Quotes and Discussion on Internationalism

Ahoy Mates and Comrades!

I’m very concerned with the Rise of Nationalism and Idpol.
Imo it divides humanity around the globe and makes us easier to control.
I would like to read your thoughts in favour or against internationalism.
I read a quote from Tito about internationalism but I can’t I would greatly appreciate if you are able post it.

...

Seriously?
being this paranoid?

Modern socialism needs to be nationalist, not globalist. Nationalism gives power to the oppressed proles and their culture while globalism makes them weak. Everyone should belong in their own nation and not be threatened by multi-national corporations.

Then it's not socialist IMO.
we are all victims of the class war, dividing humanity into nationalities, only leads to tribalism.

What's wrong with tribalism?

It prepares the ground for Nationalism and Patriotism next step is Fascism.
Imo.

wew

would you care to elaborate why that is not the case?

this doesnt answer the question. whats wrong with tribalism?

I already told you imo it leads to fascism.
it divides humanity making us easier to control.
as I already implied in my OP text.

that's not an answer though.

your assumption is that "fascism" is wrong. you aren't explaining WHY its wrong.

the assumption is that division is bad. division is necessary.

communism/socialism can't happen without division.

communism requires communes to succeed. competition is a natural instinct of man. the only way for communism to succeed is not to suppress that instinct, but channel it. loyalty to the community/village/family is therefore the individual's connection to a communist society.

don't see how tribalism can possible be wrong or not-wrong. it's the state of human civilization without any other "isms". It's to be taken advantage of, formed into something productive, rather than denied or shunned as wrong.

Cooperation between the human race is desirable Imo.

Competition is one of the capitalistic scourges that have been plaguing us.

desireable isn't realistic.

at least not without changing the way people think, which requires multidimensional memetic warfare (which we live now)

the way to get there is from the bottom-up tho. slow and steady. neighborhood communities and local villages that work together for shared profit so they can buy/earn/prove their independence

internationalism's impossible if you try to enforce it, because that's just globalism trying to control the world.

BUT if you care about your neighbor first like a nationalist, international cooperation is a side effect.

The interesting thing about the nationalist's problem is that the only true answer to it is, paradoxically, internationalism.

The nationalist's concerns are to do with the loss of culture, the blurring of a society's identity, and the removal of a people's agency and self-determination - these are very valid concerns. Liberals are happy to see them as valid concerns when it comes to the third world, when it comes to European or American imperialism. These should be considered valid concerns for all societies.

Capitalism, which by its nature tends towards globalism, removes the agency of a society in general and places power in the hands of a few capitalists. It is in their economic interests to make the whole world a unified market, to import cheap labour, and to export the same commodities all over the world.

Immigrants don't come to Europe or America for the weather; they come for economic conditions. They come for housing, healthcare, education and jobs. They come for social security. We can clearly see that if those needs were met in their homelands, they wouldn't bother to immigrate; hence the way that many of these groups of people don't culturally integrate. They want to still be in Mexico, for example, but with the economic conditions of the USA.

We can also see that these people will travel for these economic conditions whether it is legal or not. They will try anything, to better the lives of themselves and their loved ones, if their homeland is bad enough. The "jungle" in Calais is evidence of this, and only one example of many.

The way to solve these issues once and for all? International socialism. An international situation in which each locality, each society or nation or country - whatever you want to call it - has agency, has control over their own society, and has the quality of life in their own homeland that they want.

Capitalism is global; it must be fought on the global arena. Internationalism is the only way to tackle the problem, or else the problem is merely postponed or passed along. An island of socialism cannot survive long in a sea of capitalism.

If you want a society in which your people have economic and political agency, in which your culture is not sacrificed for profit, and in which all cultures across the world can maintain their uniqueness - then there is no other answer.

Would it not be more practical to try get socialism in individual states first, at least as a stepping stone? To put all your faith in a near non-existent movement that is practically unworkable atm seems like a cop out.

Not him but you're the one that made the claim 'nationalism leads to fascism' without any explanation. Many users here try to create a distinction between western nationalism (Nationalism) and nationalism in the third world (national liberation). Currently workers in the first world are just as much hostage to global capital as workers in the third world. So to break free from this system would be national liberation, and would also deal a blow to neo-liberalism.

No, because it's not possible.

No more difficult that a global revolution. In fact 100 x easier than a global revolution. What you think for example the Chinese are going to revolution for more communism? You think a global system exists that will respect the rights of everyone and the {{{certain groups}}} won't demand special conditions?

National Socialism would be better.

Not "more difficult": completely impossible.

Isn't the world entirely capitalist today? Was it two centuries ago.
Here you go: a living example of a successful global revolution.

As for the rest of your message, I don't get what you're saying tbh.

How is you saying this any more valid than me saying a global revolution to overthrow capitalism is impossible?

In addition, I don't see capitalism as revolutionary but an evolution of feudalism. The difference being the people at the top are largely the same as they were before whereas communism requires that the hierarchy is removed, a much greater ask.

Great response!
I thank you for the time it took you to write it.

No flags No Borders Humanity must unite!

No I want the State abolished not reformed.

You are the scum of the earth and you must hang.