A question about NazBol

I have read bits and pieces of 4PT. What exactly do you mean?

Nazbols believe their race is above others.

The other examples you gave believe their races should be equal to others.

It's the same difference between white power and black power.

4PT and NazBol goes more for civic nationalism than race-based nationalism. Dugin has actually made the point that Russia is one of the most racially and religiously diverse nations on earth and yet they have very little racial/religious tensions with the exception of Chechen separatists in the Caucus.

Juche is a racial-supremacist ideology. North Koreans have internalized a lot of Japanese nationalism left over from occupation.

wn.com/russian_nationalists_attack_immigrants_on_st_petersburg_metro_truthloader

EXPLAIN ON THE WAY TOVARISH TAKE KALASH WE HEFF TO GO

Dungin's 4pt isn't about nationalism but about autonomy
very different things specially when contrasted against fascist nationalism

Most nationalist movements are about autonomy to some degree.

All of these ideologies are revisionist, including Third Worldism and anarcho-primitivism.

There's that word again

...

Was Muammar Gaddafi basically a NazBol? I see NazBols praise him a lot along with some other dictators.

...

Nazbols generally like anybody mixing authoritarianism with left-wing economic policies.

what about no

Yes. Gaddafi's regime was entirely turd position.

The Bund were basically Zionists afraid of seasickness.

The Panthers weren't anarchist or Maoist as popularly portrayed but Jucheist. There's a reason why they wouldn't let non-blacks into their party.

What? Bundists were vehemently anti-Zionist.

What the fuck are you even talking about?

They were still nationalists. "Afraid of seasickness" was a metaphor. Either way, they were Second Internationale reactionaries so they generally sucked.

Do you even know what you're talking about? Several members of the BPP greatly admired the DPRK and wanted to base a black socialism off Juche. There is plenty of literature on the topic.

Juche isn't even "socialism for Korea" but a kind of proto-NazBol ideology, aka racialist communism. Ceausescu and Honecker, and for a time Tito, wanted to export Juche ideology to Romania and the DDR respectively.

Hold up, dude.
Left-Wing Nationalism is a good and decent thing. Nation has race as a possible secondary meaning, but it is the people of a country. Every country is Nationalist, even the US is actually a confederation of 50 nations, and it's been so long in that arrangement that there is a kind of broken halfassed federal nationalism to it.
Juche is pretty cool on paper. But I mean, like Gaddafi, they are still in a position where dictatorship is the name of the game, see

youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

I agree. The modern left these days is just as ethnocentric as the right at this point, and you see it very bluntly in postcolonial theory. Even Third Worldist groups like RAIM have dropped the "Marxism" label on account that Marxism is too eurocentric (or Judaic) and HistMat doesn't fit with the indigenous paradigms of Muslims, Africans, Asians, and so on.

"Decolonize your mind" is a statement which inherently invokes nationalist sentiments.

When are you going to learn thqt your entryism doeent work Holla Forums

Gaddafi's regime really wasn't all that "left-wing". Starting in 2003, the Libyan government oversaw large-scale privatization of the economy — including that of the oil sector. And it showed absolutely no sign of stopping.

He also contributed $50,000,000+ to the political campaign of Nicolas Sarkozy, the most aggressively neo-Liberal candidate in the French 2007 presidential elections. Yes, that's fifty millions.

Nationalists never support consistent economic policies because they, by they very nature, do not care all that much about economics. The moment Arab "Socialists" can drop the "Socialist" act, they do.

It's just that Turd Positionists have a hard-on for anything that calls itself "anti-imperialist".

Actually got me curious there. Would you mind sharing some of that literature?

Again, I'm not a NazBol or Holla Forumstard. I'm merely trying to point out that the future of the Left will be some kind of crypto-NazBolism.

theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/19/black-panthers-north-korea-us-imperialism

National bolshevism is basically an epic ironic trolling art project that is on a million layers of irony more than weird twitter. It's function is to confuse, distract and divide so that the only clarity in russia will be putinism.

...

IDEOLOGY

Nazbols are taking the identity politics "left" to its logical conclusion. The solution is the same as it always was: proletarian internationalism.

I don't think you really understand what kind of memery happens in Russia

Mein gott

I think user is referencing the weirdo postmodern theater-strategy utilized by Vladislav Surkov: nonalignedmedia.com/2016/01/putins-pr-strategy-play-all-sides-every-side-to-win-support-confuse-opponents/

This. Watch any interview with Dugin explaining his philosophy and he sounds identical to an SJW or postcolonial theorist.

TY my comrade.

NOI were never leftist. They've always been black fascist and full of black bourgeoisie. There's a reason why so many rap stars pick NOI black nationalism over black proletarianism.

Nothing is more ebin than Stalin's icons

Actually they work.

I'd much rather live in Gaddafi's Libya or Nasser's Egypt than Mao's China or Anarchist Failalonia.

The cult of personality was pretty shit but I'll admit it did lead to some killer syncretistic art.

That fucking face on the left…

Except the hijab and other traditional garments have the capability to disrupt capitalist hegemony. That's how it works. The more stigmatized you are, the more threatening your identity is to capitalism, because stigma grows from not reproducing capital in a way that capital finds beneficial.

...

False analogy. The fact France has put legislation into practice which de-veils Muslim women is all the proof you need that Islamic modesty threatens capitalism.

...

...

Anti-colonial resistance isn't the same thing as Holocaust denial.

I'm for nationalist socialism inasmuch as I acknowledge that cultures, regardless of their spook factor, can simply be opposed to such a degree that attempts at mere globalism without regard for culture creates more conflict than ought be necessary. In other words, I would prefer to not have a horde of immigrants from the Islamofascist Middle-Eastern countries moving into working class areas where I live, fucking everything up for everyone dramatically. There is no need or obligation to do so either. So let the countries become socialized individually, and then we can work on destroying the borders.

Also, Nazbol != racist. There has been a schism between the Nazbol movements, but the primarily established concepts did not allow for racism/antisemitism.

I have a friend who is an orthodox Jew who is sympathetic to NazBol for pretty much the same reasons, specifically that return to tradition can offset neoliberalism.

That's retarded.

The French government wouldn't ban the niqab and hijab if they weren't threatening to their neoliberal way of life.

You're retarded. Those legislations were put in place to placate the working class, which is what actually threatens capitalism. Capitalism doesn't give a shit about Islamic "modesty". Capitalism eats cultural traditions for breakfast and shits them back out as commodities in the afternoon.

No they weren't. They have a distinctly colonial function. Not everything boils down to "muh workers."

But everything boils down to "muh colonialisms"

National liberation matters, yes.

Opinion discarded

...

So what? Anti-colonial struggles ought to be discarded?

Yes

Opinion discarded

Why?

Literally no one says that. We simply understand class in a different framework.

By your logic, the Palestinians should just join unions and take over the factories rather than fight against occupation.

It's not 1960 anymore. Anticolonialism isn't some never-been-tried theory.

We've seen the result of anticolonial struggles in country after country all around the world: a new, native bourgeois which collaborates with foreign capitalists to keep the majority as poor and desperate as they were under colonialism.

The sole exceptions to this trend occurred when the independence movement was led by socialists on an explicitly socialist basis.

How do you expect colonized nations to hold a proletarian consciousness before a national consciousness?

You really sound like ultraleftist scum.

...

"National consciousness" is the very thing we're fighting. In non-colonized polities it's a key prop of bourgeois rule.

How the fuck is embracing it wholeheartedly going to do anything but channel proletarian anger into the creation and maintenance of a bourgeois state?

You do know that the "mental decolonization" agenda is primarily pushed by university-educated BOURGEOIS PoC, right?

The whole "return to an authentic X identity" is not the language of the lower classes but the language of the new bourgeoisie that takes the place of colonial occupiers. It does NOT further class struggle but gives clout to the archons of the feudal/pre-colonial past by propping up their mythologies.

National Bolshevism, Pan-Arabism, Juche, and all the other ideologies you listed all fall into this category.

Yes and yes.
youtube.com/watch?v=k7RyVmZWuzs

Modern National Bolshevism could certainly be considered a "cool" and "dark" re-branding of postcolonial left wing nationalism, the only real difference is that National Bolshevism affirms European identities against Anglo American imperialism as well. Its dark demeanor gives it more of a cool edge when compared to post colonialists though, thus it would be more palatable to an anti idpol leftist than post colonialism would, even if one would disagree with both.

...

...

you guys obviously are aware of the fact that western european and UK hijab styles are regarded completely unacceptable and alien phenomena in a middle eastern or south asian muslim country? they are too immodest to begin with. therefore it has a radical meaning by all means, defying both theocratic and western capitalist expectations and authority

Islam in the MENA region, like Christianity in Europe, is a cancer that has eaten away at both the deep roots of traditional culture and the leaves of upward progress whenever it gains political ascendancy. I'm not even a neopagan, but it amuses me greatly that a Zoroastrian revival is occurring from the ashes left behind by the apex of Moslem fundamentalism that is ISIS.

Secularism is the only true subversion, and every apologist for Islam in the west, represents another secularist further repressed in the east.

This.

...

This is literally:

The fuck are you talking about? Being anti-zionist is "basically zionist"?

I'm sorry, English isn't my first language. I didn't know that "Zionists afraid of seasickness" is apparently a figure of speech with the meaning "my passion is drinking lead paint". You might as well call Öcalan a "National-Bolshevist".

The Bund advocated for a decoupling of state and territory which is completely at odds with "National-Bolshevism":
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_personal_autonomy
See this text by Otto Bauer (in German):
marxists.org/deutsch/archiv/bauer/1907/nationalitaet/22-personal.html
One and the same territory can belong to several "nations" in this concept, similar to how different creeds can have their churches and temples in the same city. A key aspect of Bauer's proposal is that the choice to join this or that group is entirely up to the individual.

I think he means to say that the Bund had their own variant of Jewish nationalism.

Because all the movements you've listed were movements by colonized nations against oppressors. Nazbols are literally white supremacists.

That's bullshit. You've never read anything about NazBol nor did you care to inform yourself properly.

Hint: We admire the integrational power of Russia to include different cultures and religions. Russia was literally the only imperialist power that didn't genocide natives.

I thought France did pretty okay too.

I honestly still fail to see why this tactic is wrong in any way, shape or form. There is a state which governs an area, all the people inside that area are subjected to the police force of that nation, which protects the property in that nation. The people in that nation (at least in most of the west) all speak the same language and thus have some pre-existing sense of unity or at least a tendency to regard each other as more "the same" as other groups, regardless of if this extends beyond the border as well.

So in my mind it makes perfect sense to organize, say, all the people in france, who all are french, in order to overthrow the french government, so that they can establish a proletarian state to enforce the dicatorship of the french proletariat upon the french nation. After you're done that, you can use french resources to help the austrian proletariat to overthrow the austrian government, and the germans proles to overthrow the german government.

Yet when I say this I am called a nationalist and a whole load of other words such as racist, reactionairy etc. It seems to me the most logical thing to do is to take over the very organ that is preventing us, right now, from seizing the means of production, which is the state and its soldiers, acting in the interest of the bourgeoisie.

(Im not even a nazbol, i dont even care about culture or race, its litterally just the most sensible tactic to use existing political powerstructures, which happen to be the state)

Because left-wing is full of retards who are neither smart nor aware of history.

Think of it this way: those blacks and Maghrebis within France ARE French, whether they think of themselves in that way or not. The people around them are French, the culture they're immersed in is French, and so on.

I think what OP was implying with those former colonials is that the left today focusses a lot of its energy on "oppressed" groups such as immigrants, rather than the national proletariat as a whole. This turns natives (as in, the white french) off from the left since they often seem to favour immigrants over them, while socialism is supposed to be a movement for the workers by themselves, not a movement from the workers for not-themselves other workers who live in shittier countries.

Unless I misunderstood OP of course. I don't consider the (children of) migrants from former colonies in my country as foreign. They all came here as dutch citizens, they are dutch citizens, live in the netherlands, speak dutch and are culturally dutch.

the lady wearing pakistan's is kinda cute

Yeah. She looks like Camila from Fifth Harmony.

i think she looks better