Hello i have been newfagging it a bit i am a Not Socialist (not a hitlerist) i am a bit like a Asserist/ba'athist can anyone provide valid argument for why nationalism sucks and internationalism and globalism is good? thanks.

Other urls found in this thread:

There's no such thing as globalism. You're thinking of globalization, the mechanism by which different countries' economic systems are linked by bourgeois trade agreeements.

Alright what about just internationalism

No man is an island, ethnicity and culture and tradition are spooks, we are all humans sharing earth. Why should significant economic or technological differences occur between arbitrarily defined nations? Borders are wholly artificial and nationalism is a stupid tendency that people without inherent self worth fall back on. (Well I may not be a doctor or an artist or even especially Clever but I am a "True Blooded Korean" is the way the nationalist state of DPRK brainwashes its stupider proles into obedience). Nationalism within itself contains kernels of racialism / separatism / identitarianism and the only people who seriously try to push Nationalist efforts are fools or scoundrels.

No socialists are "Hitlerlists" kiddo. Hitler was in truth a national capitalist

Globalization is the idea that capitalism can liberate poor nations and there's a lot of good critiques of it.

Our economy is international. A movement to change it must also be international. Even if you're a chauvanist ass who only cares about Arabs or white people or whoever, no socialism in one country can be constructed. Just look at the USSR, which through every period of its existence relied heavily on selling and buying from other capitalist economies.

Classical Leftist Excuse
yet we have so many differences and places we live in..

Buddy, you can care about skull shapes and race-spirit all you want.

Good luck trying to abolish capitalism and protect against bourgeois assault without access to the rest of the world's economies.

But every other country socialist country can sustain itself e.g syria,iraq,egypt,libya,etc. during ba'athist and socialist rule


As a leftist who is a soft-nationalist, it's not "bad" in a moral sense but it is a divider of the greater, global working class. Just because something is a spook doesn't mean it doesn't still have its uses if only until it can be done away with. No borders + class-unconscious native population = you're gonna get ass-raped by the ensuing reaction.

To abolish the border, it is necessary to enforce it (for now).

As you see in europe we are not exactly the best case of open borders and internationalism

Those countries weren't socialist, just pretty milquetoast social democracies run by nominally socialist governments.

And even then, they were hugely dependent on international capital. Egypt and Syria were constantly arranging trade agreements with the USSR and even some Western countries.

If you really think one national proletariat can beat the most expensive economic system in human history, go ahead and try it.

Lets see The eastern block china NK lot of middle east

There was no world revolution

This, my friends, is what is called brain damage

First I am a racialist not rascist 2nd i am afraid of them??? are you fucking autistic

You can start making arguments any time.

What does racism have to do with nationalism?

No user, I believe it is you who is the autist in this scenario

They're both brain disorders.

Motion we wordfilter racialist to pussy racist.

Sage for what bait?
This is a geneal question thread



Real answer: they're both spooks cultivated by bourgeois or bourgeois-aligned sources to divide you from other people along imaginary lines.

You can start making arguments about why nationalism is "good" and internationalism is "bad" or you can be shown the door, your choice, classcuck.


As long as people are nationalists, there will always be war, or the threat of war. Only through internationalism, or postnationalism, may the world know peace.


You're thinking of globalized capitalism.

every time


>Not one person in ITT can point at the actual problem with nationalism
First of all, whether nationalism "sucks" is very class dependent.
Let's start at the beginning: The origins of nationalism lay in in struggle of the bourgeoisie to overthrow the (landed) aristocracy and religious estates during the 18th and 19th century. And later on - during the 20th century - the desire for the colonial bourgeoisie (but also those of lesser imperial - or - newly independent states) to upend the established powers and take their place.

Assuming you're not some card-carrying bourgie: The problem with nationalism is that it runs contrary to your class interests. I.e. your relation to the means of production within the capitalist mode of production. (Read Marx "Value, Price and Profit" and Wage, Labor and Capital, they're short works and more easily digested than the Kapital trilogy. Alternatively look up Capitalism 101s Law of Value series on youtube which explains it. I also recommend reading Marx' On the Jewish Question which also deals with nationalism. And also the PDFs related.)

From the beginning Nationalism has been about the interests of the owners of capital. Not the working class, who aren't just exploited, but often sacrificed in imperial wars (see world wars, colonial wars, various colonial genocides, etc.).
Whenever the bourgeoisie take up the banner of nationalism it's the workers that suffer and die. Be it in the trenches of WW1, the cities and battlefields of WW2, but also today: Many in the US for example are forced to join the military to escape poverty. And if they're not, they're working multiple dead end jobs just to make ends meet. But it's all "okay" because after all, they're living in the greatest country on Earth!. To want anything else is paramount to treason. It's siding with the enemy, it's subversion.
That's the sort of tactic the nationalist bourgeoisie have used throughout history to silence the working class: No matter how much you're exploited at least you're not them. You're not a nigger, you're not a shitskin.
In the 1930s German workers saw a cut in real earnings, it was white german sons and fathers that were sacrificed on the eastern front so industrialists such as Krupp could line their pockets. Millions of white Europeans, including Germans were slaughtered.
In the American south white workers were pitted against black, while the landlords and oligarchs made off with billions. I don't know if someone can find the quote (I think it was one of the Black Panthers), but it talks about how even with all the poverty surrounding them, even when they starved, the white workers of the South 'ate' racism. They could always could rely on the fact that - at the end of the day - they weren't niggers. They weren't the other.

Assuming you consider yourself a fascist: You may also be interested in the fact that all fascists that came to power immediately began liquidating their working class supporters. The SA was betrayed, the Romanian Iron Guard was outlawed, the Falange was infiltrated and pushed aside. When Mussolini came to power he began by having his cabinet push neoliberal reforms: the syndicalism he promised to his supporters never came to be.
Nationalism is working class suicide. Whenever things go south, it's the working class that's squeezed. Whenever a war needs to be fought against some vague and omnipresent "enemy" it's working men (and today even women) that come home in body bags and flag draped coffins.

There was war before advent of nationalism and modern nation-states.

Once again the moderation exposes themselves for being totally clueless dunces with no eye for optics. Why even effort post? Why even bother?
No matter how many times you ban these people, no matter how many times you delete it. They will keep coming back, and they will keep posting. The only solution - bar taking over every social media company in the world, and excising this stuff from the internet which won't work - is to voice your opposition everywhere. To expose this for the brainrot it is to everyone lurking.
There hasn't been a single person ITT that actually outlined why nationalism doesn't make sense if you're not pulling the strings.

Sure, but nationalism makes peace impossible.

Looks like OP was unbanned as well
Thx hotpockets

OP got what he gave you massive dipshit.

Gee I dunno maybe the war or the racism or the division of classes along arbitrary lines in a map or the muh evil immugrants or the forgiveness of evil doings because we're better cause we've invented more or the potential for wars to be fought over resources/land or the easy pacification of idiot proles with a US vs THEM attitude.

No Communist should be a nationalist because we wish all borders to be abolished and we see borders for what they are. Culturally supporting these systems of oppression and building massive amounts of pride over these institutions instead of international co-operation and human nationalism or something like that is SHIT and reeks of a persons failure as a human or how much Holla Forums they still have in them.
Because nationalism is retarded prole pacification shit, why be muh commie nationalism (totally not turd positionism) when you can just be a "normal" Communist. Those tens of thousands of international brigade volunteers sure as hell didn't show up for Red Spanish Nationalism oppress minorities 2.0.

Even Castro and the Soviets didn't use Nationalism as a massive thing they used parts of it in the greater scheme of a global system hence why it was a Soviet Union rather then Russian Communist nationalism over everything. Also National liberation ≠ Nationalism so you hardly need nationalism to expel a foreign occupying force, and Castro was prepared for Cuba to become a nuclear wasteland rather then give up the revolution so he's not a very good nationalist if he's fine with killing everyone in his country for the cause if needed be. If you're using nationalism to reach Communism then there's far better ways to reach it without relying it that.

Thanks for that dank unban

Perhaps you haven't considered that effort posting is less for polyp OPs, and more for whoever is lurking at the moment. If you can't put forth convincing arguments, can't deconstruct someones position in under a paragraph, or convince passer-by's, perhaps your movement movement is really a waste of time.

The problem is not pointing out how racism is hurting themselves, explain that the same economic-power structures that exploit them breed racism, and is also used to defend them. Appeal to their (rational) self-interest rather than empathy.
If you talk about artificial divides, show why their class interests coalesce. It's not like most of these people have ever read a word of Marx. It needs to be explained, again and again. Hell, Rafiq would write 20-page treatises whenever some brainlet would drool over the keyboard for the 100th time. It's tedious, but absolutely necessary.
Unlike the powers that be you don't have the luxury of hiring people to do this for you. You need to counter this every time, everywhere. Because no one else will.

Read the PDFs, that garbage really is one and the same. There is no "national liberation" without nationalism. They've been tied since the beginning. Nationalists taking up the language of "marxism" don't stop being nationalists (and with all the aspirations that come with that) the moment they wave a few red flags around.

Except it just devolves into nationalism. "Nationalist Communism" is just red liberalism/fascism. That's not to say that anti-imperialism or anti-colonialism are the same as nationalism - they aren't - but the idea that you can safely practice nationalism in service of 'communism' is a bourgeois lie, because nationalism - as one of the core foundations of liberal bourgeois ideology - is fundamentally opposed to the emancipation of the global proletariat.
And let's say "nationalist communism" is a thing (or could be): What is the best you can hope for other than proletarian imperialism, and the implicit reproduction of capitalism? It's NazBol tier.

The question was point out some ways nationalism is bad, I've done that. Being supremely proud of a state institution and the people in it just because you speak the same language is 1984 as fuck, when you make the state and the people your very culture and hold it close to your heart even if these things oppress and cheat you is some 10/10 pseudo mindcontrol.
If the US invaded me and bombed my cities I don't need to be a Nationalist to fight against it. If a US soldier shot all my family I don't need to be a nationalist to want to kick them from my country. In-fact I can be a anti-nationalist and fight against it on a global workers liberation/anti-imperialism style. The idea that National Liberation and Nationalism are one in the same is wrong, they are historically linked via real life events but that's just cause nationalism was a cheap tool to rally everyone from communists to anti-communists into some sort of Alliance but they are not necessarily joined since I could fight against Fascists in Spain with the idea of liberating the people in Spain from Fascism without being a Nationalist.
I agree with that it would just devolve into some shitty nazbol thing.

rip formatting

1..2..3..4 how many niggers saged my thread

It’s not even bait you faggots


How many arguments you made.
Then you're even dumber than you look.

If you're a nationalist, you're a right winger.

Pick one and only one

you mean
>Thinking I'm
you samefag

learn to read faggot, he explicitly said he's not a socialist :^)

No fuck off.

I am Op just on my phone

Sorry for the mistype I meant to put nationalist socialist so yeah I am a socialist

It isn’t bait you faggot

globalism is imperialist ideology
it's rooted on national chauvinism of the imperialist nation and subjogation of its periphery and exploited nations
internationalism is the antagonistic opposition to it, it's proletarian national liberation of the exploited nations and solidarity of all workers

"nationalism" and globalism go hand in hand
for nationalists are either conquering and denying national rights of other nations or selling out their own nation to that of foreign investors for their own national bourgeois interests

some antiimperialist elements of national bourgeois can be tied into the proletarian struggle for independence transitionally in a popular front but the proletariat has to reign over them, otherwise it's futile and will eventually lead to the sell out to foreign interests

read Lenin and Stalin

The computer in my head tells me that you need to read a book


You can't" abolish" capitalism in "your country". This statement might have made some modicum of sense in the era of national economies centuries ago, but it does not today. Capitalism is a globalized abstract system and nothing short of a global movement can tear it down.

There can be no nationalism without a national planned economy.