Marxism, Zionism and the National Question
Constraints On The Creation of Nation States (3/5)
In the national question, whilst each nation may have the right to self-determination, it is not just a question of whether they can objectively exercise such a right, but also, a question of whether Marxists would support it. Marxists acknowledge the abstract right of each nation to self-determination, but that does not mean that they automatically support the exercise of such a right in any particular case. On the contrary, the presumption is against the exercise of such rights, because, in the current era, such action inevitably divides the working-class of one nation from another, and the goal of Marxists is not the self-determination of nations, but the self-determination of the working-class within each nation. Our goal is the unity of workers across national borders, which means, where possible, tearing down those borders not erecting new ones. It is why Marxists oppose Brexit, or Scottish independence.
As Lenin put it,
“As the party of the proletariat, the Social-Democratic Party considers it to be its positive and principal task to further the self-determination of the proletariat in each nationality rather than that of peoples or nations. We must always and unreservedly work for the very closest unity of the proletariat of all nationalities, and it is only in isolated and exceptional cases that we can advance and actively support demands conducive to the establishment of a new class state or to the substitution of a looser federal unity, etc., for the complete political unity of a state.”
And, as Lenin also says,
“The working class supports the bourgeoisie only in order to secure national peace (which the bourgeoisie cannot bring about completely and which can be achieved only with complete democracy), in order to secure equal rights and to create the best conditions for the class struggle. Therefore, it is in opposition to the practicality of the bourgeoisie that the proletarians advance their principles in the national question; they always give the bourgeoisie only conditional support. What every bourgeoisie is out for in the national question is either privileges for its own nation, or exceptional advantages for it; this is called being “practical”. The proletariat is opposed to all privileges, to all exclusiveness.”
Again, this is in contrast with Zionism, which is inseparable from the demand for “exclusiveness” and for privileges for Jews not extended to others living within the Jewish state.
“The bourgeoisie always places its national demands in the forefront, and does so in categorical fashion. With the proletariat, however, these demands are subordinated to the interests of the class struggle. Theoretically, you cannot say in advance whether the bourgeois-democratic revolution will end in a given nation seceding from another nation, or in its equality with the latter; in either case, the important thing for the proletariat is to ensure the development of its class. For the bourgeoisie it is important to hamper this development by pushing the aims of its “own” nation before those of the proletariat. That is why the proletariat confines itself, so to speak, to the negative demand for recognition of the right to self-determination, without giving guarantees to any nation, and without undertaking to give anything at the expense of another nation.”
(ibid)
No comments:
Post a Comment