#41
Post rating: ~

DRUXXX posted:


there's some truth to that, and multiculturalism deserves a critique as much as any other sort of politics. still, i'm not sure why you'd locate the problem in multiculturalism rather than white supremacy itself. it's hard to imagine these states would have done any better had they pursued the alternatives to multiculturalism, i.e. attempting to enforce a monoculture or communitarianism. historically those have actually been worse.

#42
Poronto
Post rating: ~
modern south africa is multicultural as hell
#43
Post rating: ~

DRUXXX posted:
Crow posted:
well, i was asking about the reverse. if nationalism is founded on exclusion of the subaltern, can't the bourgeoisie be designated as the new subaltern? is the nation founded on exclusion? and can the exclusion be ideas? ie. the restoration of capitalism, revisionism

not approaching this from stalin's theory, if we approach it from the theory of 'imagined communities', can't a nation be an imagined community of ideas ?


I think that's sort of what I was saying? I could give a fuk about Stalin's definition of what a nation is

i could give a fuck about what you think about Stalin, but i never will!

by the way, has anyone read/obtained a copy of Otto Bauer's The Question of Nationalities and Social Democracy?

#44
Post rating: ~
doesnt the problem with multiculturalism have to do with the privileged liberal concept of tolerance rather than radical or emancipatory multiculturalism. like since the 70s we've actually become more segmented but we all come together to shop in the commercial districts. multiculturalism has been packaged as anything but what it actually is.
#45
el area metro
Post rating: ~
I think multiculturalism will always be bullshit because it's still not multicentrism now matter how hard we pretend it is...

I'm now on my phone but when I get home again I will write a more comprehensive thing on why i think multiculturalism is bullshit

edit: and I think you have to look at it from a more than just am USAian perspective to see the full picture
#46
[account deactivated]
#47
Poronto
Post rating: ~
ineffectual state initiatives aimed at.....what? what has struck you about European "diversity" in contrast to that of north amrika. my adopted city of toronto is much more melaniny than my ol' london home but im not sure what else to make of it
#48
Poronto
Post rating: ~
I Post what I Want. Fornicate Ungently this Tyranny of Goodposts. Maeks Sleeves of us Awll
#49
drivel of drunken hags
Post rating: ~

littlegreenpills posted:
ineffectual state initiatives aimed at.....what? what has struck you about European "diversity" in contrast to that of north amrika. my adopted city of toronto is much more melaniny than my ol' london home but im not sure what else to make of it


canadian multiculturalism means chinese/jamaican/south asian faces keeping up some of the quaint superficial traditions of their homeland in 'vibrant' pockets of one of the three or four non-totally white cities in the entire country so long as they otherwise assimilate into degenerate english protestant society

it also means feigned ignorance of racial tensions compared to the more troubled history we have here in the states, so people can throw bananas at wayne simmonds or dress in blackface with subban sweaters

#50
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
multiculturalism also facilitates the movement of minorities into the cities and whites into suburbs
#51
north pole
Post rating: ~
#52
Post rating: ~
what about multiculturalism in, say, India? or to complicate the matter further, not just the contemporary movement towards such, but also the sorts that existed prior to European colonization? i see no reason to present latemodern white liberal multiculturalism as the only imaginable formulation.
#53
Post rating: +

Crow posted:

#54
Post rating: +
#55
Post rating: ~
lol
#56
Post rating: ~

vampirarchist posted:

unlimited power! Unlimited resources! Unlimited war! Valhalla!

#57
Post rating: ~
UNLIMITED POWER!!!!
#58
Post rating: +

jools posted:
UNLIMITED POWER!!!!



#59
Post rating: ~
The problem of borders, that relates so closely to the problems of nationalism, is that it does not reflect community borders. I live in Washington and have more in common with the people a few miles north across the border then I do with the people a few hours east in the same state. If we are going to use patriotism constructively as good leftists, as I agree we need to do, then we need it to be community patriotism first and national patriotism second. When I say "I love this country" I say it as a clever lead off to the coming rant about "the need for socialism" or some other BS I might be pushing that day. I love this country as a tactic.
#60
Chacabuco
Post rating: +
ahmad is wrong because the bourgeoisie will by definition be international and global in the sense described in this thread

it's not wrong to worry about religious or nationalist movements being insufficiently leftist, instead becoming social democratic (first world) and/or fascist (everyone else), but actively rejecting religion and nationalism is ridiculous

Edited by Francisco_Danconia ()

#61
Post rating: ~
you have more in common with canadians than east washington-ers? Off with your head!
#62
drivel of drunken hags
Post rating: ~
as i've said before neither the usa nor anglo-canada are nations
#63
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
I raised this question on another blog where someone had claimed that Salafism / Islamism was the Islamic analogue for the Protestant Reformation, to which someone had replied that:

Aha, but Protestantism everywhere allied itself with specific nation states, via their ruling dynasties, and as such became pro-nationalist (as against the Habsburgs). Salafism on the other hand doesn’t even recognise the concept of Arab nationalism. Salafism is ‘internationalist’. The Sauds don’t like nationalism, anywhere. Olivier Roy has written several short books about this in the last decade.

Insofar as members of Saudi intelligence probably organise the funding for the various Salafist organisations abroad, they may be said to be calling the tune, and in general even Muslim Brotherhood factions fall under this general spell of these paymasters. This is one of the broader reasons for wondering about the genuineness of al Qaeda. Their money came in exactly the same way.

Imperial ideologies are always anti-nationalist. They also always downplay their own national concern, viz the continued hegemony of the imperial centre, which is often a city, not a country, viz Rome. They tend to present the imperial centre as a mere ‘coordination point’ for global ‘helping’ strategies, using NGOs and charities as fronts, to further lessen the appearance of political control.



I said:

If Salafism is analogous to an “Islamic Protestantism”, the ties between Protestantism and nation-states needs to be transfered in the analogy as well. If the Reformation exhibited a combined Protestant-nationalist project to facilitate the eventual seizure of political power by the bourgeoisie (which freethinker unfortunately named “the Jews”), then Salafism should be tied not to nationalism, but to a socially analogous project of bourgeois politics in the Arab-Islamic world. I think that there’s probably something fruitful here that is worth examining.

There is a difference between the two historical events, and that is that Salafism is occurring in a neo-colonized environment, while the Reformation occurred under quite different circumstances. This needs to be taken into account when drawing comparisons for analytical purposes. The political drives and configurations will play out quite differently due to this factor.

I think it also needs to be questioned whether or not Islamist anti-nationalism constitutes a form of nationalism itself, at least for purposes of comparison to the nationalisms of the Reformation Protestants. Does pan-Islamism constitute a similar nationalism, or a substitute for it, in a neo-colonial context?