case at all for repressed national groups like Indigenous Americans and Australians, Black people in the US, Palestine, Basque peoples, Kurdish peoples, and many more struggles. The position of Leon Trotsky still remains the same which he thought that the liberation of black people in the US is the job of black people themselves, rising from that national liberation movement alongside the international class liberation of the proletariat to abolish classes as racial hierarchies would be abolished from the national liberation movement of black people in their own struggles, thus in a way race (as a social construct) is abolished as well. Also why would you consider Trotsky's analysis "autistic dung"? You got some stuff to say about Autistic people?
@@socialistlynx1264 I really can't unravel what you are talking about... I already said that I'm not speaking about black nationalism, but about Trotsky's quote, and he hardly had BLM in mind. If anyone is comparing apples and oranges (regarding that quote), it's the speaker from the video. Furthermore, "the difference is that in Eastern Europe there was set up nation states that ended up reproducing capitalist relations..." this is wrong on so many levels... Just look at the Europe 1910 and Europe 2010 maps before speaking about nation states, and trying to understand what I am talking about (wtf is the difference between a Slovak and a Basque or Kurd, except the former managed to end up with a nation state (not only because of his own capacities, mind you). "National liberation" often leads to chauvinism (not that it should not happen (liberation, I mean), but it shouldn't be romanticized), or is straight up driven by chauvinism. Give your array of oppressed peoples total liberty and at least 50% of them would turn into "reproducing capitalist relations"... and their own dalits. I was optimistic when I said that his analysis was autistic dung. More probably, it was a conscious dung by a proven narcissist. And I haven't got anything to say about autistic people (as I never mentioned them), but I have a lot to say about regular people who can't comprehend simple words, but are ready to scorn others through twisting their words.
@@cletusbufford Okay well first off your wrong, if you read the interview between C.L.R. James and Leon Trotsky, you can see that Leon Trotsky was very supportive of a Black Nationalist movement actually. I'll give you a direct quote where he says this: "We say: If the Negroes want that then we must fight against imperialism to the last drop of blood, so that they gain the right, wherever and how they please, to separate a piece of land for themselves. The fact that they are today not a majority in any state does not matter. It is not a question of the authority of the states but of the Negroes."- Leon Trotsky, The Negro Question in America. This isn't out of the blue for Leon Trotsky to say because him, alongside Vladimir Lenin, Christian Rakovsky, Evgeni Preobrazhensky, and even Alexandra Kollontai saw that national liberation leads to internationalist struggle of all workers of the world against a common bourgeois enemy of workers of imperialized lands and workers from the imperialist lands fighting against imperialists, just as Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, Joseph Weydemeyer, and Paul Lafrague did. This is more evident of the entire Communist International in mass-majority drafting the Theses on the Black Question by The Communist International where they see the struggle of the African-American peoples are in the same relation of the struggles of Armenian peoples. Leon Trotsky always maintained the position that the emancipation of black people is the job of black people themselves just as the emancipation of the proletariat is the job of the proletariat themselves. That's why Leon Trotsky defended C.L.R. James in the Self-Determination vs Integrationism debate in the American Socialist Workers Party. No you don't know what the hell you're talking about, look at the European countries that you are talking about that do have states where they function through a bureaucracy but are identified as a nation, (Slovakia, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, etc) then compare to people that don't have a state but are still a nation because of their struggle rather than a bureaucracy that uses history (Basque, Palestinian, Indigenous Americans, etc). The clear difference between the nationalism of a White European vs the nationalism of a Black African is that White Nationalism emerges as a reaction against resistance of the conquest of another group and advantages that group has vs Black Nationalism where it is the resistance against the conquest, genocide, looting, and imperialism of their own peoples. Capitalism itself seeks to dominate over other nations, and grow the proletariat as large as it can. How ever by doing this, this doesn't entail just a nation doing this to another nation, rather a class of people, doing it another class of people, that spans to people in general regardless of the national affiliation. This goes for classes that are employed, thus there isn't even and oppressed national people, rather that, but mostly under a oppressed international people from another international people, with different social relations to the means of production. International action has always changed the world, and itself is how the world operates and always has. Communists thus must be Internationalists. So then how do we put that internationalism into action. Well the national borders and the nations still exist under the rule of capitalists and national people, thereby loose their own importance of nationality and become proletarians, like the rest of the proletariat. Thus means that the proletariat spans on the world, and thus means that the oppression is all over the world, and affects everyone. Thus when workers then organize in a national liberation movement to fight against the oppression and domination of a capitalist state through it's imperialism, and calls for national liberation of the given area, that actually speaks to the over all class struggle, for these people were integrated into the proletariat to serve the interests of the bourgeoisie against theirs, and see the same thing is happening to others in their oppressors nation. Thus then they get fed up and revolt, and it speaks to other workers, to where they revolt as well in the same movement to stand in solidarity with other workers, against the domination of the bourgeoisie they know from experiencing it themselves at home. National Liberation is the fight against Nationalism and is the full promotion of internationalism. The only person where Rosa Luxemburg's criticisms on National Liberation movements can apply is to Geogri Plekhanov in his specific interpretation to National Liberation, because majority of it is true. Geogri Plekhanov misses the entire point of national liberation to Marxism. It's not the fact that we should still allow Great-Russian Nationalism or any form of Nationalism to come about at all. Rather the fact that this gives more freedom to workers and humanity when we set movements to become revolutions against the bourgeoisie and capitalism to abolish classes, and money, which will negate the state. Trying to work within Great-Russian Nationalism or Ukrainian Nationalism is destroying to the entire point of having these workers state be declared along side with their independence deceleration. There is a difference in supporting national liberation movements made up of workers to give bigger and better class and political consciousness to the working class from a common struggle of fighting against the bourgeoisie of imperialism from proletarians in imperialist and imperialized nations. Then a policy that supports movements to give further capital to nations, rather than fighting against the problems of capital entirely. We must strive for the former to support national liberation movements made up of workers that will allow an international socialist revolution made by and for the proletariat. The proletariat as the proletariat can show international solidarity and make international action through National Liberation movements that allow spontaneous international revolutionary situations that can be used from the vanguard party to take down the capitalist system. This is where the efforts for the Vanguard party comes into play to enhance the class struggle to play out as a full on revolution made by the proletariat themselves. Because just because the proletariat has the capabilities to self emancipate, doesn't mean they have the consciousness to do so. This is where the vanguard party or any socialist at all, should support national liberation movements and it is something that is very helpful for the proletariat to rise up against their imperialists. By not supporting national liberation movements, it actually increases more reactionary and nationalist politics because it means that the proletariat would be abandoned by their fellow proletarians who are class and politically conscious. These proletarians who are class and politically conscious are people like me, or you, all of us, the Communists, where it is out job to support and build up the proletariat. If we don't, they will fall further in the combined uneven political and economic development of class and political consciousness within the proletariat that will lead them to go to alternatives that will just replace one form of exploitation with another, rather than abolishing all exploitation. Thus to support national liberation and the self-deamination of nations made by the proletariat, will increase internationalism and internationalist solidarity among the proletariat, as well allows us to spread class and political consciousness to build up the proletariat. This is clear where here Vladimir Lenin is even supporting the self-determination of Finland, Ukraine, and Armenia. I recommend you watch The Fight Against Racism: The Revolutionary Tradition by Anne Rogers.
Revolutionary nationalism creates the conditions for proletariat international ism. You can't get workers to care about foreigners if they have no security, wealthy, or political power. Self defense, political development, establishing a cultural/spiritual identity should be the priority of any nationalism movements while separating from the enemy (whites)
Self-determination does not *necessitate* separation, but it does include the right to do so.
Like the Jewish self-determination?
@@mikiafu there is no jewish national identity
@@mikiafu Yes and no. Jewish self determination does not mean the right to mass murder indigenous people, displace them, inflict an apartheid system against those indigenous people, and then genocide them.
Fred Hampton once said: “We say you don’t fight racism with racism. We’re gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don’t fight capitalism with black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism.” Love this video ❤
Fred Hampton was right and wrong. Solidarity was correct but you do not fight one exploitive white social system with another white exploitive social system.
Well explained comrades
Neither religious war nor national war
Only class war✊
No
@@twentyfaces6915big no
As a materialist, you can't expect colinised ppl to blindly join a class war with ppl who are racist. Nkrumah-Tourism>Marxism
@@JoeyAfrika thank you brother. I think some leftists purposely try to play dumb to this fact.
Foolish and short sighted
There are two things that I love the most in this world; british accent and trotskists.
My favorite part was from 25:18 - 33:51 describing Malcolm X and the Black Panther's evolution from black nationalism to broader class consciousness. Well done! Need more talks on this topic 🙌🏽
Malcolm X never gave up the black belt thesis tho. Malcolm going to Africa increased his pan africanism. It also turned him into what we would call today as a revolutionary nationalist.
Evolution?
Malcolm on his arrival from Mecca said about his organisation “White people can help but they can’t join”. Malcolm was very much a Nationalist. The blak panthers were always socialist and about class struggle. You really should do more research.
Stop twisting the words of the great X to defend your racist and reductive stance
Why is it ok for Puerto Rico, Ghana, Grenada, South Africa allowed to fight against their colonial overseers on a national bases but black americans can not?
Because they were fighting on there lands. We are in America we have nowhere to call home.
All we can do is destroy racial inequality, after that's done we could have black only communities.
@encouraginglyauthentic43 the so called 5 civilised tribes enslaved Africans in mass and to this day in many ways are still racist (evidenced by how reparationsare doled to natives with african ancestry). They owe black america reparations as well. Revolution is about land we are owed land.
I also understand the limitations of nationalism with capitalism and imperialism alive and well.
@encouraginglyauthentic43 repatriation is an option but we are home and have a claim to at least the southern states the RNA laid out
@@JoeyAfrika We have no land.
@@JoeyAfrika We aren't getting reparations without violence.
the back to africa movement was a program underneath the UNIA not the reason of the organization, marcus garvey emphasized pan-africanism (something i haven't see you mention fully) which is international, the UNIA didn''t just have members in america, they also had members in the carribean and in europe
Nationalism and internationalism arent conflicting ideologies
Malcom X parent were garveyites to say that malcom's black nationalism was different to marcus garvey's despite the overwhelming evidence of the contrary is just unscientific, it's entirely plausible to say that without marcus garvey malcom x never picks up his internationalist consciousness . Marcus garvey also spent a significant amount of time working with the poor working class.
But Garvey had no class analysis.. that was clr james Hubert Harrison problem with Garvey and malcolm didn't have his father in his life long enough nor his mother. So he definitely got it from the noi.
How does one completely miss Hubert Henry Harrison and A.Phillip Randolph?
Don't read what Marx said about Mexicans and black folks oof.
Did Henry Haywood ever drop the black belt theory or fighting for a black nation inside the US? I know Queen Mother Moore did not
He didn't.
@omowale you saw the Dwight boy just shot up the dollar general on some racist stuff? And Uncle Sam is funding nazis in Ukraine. But these folks in the socialist appeal want us to give up our nationalism? Nah, I'll pass
He didn't because he didn't get it from lenin like she implied
Nice, Ty for that!
Could the maroons be considered nationalist?
Absolutely
do brits not have their own history to discuss
Vamos Guerreiros 🔥🔥
A better answer to this question can be found in Frank Chapman's "Marxist-Leninist Perspectives on Black Liberation and Socialism"
I love these nice talks and it displays some great young voices, but I live in america. I like the talks, but SHOW me what these groups DO!! NOW. otherwise it just sounds good.
Hey, take a look at what the Revolutionary Communists of America are doing ua-cam.com/video/v7CrL27mzkk/v-deo.htmlsi=01cpJYtSlZfrceIa
Algieria Ahmad Ben Bella
The big problem with this speaker's analysis is her lack of historical understanding.
Great analysis, but damn, the frame you chose to film this in cracked me up every time I looked at the screen 😂
that guy looks irish scottish, thats our brother.. i think you need to listen to this again specifically the part about Malcolm Xs reform
A good overview of white bourgeois Marxist critique of black nationalism. Seems to be pretty unaware of the proletariat base and international engagement of important Black nationalists organizations like the UNIA, the Nation of Islam and the black panther party
It doesn’t seem like you actually watched the video. She discusses the UNIA extensively. While she doesn’t go much into the NOI she does discuss Malcolm. That’s probably because the NOI is a pro-capitalist organization. The UNIA, however, was more complicated.
The Catholic Church, the US military and the NOI are all organizations primarily made up of workers. That doesn't mean they have workers' interests in mind. The exact opposite, actually
If you read Dhoruba bin Wahad Still Black Still Strong he mentions Black Nationalism moving toward fascism
@@atakeall1 yes the NOI is and UNIA has its contradictions...a bit capitalistic
@@andreathesexy1Black nationalism =/= fascism
Why aren’t there any racial activist who are non-Marxist?
Because liberalism is inherently racist especially in America
Cause that's it's foundation lmao
There plenty racial activist who aren't marxist. Lolita LeBron and Marcus Garvey come to mind
@@JoeyAfrika thank you.
@@noonesishome that seems to be the rule,
not the exception….
And if not Marxist, then radical or revolutionary in some other way
(like the examples given below: Lolita LeBron and Marcus Garvey)
Class consciousness is a minute issue compared to race consciousness
except repressed consciousness gives rise to class consciousness, tf you talking about? Also class consciousness doesn't just arise completely spontaneously, it's essential for there to be a class and politically conscious proletariat to spread class and political consciousness, that's why groups like these exist in the first place dawg.
@@socialistlynx1264 They're saying class consciousness isn't a concept that takes a while to grasp.
@encouraginglyauthentic43 The concept itself isn't, but to truly be class concious is truly a long and gradual process. Not to mention that the social relations both race and class lead and give rise to eachother as apart of the mode of production. They cannot be abstracted because they are in a constantly changing dialectical relation.
"Trotsky described the nationalism of the oppressed as the outer shell of an immature Bolshevism"... really impressive, beautifully autistic - dung. And the competition is high in the well of permanent Trotskyism...
That line of thought turned out pretty well in eastern Europe. Whenever there was an attempt to pamper petty nationalism (oppressed or not) in hope of swaying it to the communist camp it turned out horribly wrong. The petty nationalism's only use of that is to reap whatever it can from such a deal in hope of outliving the communism, so it can be the only thing it wants - an unfulfilled, petty nationalism. Just check out which countries are (and were) the Empire's most rabid, anti-communist lap dogs. In literally every one of them you'll hear the stories of "good ol' days, before the commies"... when they could freely wipe their Swedish/German/Austrian masters' asses and enjoy civilization.
I'm not speaking about black nationalism in the USA - that situation is much different - but I also doubt that Trotsky had that in mind.
This is comparing Apples to Oranges, the difference is that in Eastern Europe there was set up nation states that ended up reproducing capitalist relations, that is not the case at all for repressed national groups like Indigenous Americans and Australians, Black people in the US, Palestine, Basque peoples, Kurdish peoples, and many more struggles. The position of Leon Trotsky still remains the same which he thought that the liberation of black people in the US is the job of black people themselves, rising from that national liberation movement alongside the international class liberation of the proletariat to abolish classes as racial hierarchies would be abolished from the national liberation movement of black people in their own struggles, thus in a way race (as a social construct) is abolished as well.
Also why would you consider Trotsky's analysis "autistic dung"? You got some stuff to say about Autistic people?
@@socialistlynx1264 I really can't unravel what you are talking about... I already said that I'm not speaking about black nationalism, but about Trotsky's quote, and he hardly had BLM in mind. If anyone is comparing apples and oranges (regarding that quote), it's the speaker from the video.
Furthermore, "the difference is that in Eastern Europe there was set up nation states that ended up reproducing capitalist relations..." this is wrong on so many levels... Just look at the Europe 1910 and Europe 2010 maps before speaking about nation states, and trying to understand what I am talking about (wtf is the difference between a Slovak and a Basque or Kurd, except the former managed to end up with a nation state (not only because of his own capacities, mind you). "National liberation" often leads to chauvinism (not that it should not happen (liberation, I mean), but it shouldn't be romanticized), or is straight up driven by chauvinism. Give your array of oppressed peoples total liberty and at least 50% of them would turn into "reproducing capitalist relations"... and their own dalits.
I was optimistic when I said that his analysis was autistic dung. More probably, it was a conscious dung by a proven narcissist. And I haven't got anything to say about autistic people (as I never mentioned them), but I have a lot to say about regular people who can't comprehend simple words, but are ready to scorn others through twisting their words.
@@cletusbufford Okay well first off your wrong, if you read the interview between C.L.R. James and Leon Trotsky, you can see that Leon Trotsky was very supportive of a Black Nationalist movement actually. I'll give you a direct quote where he says this: "We say: If the Negroes want that then we must fight against imperialism to the last drop of blood, so that they gain the right, wherever and how they please, to separate a piece of land for themselves. The fact that they are today not a majority in any state does not matter. It is not a question of the authority of the states but of the Negroes."- Leon Trotsky, The Negro Question in America. This isn't out of the blue for Leon Trotsky to say because him, alongside Vladimir Lenin, Christian Rakovsky, Evgeni Preobrazhensky, and even Alexandra Kollontai saw that national liberation leads to internationalist struggle of all workers of the world against a common bourgeois enemy of workers of imperialized lands and workers from the imperialist lands fighting against imperialists, just as Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, Joseph Weydemeyer, and Paul Lafrague did. This is more evident of the entire Communist International in mass-majority drafting the Theses on the Black Question by The Communist International where they see the struggle of the African-American peoples are in the same relation of the struggles of Armenian peoples. Leon Trotsky always maintained the position that the emancipation of black people is the job of black people themselves just as the emancipation of the proletariat is the job of the proletariat themselves. That's why Leon Trotsky defended C.L.R. James in the Self-Determination vs Integrationism debate in the American Socialist Workers Party.
No you don't know what the hell you're talking about, look at the European countries that you are talking about that do have states where they function through a bureaucracy but are identified as a nation, (Slovakia, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, etc) then compare to people that don't have a state but are still a nation because of their struggle rather than a bureaucracy that uses history (Basque, Palestinian, Indigenous Americans, etc). The clear difference between the nationalism of a White European vs the nationalism of a Black African is that White Nationalism emerges as a reaction against resistance of the conquest of another group and advantages that group has vs Black Nationalism where it is the resistance against the conquest, genocide, looting, and imperialism of their own peoples.
Capitalism itself seeks to dominate over other nations, and grow the proletariat as large as it can. How ever by doing this, this doesn't entail just a nation doing this to another nation, rather a class of people, doing it another class of people, that spans to people in general regardless of the national affiliation. This goes for classes that are employed, thus there isn't even and oppressed national people, rather that, but mostly under a oppressed international people from another international people, with different social relations to the means of production. International action has always changed the world, and itself is how the world operates and always has. Communists thus must be Internationalists. So then how do we put that internationalism into action. Well the national borders and the nations still exist under the rule of capitalists and national people, thereby loose their own importance of nationality and become proletarians, like the rest of the proletariat. Thus means that the proletariat spans on the world, and thus means that the oppression is all over the world, and affects everyone. Thus when workers then organize in a national liberation movement to fight against the oppression and domination of a capitalist state through it's imperialism, and calls for national liberation of the given area, that actually speaks to the over all class struggle, for these people were integrated into the proletariat to serve the interests of the bourgeoisie against theirs, and see the same thing is happening to others in their oppressors nation. Thus then they get fed up and revolt, and it speaks to other workers, to where they revolt as well in the same movement to stand in solidarity with other workers, against the domination of the bourgeoisie they know from experiencing it themselves at home.
National Liberation is the fight against Nationalism and is the full promotion of internationalism. The only person where Rosa Luxemburg's criticisms on National Liberation movements can apply is to Geogri Plekhanov in his specific interpretation to National Liberation, because majority of it is true. Geogri Plekhanov misses the entire point of national liberation to Marxism. It's not the fact that we should still allow Great-Russian Nationalism or any form of Nationalism to come about at all. Rather the fact that this gives more freedom to workers and humanity when we set movements to become revolutions against the bourgeoisie and capitalism to abolish classes, and money, which will negate the state. Trying to work within Great-Russian Nationalism or Ukrainian Nationalism is destroying to the entire point of having these workers state be declared along side with their independence deceleration. There is a difference in supporting national liberation movements made up of workers to give bigger and better class and political consciousness to the working class from a common struggle of fighting against the bourgeoisie of imperialism from proletarians in imperialist and imperialized nations. Then a policy that supports movements to give further capital to nations, rather than fighting against the problems of capital entirely. We must strive for the former to support national liberation movements made up of workers that will allow an international socialist revolution made by and for the proletariat. The proletariat as the proletariat can show international solidarity and make international action through National Liberation movements that allow spontaneous international revolutionary situations that can be used from the vanguard party to take down the capitalist system. This is where the efforts for the Vanguard party comes into play to enhance the class struggle to play out as a full on revolution made by the proletariat themselves. Because just because the proletariat has the capabilities to self emancipate, doesn't mean they have the consciousness to do so. This is where the vanguard party or any socialist at all, should support national liberation movements and it is something that is very helpful for the proletariat to rise up against their imperialists. By not supporting national liberation movements, it actually increases more reactionary and nationalist politics because it means that the proletariat would be abandoned by their fellow proletarians who are class and politically conscious. These proletarians who are class and politically conscious are people like me, or you, all of us, the Communists, where it is out job to support and build up the proletariat. If we don't, they will fall further in the combined uneven political and economic development of class and political consciousness within the proletariat that will lead them to go to alternatives that will just replace one form of exploitation with another, rather than abolishing all exploitation. Thus to support national liberation and the self-deamination of nations made by the proletariat, will increase internationalism and internationalist solidarity among the proletariat, as well allows us to spread class and political consciousness to build up the proletariat. This is clear where here Vladimir Lenin is even supporting the self-determination of Finland, Ukraine, and Armenia.
I recommend you watch The Fight Against Racism: The Revolutionary Tradition by Anne Rogers.
@@socialistlynx1264 Sorry if I'm richardhead, but... Are you American?
@@cletusbufford I don't think that matters for the argument I presented
marxism or black nationalism? both lose. swipe.
They both win over capitalism and white supremacy 🙃
An Oreo
Don't make such stupid comments