Is nationalism of the oppressed progressive?

Scan page 20

The ruling white minority regime of South Africa is demanding special privileges for whites in a future non-apartheid South Africa. President F.W. de Klerk and other white nationalists claim this is necessary to protect whites from "majority domination."

In Lithuania, Russian nationalists are demanding that the Soviet government protect "their rights" from Lithuanian nationalists demanding self-determination—an independent Lithuania.

The government of Sri Lanka is waging war against the Tamil minority. Tamils are demanding self-determination. Sinhala chauvinists argue that the nationalism of the Tamils is against the Sinhala majority.

What is common in all these examples-and many more could be cited—is the claim of the dominant nationality that their rights are threatened by oppressed nationalities fighting for self determination.

Not academic issue But is the nationalism of Black South Africans, Lithuanians, Tamils, and U.S. Blacks the same as those who oppress them? Is all nationalism identical?

Because nationalism is on the rise around the world it is useful to South 1 Africa carole siglega review the Marxist stance on this question. The issue is not an academic one. It involves whether or not the workers and farmers of the oppressor nations themselves will be able to free themselves from capitalist exploitation. If they oppose the nationalism of the oppressed nations they will be committing political suicide.

The founders of scientific socialism-Karl Marx and Frederick Engels—were the first to explain the relationship between the nationalism of the oppressed and the struggle of the working class for their emancipation. In a letter Marx wrote to Engels in 1869 he said:

"The English working class will never accomplish anything before it has got rid of Ireland. The lever must be applied in Ireland. That is why the Irish question is so important for the social movement in general." ("Marx and Engels on Ireland," page 284)

Engels, writing in 1882 about the struggles of the oppressed Irish and Polish peoples, explained, "I therefore hold the view that two nations in Europe have not only the right but even the duty to be nationalistic before they can become internationalistic: the Irish and the Poles. They are more internationalistic when they are genuinely nationalistic." (Ibid, page 332)

While English, French, and other European nationalisms were progressive in unifying popular struggles against feudalism in earlier centuries, by the late 19th century these nationalisms had become reactionary. They were whipped up by the ruling classes to keep the colonies in tow and the workers and peasants under their domination.

The nationalism of England became a battle cry to keep Ireland and other colonies oppressed. The nationalism of Ireland, on the other Now, who wants to be that ONE person?

South

hand, became the rallying cry to mobilize the Irish people against that domination. English nationalism (read: chauvinism) kept the English working class from fighting against its own rulers.

V.I. Lenin, central leader of the 1917 Russian revolution, elaborated on Marx and Engels' views on nationalism. In his famous thesis, "The Right of Nations to Self-Determination," written in 1914, Lenin stated:

"The bourgeois nationalism of any oppressed nation has a general democratic content that is directed against oppression, and it is this content that we unconditionally support."

A look at current struggles A look at some of the current struggles of oppressed nations confirms this Marxist approach to nationalism. Let's begin with South Africa. The Black majority is oppressed by the white minority. The whites have special privileges because of that oppression.

White workers and farmers have the illusion that the white system is in their interests. In fact, the white (capitalist) system is how the rulers both oppress the Black majority and keep white working people from joining with Black workers to fight their common enemy.

The only road for white workers to win emancipation from capitalist exploitation is to join with the Black majority against apartheid and establish a truly democratic South Africa. Under such an anti-capitalist South Africa, affirmative action will be taken by the new government representing the majority to end the special privileges of whites.

White nationalism in South Africa is for maintaining the status quo-white rule. It's reactionary.

Blacks in the United States are a minority who suffer under institutionalized racism—i.e., national oppression. It is why Black nationalism exists and why struggles for Black civil rights continue to be fought.

Whites who perceive this fight for equality as reverse discrimination are falling into a trap. The problem for white working people, as for Blacks, is the common enemy: the owners of capital who control the vast resources of the country, not Blacks fighting for an end to discrimination.

While the situation in the Soviet Union, a workers' state, is not identical to that in the capitalist countries, the principled stance of Marxists supporting the nationalism of the oppressed remains valid. Russian workers and farmers will not be able to launch a successful political revolution against Stalinist rule without supporting the struggles of the oppressed Soviet peoples of the East and the Baltic states.

The rise of nationalism of the oppressed reflects the crisis of imperialist and capitalist, as well as Stalinist rule. It is progressive and should be supported to slow down political activity at Anamosa

----- pull-quotes -----

What do you BLACKS want anyway?

ONE person,: ONE vote! OK, we agree.

Africa Malik Mi