Nasty Nationalist Nonsense
The concept of the nation is a very real force in the minds of people. The outlook of “us and them” is deeply entrenched within the lives and the mind-set of many people. The idea that the world is naturally divided into nations is so widespread that it often goes unquestioned despite the world of nationalism being full of contradictions, odd ideas and illogical notions.
The idea that a line of a map, a so-called “national border”, should actually mean something concrete to the workers is laughable. The idea of “we” as in the people who live in a specific country is the most profound falsehood. To say “this is our country” implies that we all own it collectively when we most certainly do not.
A country is a group of people living under the same laws because they themselves or their ancestors have been brought willingly or by force – more often than not by force – to obey the same sovereign, the same government.
Patriotism groups people according to their land of origin, as decided by the vicissitudes of history and within every country, thanks to the patriotic link, rich and poor unite against the foreigner.
Socialism, however, groups people, poor against rich, class against class, without taking into account the differences of race and language, and over and above the frontiers traced by history. No one country’s exploiters are so superior to the rest that the workers should sacrifice themselves in defending them.
Differences in language, food, music and the like will continue to exist in a socialist world. Indeed, we would no longer be subjected to the “McDonalds” globalisation we have today under capitalism. Different cultures can exist in the same geographical area and individuals can partake of elements of different cultures. People living in a locality can enjoy their favourite local delicacy, without being nationalists. But the World Socialist Movement does object to the exploitation of cultural differences for political ends, as for instance to set up or maintain a state or as the basis for a political party. Without the ideology of nationalism, capitalist states would be unstable since, being based on minority class rule, they need a minimum allegiance from those they rule over.
Nationalism serves to achieve this by teaching the ruled to be loyal to “their” so-called “nation-state”. Patriotism has run through politics like a malignant sore. That its workers should be patriotic is vital to each national ruling class and this, fertilised by official lies, is exploited by all governments. The very idea they all try to spread, alike – that a given country is owned by some inclusive “we”, based on common descent or culture which “we” all have an interest in defending; that “we” owe loyalty toward, and toward our “fellow-countrymen” over folks from other lands – is the very premise that the nationalists latch onto and tout as their glorious cause. The professional politicians do their craven best to pander to this supposed collective identity.
The only way to define such national identity is to define it in terms of what it is not, i.e. negatively. Thus nationalism sets itself as being against other countries, striving to define the uniqueness of national culture so as to once and for all set its country apart from others, to know itself by what is un-like it.
At one extreme this can include myths about race and blood, trying to attach the national abstraction to some trait of genetics or similar such foolishness. Since people have a strong desire to retain their own perceived identity and to have a good opinion of themselves, often the creeds based on such identities function in a highly irrational, and ultimately, defensive way. This setting of one section of the population against another has been successful all around the world. Great numbers of people can now rouse themselves against the newest threat, the most recent immigrants, anyone who looks or sounds like they may be from a group other than their own. And those who dare question the status quo become unpatriotic subversives.
People are not robotic machines and they feel lost in this complicated world of capitalism, treated as just another cog in the machine. So they seek some sense of meaning since little meaning for life can ever be gained from the system of alienated labour. Often they find that meaning in the idea of the nation and often connect nationality to sport to sustain this nationalist mindset.
People can be made the enemy simply because they compete with them on the football field and that “togetherness” becomes their lives, and they express it accordingly from within the tribalism of the football fans. Indeed “sports nationalism” is of tremendous value to the capitalist class as it makes supporting “your country” socially acceptable. It not only diverts workers minds away from the problems that surround them, but it also allows politicians to reap the rewards of any “feel good” factor that springs forth from a good set of results. Many socialists play and watch football but it’s a shame that nationalism has to taint what should be a wonderful event. As far as socialists are concerned, these attempts to try and make an appearance of common interest with our exploiters is just like a thief playing on their support for the same football team as their victim. It does not change the relationship one iota.
Nations have taken a great deal of building. There is almost no nation-state that has not had its boundaries drawn in blood, its foundations built upon human flesh and bones. Nations are manufactured, not born. People who have a common history or speak the same language do not have a common interest; they are divided into classes, and a worker who speaks a particular language has a common interest with workers speaking other languages but not with a capitalist who speaks the same one. We see the harm that is done by national borders, that prevent workers from moving to be with whom they want to be with; prevent them from sharing their skills and their knowledge as they see fit; prevent them from seeing their common cause.
The singing of a national anthem, flag-waving, and other expressions of loyalty to the nation-state help to reinforce the idea of the nation in our minds. There is no national interest for workers. Self-determination for “nations” just equates with self-determination for a ruling class. It must be opposed in favour of self-determination for people. It must be opposed to socialism. Enormous damage has been done, throughout the world, by the notion that one country and its people are somehow inherently superior to the others.
The World Socialist Movement recognises the essential unity of the human race and the urgent need to celebrate it by building society on that basis. In a socialist society, the traditional knowledge and expertise held by communities will be respected, especially where this relates to local ecology and sustainable systems of land use, and hence priority is given to local decision-making over whatever has to be delegated to wider regional or global democratic control.
