«12. . .115116117118119120121. . .192193»
Krillin, has requested embassies, I will put it to vote for two days here on the RMB.
My vote: VETO
because it is an RP/anime region of no relevance to us.
My vote: Veto
For the same reasons.
What are your guys thoughts on National Anarchism?
Many say that it's a controversy & an oxymoron. While we see footsteps of natioanlism in many books from Bakunin and Proudhon, who have respect for somebody else's love for a place. But there is an eventual fundamental difference between nationalism and patriotism ; one being in favor of a government exercising authority over a place (and many nationalists in Europe and in the US are also strong militarists) and one favorising a place or a people. I see nothing wrong in the second one.
As I learned, national anarchists are not some bunch of white suppremacists & segregationists fighting for the markets and racial superiority, but rather feel associated with a people or a place, and are in favor of confederalism, anti-imperialism, mixed economy, etc...
But I wouldn't use such anticipated answer, for the good reason that we find tens of anarchist authors who are pretty much tolerant towards patriotists - who do not act in behalf of a state - and confederalists. They only wanna gradually go towards a horizontal nation throught the philosophy of Proudhon and Bakunin :
Individual < Community < Commune < Federation < Confederacy < Nation
For me nationalism is a way to preserve a cultural identity of a certain people.
Yep. Pretty much.
But today it has become - in the EU - a doctrine calling for the state to take measures instead of the people actually taking direct action.
Fascist entryists.
I strongly disagree. Nationalism has been one of the greatest evils of the last century, and patriotism is a sickness of the mind.
Love of a place, of a people, and defence of a cultural identity against the all-consuming atomisation of capitalism is completely understandable, but those things should not be mixed up with "The Nation", which is the face of the State, of its power, violence and borders; the Nation is the fountain of collective strength with which the fascist ego identifies. Any genuine community/cultural association that is limited to the territorial and structural formation of the Nation is the product of the State which artifices these nationalist sentiments as a tool of dividing the working class and obscuring class conflict. It's a mystification, to put it in Marxist terms.
You mention Bakunin and Proudhon, but a better example of patriotic sentiments arising in anarchists is Peter Kropotkin. When the imperial tensions of the conflicting States of Europe exploded, and each of these rulers sent off their subject "working masses" to slaughter each other for the interests of the ruling class, Kropotkin felt the urge of patriotism, to defend Russia and the allies against the beasts of Germany! And this momentary abdication of anarchist principles, by one of the most respected of anarchist revolutionaries, has gone down in anarchist history as one of the greatest mistakes of our movements past.
I know you've said in the past that you always like to refer to examples in history - well take a look at the history of national liberation movements. They invariably produce a new ruling class, and so the cycle of oppression and exploitation begins anew, only with more blood dripping from the flag.
F*ck the Nation, burn the flag, destroy the State.
The new sea territory, United Provinces of Atlantica, Folkvangr anarchists, Ansoc, and 1 otherVertway
Also, we have had a quite extensive debate on national-anarchism already, beginning here:
page=display_region_rmb/region=federation_of_anarchist_communes?start=1675
Not that you can't open up that debate again, but let's not start repeating ourselves.
Yep. Borders are imaginary.
I've been reading stuff about that and I thought that he supported the Triple Entente for the reason that he felt that countries such as France, England and the US were the freest countries on the planet, where we were able to actually publish some writings, and those were places that could go towards revolution. But hey, the failure of Germany was an argument for Hitler to get elected.
It depends which national liberation movements you're refering to. Nationalism is a way of making a people feel like he's doing something for the good of a nation and it's people, yes. But that can be assimilated to both state and anarchist principles. National liberation movements such as the ones who've made the USA and the USSR possible can be justly criticized. But ones like the spanish revolution and the birth of anarchistic ways of living (in Catalonia and Aragon of course) were possible throught federalism. I believe that in Aragon, the peasants had made different systems of sharing and trading throught out syndicates and were divided into very small quarters, districts and federations that could eventually interact with each other. But those were not state borders demanding pieces of paper in order to pass the frontier, but rather places with different rules. And I don't know if you do support the kurdish resistance in Kurdistan, but the movement is entirely based on nationalism and libertarian socialism.
Talking about my own views on nationalism. I think that it can't be an excuse to destroy other cultures and experience has taught me that the link between nation and states is a complete lie, the type of nation that a Nation-state claims to be defending is a construction. Nationalism based on language for example, most of the current Nation-states of the world supports an official language while it is not spoken in all its territory or it is spoken even outside of its frontiers. The sillyiest thing of this is that the Nation-state ignores the dialects and takes 'the most pure' to create a uniform language, and those dialects are the thing which demonstrates that nations are not uniform and most of cultures are transitions to others. For example: You have a line which starts in A (for example, Paris) and ends in Z (Sofia). The people from A understands people from B, A understands less the people of C, and for example, people of A and F can't understand each other. What I mean with this is that languages and dialects are influenced by its neighbours, expressing pride coming from a certain nation in this context is a bit silly, it is trying to find differences in other to feel better than your neighbours.
There's a difference between anarchists tolerating patriots and patriots pretending to be anarchists.
Both are okay, in my point of view.
Just put up and poll about the map issue I brought up a few days ago. As a reminder I'm not going to remove Volinland and also any nation removed is free to have their space back should they return and it hasn't been claimed by an active resident here.
Eh, I don't see the issue with having pride for a certain culture. That is, of course, while maintaining respect for others. I'm a Neapolitan Italian and I'm quite proud to be so, but that respect for my own culture does not hinder me in acknowledging the worth of, say, Latino or Arab customs and traditions.
Post self-deleted by Libertarian Australia.
I agree, I'm asturian and I appreciate my culture and people, but I think it is not an excuse to crush other 'nations' or having an insane view of the Nation like the fascists have. And of course, it can't be an excuse to support a state which claims to be defending its nation while it oppresses the people.
In my opinion, anarchism cannot be nationalistic, but regionalist, municipalist. Anarchims often linked with socialist and comunist ideias strive for a local self governance or lack of it. Nationalists and Anarchists have long story of alliances, often, when there is an Opressive empire ruling this so called nations, Against the nazis fought anarchists comunists nationalists etc, for the liberation of most of the african countries there was many alliances like that, the greek anarchists are against the EU because is seen as a Supra State, Empire like, that destroys local decision making, direct democracy, auto-gestion, etc. I would say, in theory no, no the anrchist ideal is for the abolition of borders States Nations etc, but in Praxis, it is sometimes wise to understand that a small nation, an imaginary or cultural natian as occitania or kurdistan, are not the same as an empire pose to world domination, i believe that is needed to reduce the scale of the mega states, for anarchy to be possible, the Red and Black Anarco-Sindicalists of Catalunia, had to fight huge empires, if they were weaker maybe they could win. The same for any sprouting anarchist movement, the bigger and stronger the Nation State the harder is for it to Bloom. Nationalists can be seen as useful idiots, if and only if they don't gain the upper hand, this said, i think anarchists should stay out of nationalist retoric.
National "Anarchists" are basically fascists with a thing for localism.
the anarcho-syndicalists of Catalonia were crushed by the Government of the Republic
I would hestitate to say pride. This post seems to border on the spiel you get from "civic nationalists," who think that as long as you're consistent, and support the right of other citizenries to be nationalist, that everything's okay.
Which is not the case. The nation-state is a concept we must do away with. It is everything anarchists stand against. Borders are some of the biggest killers the world has ever known. Cultural and social boundaries will perpetuate this system of states and borders if we let them. If this is actually meant as sympathy toward the National "Anarchists," even in any theoretical or hypothetical way... well, some self-evaluation is needed.
The dichotomy of oppressor vs. oppressed is, as usual, extremely relevant. A nationalist movement among an oppressed group, vying for freedom and their national struggle being against domination and empire? This, I can support. Going out of one's way to respect the culture and customs of a marginalized people? One should do so as a matter of course.
But nationalists supporting their imperialist country? Nativists demanding immigrants/refugees integrate and mold their entire lives to our liking? No. Not okay.
United Provinces of Atlantica, Kincoboh, Kassimo, and Folkvangr anarchists
Yes, I am such a civic nationalist, crypto-fascist, national anarchist *rolls eyes*.
I don't see the issue with recognizing that there are very fundamental differences in cultures, and I certainly don't see how a recognition of these differences at all takes away from the inclusivity of anarchism.
«12. . .115116117118119120121. . .192193»
Advertisement
