i tried talking about this on Holla Forums but they're a bunch of clueless faggots who can't discuss ideology without unnecessary saging and retarded namecalling
the wikipedia page focuses mostly on the party, but almost nothing on the ideology itself. so can i have a serious lession about national bolshevism? what are the ideas of nazbol? how is it different from Not Socialism and Useful Idiotism? are there any books on the ideology? also why is the establishment of socialism within one country a bad idea?
You just have to understand the issues of nationalism. Destroying autonomy, demonizing, ageing populations, wars etc etc.
it's basically planned economy with nazi tier social values, like muh fatherland, muh people, muh degenerancy.
but does nationalism automatically means war? i thought thats only nationalism combined with corporatism? what if we eliminate all the oil corporations within a country and decide not to go to war to secure oil for profit nor for any other purposes? can "cultural segregation" actually be carried out on a national scale (a nation just white, another just black and no mixing or immigrating)?
Well, it's nationalism combined with imperialism. But I'd argue that nationalism has always, and does always lead to imperialism. Throughout history it always has. Nationalism was never a thing until Napoleon, really.
Not OP, but the Sandinistas originally started off as nationalist out of necessity to stave off neo-imperialism.
It is, basically, Russians doing their thing.
The NazBols are a weird mix between Stalinist Era nostalgia, a bit of socialist speech, Nazi idealism about the Nation, and a lot of populism and empty rethoric.
They are just a very high visual impact group with no ideology or plan. They are inoffensive and meaningless in the political arena.
Just give up OP, political movements in Russia do not make any sense.
pls dont sage im not baiting i just want an open discussion about nazbol :^(
what about kurdish nationalism in the PKK and YPG? wouldnt that lead to imperialism once theyve gained enough ground?
ive heard theyre ideologically against racism but some of the members are racists themselves, while they also constantly pick fights with nazis? and didnt they gain a surge in support recently?
im trying to talk about the ideology, the movements never correlates with the ideology it claims to advocate tbh
Nationalism out of necessity I think is alright, because it generally doesn't lead to imperialism. It's about context.
When a first world country does it though, I'm always against it.
Considering that they are both turd position, we can simply say that it's largely a Russian version of Useful Idiotism, just replace the German-flavoured quirks with the Russian-flavoured ones, like Eurasianism or sucking Stalin's dick
Nazbol, in theory, is not necessarily Russian. But if you want to get an idea about it, you could read Aleksandr Dugin's books, although he doesn't consider himself a national-bolshevik.
Nazbol combines some things from the left, like Stalinist communism, with some things from the right, like nationalism and family values. In some cases, a Russian nazbol might also support their Orthodox Catholic church.
It's not. People start pouring these very silly ideas just to badmouth the USSR. Besides, the USSR was far from being "socialism in one country". It was a bloc of nations after all. And the Komintern existed for a reason, they supported the spread of socialism to as many countries as possible. And when China joined the bandwagon, about 1/3 of the world was socialist.
But even if it really is the case of having socialism in one country only, what's the matter anyway? You always have to start somewhere. Just because your neighbouring countries don't want to become socialist, does it mean you can't have a go at it?
And imo nationalism is not necessarily bad, unless it turns into racism and imperialism.
No way. Some of the old religions are totally made around nationalism. The Old Testament of the Bible is always telling how Israel is the most special country of the world, and how other people are just a bunch of degenerates. The old Greeks were full of shit as well. They used to say only the Greeks were civilized. All other people were called barbarians.
What a fucking joke of an ideology.
I don't think you understand what a nation is, and how it is different from a religious or ethnic group.
you stoopid stalinist, you can't make socialism in one country, that's retarded!
you have to make it in only small regions using markets and dezentralized autistic basic democratic communes that discuss every little piece of shit issue until everyone agrees to it at each factory
only anarchism is true socialism! :DDD
why should be nationalism limited to the state level? IMO nazbol would work perfectly fine in uniting proletariat of specific ethnic group.
Why you need national bolshevism, when there's Stalinism?
your should read your own idol, Stalin was against "Great Russian chauvinism" in the Twenties (until he started practicing it himself)
kek, the difference is impressive
I know he's full of shit. You are against him - you get shot. You are with him - you get shot. The guy was making a powerful world power of his country, not helping unequally treated people, but exploited the entire population of his country on large scale.
Reading some works of Engels and Marx right now and i am kinda sad that people pretend to actually follow them, but in reality exploiting people who believe they follow them. Both russian communism and modern liberalism are doing this.
What is killing communism, is the fact that it is turning into fetishist religion. I guess philosophical approach is responsible for this. Next communist leader can only be worse tyrant than Stalin, because with availability of incredible amounts of twist minded ideologies you can't make people unite no more.
Today you support communism, and tomorrow someone picks it up to actually destroy nations, instead of making life of people better. Well, same with fascism.
This is a question I pose to all the neo-nazis that claim "every culture and nationality has the right to be protected": Does your attempt to protect national autonomy extend to that of other nations? In the case of them vs you, would you really give a fuck?
When a national identity is inseperstable from your political policy then it your nation is incompatible with other political systems because you have to work or your own tribe.
Why do you even need it to be that way? Why wouldn't your national.identity be reaffirmed through cultural practices?
I get such a kick out of them. "Hey, we just want to preserve our culture, guys, just like the people who wanted to Germanize everything from Paris to Vladivostok"
And then turn divide them from other ethnic groups. Brilliant
Every group should have the right to their own culture!
Theres no possibility of war when countries are divided along ethnic and national lines on a planet with finite resources and space. They would each stick to their own, the most effective way of coordinating a country.
By national and ethnic lines I mean my own particular brand of what identity should be,regardless of what most of the people on the planet feel. So white, black, Asian and American. No, Mexican and black citizens I mean real Americans!
What's individualism? You mean that term invented by The JEWZZZZZ?
Did I say
Nationalism isn't necessarily supremacism. There seems to be a lot of people who do think that nationalism, and national liberation, will automatically lead to supremacism and imperialism. This is obviously false to anyone from a former colony who's people have gone through a national liberation struggle. I am a nationalist but this does not mean I think that my people are better or superior to others, I just think that my people re just as good as anyone else detractors be damned.
Why are you posting here comrade?
You just asked why nationalism should be limited to nations.