Is it possible to be a leftist and nationalist ?

what you are asking for is Not Socialism, ever heard of it?

yeah but he wasn't a leftist

thank you based filter

The working class identity spans all nations.

well the guys at the PKK are nationalists (in that sense that they want to have kurdistan)

Yes you can. Bear in mind that most people here are retarded Americans who don't have anything to be nationalistic about anyways. If you look beyond America, you will find a lot of nationalist movements that are also leftist. (Examples would be Kurdistan, Ireland, Scotland, Catalonia or East Timor.)

Yes, it's possible to be a social democrat.

It is also possible to sit in an armchair and do nothing all day.

Yes. But, most Nationalists don't even understand what Internationalism really means. Let's have a look at some defining traits that Nazis like the ones from Holla Forums give to so-called Jewish Internationalism.

Nationalism needs to be reconstituted on a voluntary basis, just like the rest of society.
If a group of people living in some area view themselves as part of a common nation, and wish to govern themselves on that basis, then there's nothing wrong with that. They band together and do it voluntarily.
But that's not what we have today.

yes it is, nationalism was born as a left wing concept afterall (consider it in the context of the 19th century).
But there is no real reason to be nationalistic + left wing nowadays.
You can still be patriotic and proud of your nation without going full reactionary/ethnocentrist.

Capitalists are the ones trying to end borders and nations, though, so they can take advantage of the cheap labor that global inequality creates. They also don't like tariffs and import/export duties, for obvious reasons.
Nationalism was a tool that capitalism wielded, but which has since outlived its usefulness to the bourgeoisie.

Yes, but only if your nationalistic purpose is emancipation from an empire or getting independence from a colonial power or getting rid of reactionary theocracy such as in arab nationalism.

...

There's a difference between nations and governments. I wouldn't expect a leftist idiot like you to understand, facts don't seem to matter in a place where all dissent gets permabanned.

>In a brief sketch of national organization which the Commune had no time to develop, it states explicitly that the Commune was to be the political form of even the smallest village…. The communes were to elect the "National Delegation" in Paris. The few but important functions which would still remain for a central government were not to be suppressed, as had been deliberately mis-stated, but were to be transferred to communal, i.e., strictly responsible, officials. National unity was not to be broken, but, on the contrary, organized by the communal constitution; it was to become a reality by the destruction of state power which posed as the embodiment of that unity yet wanted to be independent of, and superior to, the nation, on whose body it was but a parasitic excrescence.
— Marx, The Civil War in France

post screenshot of rafiq's post on nationalism & patriotism

Borders and nations do create global inequality that is exploited by the capitalist as well, because the capitalists are operating globally, whereas the workers only operate nationally.
Thus the capitalist can create competition between the different nations with regards to taxes, worker rights, environmental regulations etc. always producing there where the work is cheapest and the governments have an incentive to lower those regulations so that capitalists build factories in their nation instead of the others.

Absolutely. And then they say left communism has never worked smh.

Yeah two centuries of Proletarian Internationalism are just Amerikkkan lies !!!1! "Workers of the world keep your spooks and let the bourgeoisie pit you against each other"

Forgot flag.

But Hitler spoke of this International Clique before the State of Israel had ever been formed, when it was still Mandate Palestine.

You mean like Holla Forums?
Sorry but, did you expect this place to be an echo-chamber? If you disagree with an idea explain the errors in their reasoning.

Because the working class has no nation.

Sure, why not.
See to your nations prosperity, cultivate and nurture both it's culture, folk and values.
See to that socialism benefits it instead of becoming ussr v2
Kinda like Tito did for Yugoslavia, ended up making it one of the most prosperous and progressive countries in the eastern bloc whilist not allowing stalin nor the west to screw it over.
You can claim to be cosmopolitan in the first place and a patriot in the second or vice versa.

Has Rafiq actually read Ocalan? DemCon (A confederation of communities democratically run by their workers) is pretty much what Marx describes in
Even Salih Muslim (One of the co-chair of the PYD) has repeatedly emphasized the internationalism of the Rojavan (now Federal) project.

What needs to happen before this "muh nationalism" meme dies? Do they need to go full cultural revolution and smash the symbols of the "old"? Do they need to ban local languages? Do they need to smash relics and other antiquities? Do they need to outlaw any form of cultural expression?
Some of these people seem exceptionally bitter about the idea that some people genuinely appreciate their communities, without sharing any antagonism towards other cultures.
Let it go.

No, nationalism is an invention of bourgeois modernity, created to support the power of the bourgeois nation state. Nationalism and liberalism are intrinsically tied. Fascism movements simply support the liberal state of things through illiberal means.

However, it is possible to be a leftist and a traditionalist.

Why the hell would a Leninist oppose national determination?

Isn't unfaltering support for secessionist movements an inherent part of Leninism?

Or is Rafiq not an ML?

Relax, I forgot my shitposting flag.

I disagree with his take on Ocalan too. While I don't like Communalism and Kurdish flags, I think Rafiq is a bit too harsh.

I was actually talking about Rafiq, not you

No.

Fug, I misunderstood your comment. Rafiq doesn't seem like a ML to me.

Rafiq is kind of his own thing, he tends to oscillate between a kind of orthomarxism and left communism. Respecting Lenin as a revolutionary and theorist doesn't mean you have to be a Stalinist, or even agree with everything he did and said.

why didn't he become a left wing nationalist instead of a fascist ?

youtube.com/watch?v=g-j1Dg2nKKY

Of course
youtu.be/XYJ6uqdIuBg

No

technically all ideologies are reactionary

go learn what reactionary means and then get back to us.

D I R E C T R U L E F R O M L O N D O N

Yes, you'd be on the left wing of capital as they say.

Ye

Where is Rafiq now? Is he really just some shitposter on Revleft?

What happened to him?

He shills his old revleft posts on leftypol.

...

No.

There's no reason to divide the working class on arbitrary national lines.

The revolution has to start somewhere.

...

If the revolution isn't international, there is no revolution.

You don't make revolution by upholding the political fictions of the former bourgeois state.

the answer is
Dasein

...

It started out as an internationalist revolution. It was Stalin that brought back nationalism.

And the USSR was on the decline ever since until it collapsed entirely.

Also

Read a book kid.

That's rich.

Stalin was the biggest revisionist.

Go ahead and post a picture of the mustache man and say I'm going to gulag or whatever the latest knee-jerk tankies reaction is. The USSR collapsed.

I think it works with pan-nationalism based on cultural similarities but not any right wing kind of nationalism.

You can thank Gorbachev for that

Borthers are there only to divide us into smaller identities therefore we are easier to control.
Workers of the world unite.

This is what stalinists actually believe

why tho ?

i have no problem with Asserism, but that one of the few nationalist ideolgies i like