To continue some thoughts on the politics of printed word technology… Evgenia and I went to a bar mitzvah for the twin sons of my old friend, a Soviet immigrant from Odessa.
The problem with it is that wood block printing was invented in China many, many centuries before it existed in Europe, either as wood or metal type.
So I'd say that it was more likely Buddhist monks (some of the earliest printing was for that) and then Chinese and Chinese speaking literati that were the first modern nations in that sense.
As a young person, growing up in an area that had a lot of working class Jews in it, in the 50' and 60', I was deeply influenced by a number of people of humble background. The biggest take away for me was "Never Again!". In my naivite of in the time of childhood, I lacked the historical knowledge and lacked the analytical capacity to place the sector of the Jewish population I was in interacting with, in their proper social and historical context. These were the Jews, who were open to the community around them, who thought of themselves as one other group of people, among many groups of people. They could welcome an atheistic, non-Jewish younster to their dinner tables with great warmth. Their message to me was, "Never Again!", and by "Never Again!", they meant not anywhere and not to anyone else. Perhaps, you can imagine my dis-illusionment when I started interacting with Jews, for whom "Never Again!", meant Now Is Our Turn!
I am not sure what you mean in total, when you refer to Nationalism. I am of the section of the Left that takes the view that Nationalism has no progressive aspects. Tribalism is as inherent in our species as the capacity for language. I firmly beleive, if we can not learn to see humanity as one big tribe, with many branches, stories and histories, we will orchestrate our own doom as a species.
We live in a time in which the principal organization of humanity is into Nation States. Nation States being the vessels for a flavor of tribalism. We also live in a time of near instant communication and only slightly longer times to annihilation.
Given my early experience, looking at the Zionist dog, wagging the US tail, I have a deep loathing for people like Victoria Nuland/Numacher, her rabid dog husband, Blinken and a long list of other despicable people. While the Zionist Neo-Lib/Conservative cabal is a minority, where ever one looks, one can see them running around pouring gasoline on those fires of dominance and imperialism that seems intent on acheiving armegedon.
My views on nationalism are driven by an analysis of the failures of the old Communist Parties to achieve their goals. A great deal of research, thought and dialog was put into asking the question about 'why' the failures, carried out during the 60's through the 80's, and of course, still on going. What combination of human frailties, embededness in particular human socio-economic milieus, idealism divorced from real-world experience(s) on the part of would be revolutionaries, successes on the part of capitalists/imperialists to crush would be reformers and revolutionaries alike and to keep the masses of people down, divided and dominated. This line of inquiry, also interrogates and takes the form of opening an investigation reform vs. revolution. Reform meaning trying to force a better set of concessions from the ruling elites, concessions that can be rescinded at any time and at great cost to the masses of people, because reform doesn't change the political/socio-econmomic foundation of society. The imperatives that drive the capitalist form of organizing a socio-economic system are left in place, unchallenged. Thus, would be capitalists can seize control of the various government apparatus, or create governmental apparatus that serve their interests, at the expense of all other interests, especially the coercive apparatus, cops, militias (Think KKK, Brown Shirts, Azov Battalion, ad naseum) and use the coercive apparatus to kill any reformers and their movements. People, revolutionaries, advocating the creation of a sustainable system in the interest of all, have been the greatest reformers. Revolutionaries have been the greatest leaders of reform. And, then, thus, despite their best efforts, also the greatest servants of the must fail process of leaving the foundations of Capitalism, unchallenged, by the masses of people. Nationalism appears to be an important tool in this process of manipulating people to act in ways that are not in their best interest. Such as "rallying to the flag" and marching off to war, to kill and die for the schemes of the oligarchs, such as the second US war, which continues to this day, against the people of Iraq. Nationalism dilutes class consciousness, hides the contradictions that exist between those who live by productive labor and those who benefit by seizing and monopolizing the fruits of productive labor. This to the detriment of the great masses of people and to the planet we live on, of which we are not merely on, but an inseparable part of. Like the bumper sticker says, "There is no Planet B". One of the images that brings this home for me is the, "Earth Rise" photograph taken from the moon by Apollo Astronauts. There it is, Earth, this small, fragile ball, moving in the midst of this incredible Black Void. There it is. And that is all of it. Finite. Existing as friendly to human habitation due to the happy confluence of a myriad of environmental factors or heat, pressure, gravity, atmospheric composition, history, etc, change one of these factors even a tiny bit, relative to the Cosmos in all its vastness, and I would not exist to write this, nor you to read this. The take away becomes, we are on a very finite planet, and we are OF this planet, not merely ON this planet. The Capitalist form of socio-economic organization, the very foundation of the system is incompatible with the fact that we live on a finite world, as capitalism drives the quest for ever greater profits, ever greater expansion of the system to acquire more by ever greater exploitation of the resources, human and natural of the planet. This imperative is incompatible with continued existence on a finite planet. My high school home room teacher, who was a history teacher, whom I never actually had as an instructor, used to muse that humanity was a failed experiment in Nature's quest to experiment with forms of life. I have heard scientists speculate about what a post-Apocalyptic world would be like. That it might take natural processes some 3 to 5 million years or so to recover from the mess we made as a species of the planet. Our species being its own extinction event. And after those brief millennia had past, a mere blip in the 4.5 billion year history of our planet and even more infinitesimal in the light of the 13.8 billion year history of our universe, there will be a new flowering of the species and Earth will get along just fine without us.
So, we live on a finite planet. Nationalism under girds a political-economic system, ultimately incompatible with the continued existence of our species. Thus, nationalism, the form of tribalism local oligarchs use to manipulate us to serve their ends, can have no progressive aspects.
One of the quips that people debating the reform vs. revolution question borrowed, is the old observation about the state of things: A little bit of Nationalism (which Lenin etc, saw as a good thing), is like being a little bit pregnant. One is either pregnant or not. Pregnancy follows its own path with no regard for the one who is pregnant, once it is set in motion.
Yet, nation states are the principal form of organization and the ideology that creates nation states is the dominant ideology of our time. Yet another contradiction has to be raised: The coercive apparatus that maintains capitalism, armies etc., are organized on national criteria. Yet, much of our oligarchy is Globalist. They exist astride the Earth, they wish to exploit all and everything, yet their coercive apparatus is organized on the basis of states, which in turn are under girded in their existence by Nationalism.
So, whole tracts have been written about the questions of the relationship of Nationalism, how Nationalism under girds an unsustainable economic order, Reform vs. Revolution, the virtues or lack of virtues of potential answers to these questions.
I have left out of consideration many things in this handful of paragraphs. Perhaps, one might conclude I am indulging in a great deal of Idealism (or idea--ism). Let me just mention 2. One contemporary and one which may be foundational to how human societies have evolved--or devolved if one is familiar with the arguments about how modernity is a descent of humanity. The contemporary is identity politics, a particular form of tribalism which tells us to avert our eyes from the whole and spend lots of time, gazing at each other's navels. The second is the role of Sexism, which some feminist scholars hold, maybe, correctly, is the "ism" that underlies all other unfortunate "ism's" human culture embraces. Failure to over come sexist divisions is another factor that has been identified as self-destructive of reformist and revolutionary movements alike.
A final observation in the line of "A little bit Nationalist, is like being a little bit pregnant". Extreme forms of nationalist ideology are being used to drive the Ukrainian War. The regime in place in Kiev, now is championed by certain people, some among the most strident, Neo-Liberals, who are nominally Jewish. The ultra-nationlists embrace extreme ideas as to what constitutes the "Essence of the Ukrainian people and one of the underlying tenets of this "essence" is anti-semitism. In fact, the now in exile, Ukrainian Jewish oligarch, Zelensky's sugar daddy, Igor Kolomoisky, is reported as being the principle financial under writer of bringing into existence, the rabidly anti-semitic Azov Battalion.
In Das Kapital, Marx wrote about the exploitation of labor. As far as I know, he did not address the exploitation of the world by British financial institutions, which existed in his time. It is true that capitalists exploit workers, but capitalists from the countries that issue "hard currency" exploit not only workers but also governments and capitalists in other parts of world. Nowadays, American capitalists can get unlimited amounts of bank credit to buy companies, land, and people, so that governments and capitalists everywhere are threatened by owners of the American dollar. How can workers of the world unite, when they are in such a different position? What do Trotskyites think about it?
I'm not ignoring you, my response has been stalled by circumstances. Further, in addressing your e-mail's question, I value a certain degree of theoretical precision.
I've seen arguments like this before.
The problem with it is that wood block printing was invented in China many, many centuries before it existed in Europe, either as wood or metal type.
So I'd say that it was more likely Buddhist monks (some of the earliest printing was for that) and then Chinese and Chinese speaking literati that were the first modern nations in that sense.
They even had newspapers, more or less.
https://www.medievalists.net/2021/05/how-newspapers-existed-china-900-years-ago/
As a young person, growing up in an area that had a lot of working class Jews in it, in the 50' and 60', I was deeply influenced by a number of people of humble background. The biggest take away for me was "Never Again!". In my naivite of in the time of childhood, I lacked the historical knowledge and lacked the analytical capacity to place the sector of the Jewish population I was in interacting with, in their proper social and historical context. These were the Jews, who were open to the community around them, who thought of themselves as one other group of people, among many groups of people. They could welcome an atheistic, non-Jewish younster to their dinner tables with great warmth. Their message to me was, "Never Again!", and by "Never Again!", they meant not anywhere and not to anyone else. Perhaps, you can imagine my dis-illusionment when I started interacting with Jews, for whom "Never Again!", meant Now Is Our Turn!
I am not sure what you mean in total, when you refer to Nationalism. I am of the section of the Left that takes the view that Nationalism has no progressive aspects. Tribalism is as inherent in our species as the capacity for language. I firmly beleive, if we can not learn to see humanity as one big tribe, with many branches, stories and histories, we will orchestrate our own doom as a species.
We live in a time in which the principal organization of humanity is into Nation States. Nation States being the vessels for a flavor of tribalism. We also live in a time of near instant communication and only slightly longer times to annihilation.
Given my early experience, looking at the Zionist dog, wagging the US tail, I have a deep loathing for people like Victoria Nuland/Numacher, her rabid dog husband, Blinken and a long list of other despicable people. While the Zionist Neo-Lib/Conservative cabal is a minority, where ever one looks, one can see them running around pouring gasoline on those fires of dominance and imperialism that seems intent on acheiving armegedon.
In my opinion, nationalism is a good thing if used to protect a nation and its economy against neoliberals.
Hi, Sonja
Thanks for the interest.
My views on nationalism are driven by an analysis of the failures of the old Communist Parties to achieve their goals. A great deal of research, thought and dialog was put into asking the question about 'why' the failures, carried out during the 60's through the 80's, and of course, still on going. What combination of human frailties, embededness in particular human socio-economic milieus, idealism divorced from real-world experience(s) on the part of would be revolutionaries, successes on the part of capitalists/imperialists to crush would be reformers and revolutionaries alike and to keep the masses of people down, divided and dominated. This line of inquiry, also interrogates and takes the form of opening an investigation reform vs. revolution. Reform meaning trying to force a better set of concessions from the ruling elites, concessions that can be rescinded at any time and at great cost to the masses of people, because reform doesn't change the political/socio-econmomic foundation of society. The imperatives that drive the capitalist form of organizing a socio-economic system are left in place, unchallenged. Thus, would be capitalists can seize control of the various government apparatus, or create governmental apparatus that serve their interests, at the expense of all other interests, especially the coercive apparatus, cops, militias (Think KKK, Brown Shirts, Azov Battalion, ad naseum) and use the coercive apparatus to kill any reformers and their movements. People, revolutionaries, advocating the creation of a sustainable system in the interest of all, have been the greatest reformers. Revolutionaries have been the greatest leaders of reform. And, then, thus, despite their best efforts, also the greatest servants of the must fail process of leaving the foundations of Capitalism, unchallenged, by the masses of people. Nationalism appears to be an important tool in this process of manipulating people to act in ways that are not in their best interest. Such as "rallying to the flag" and marching off to war, to kill and die for the schemes of the oligarchs, such as the second US war, which continues to this day, against the people of Iraq. Nationalism dilutes class consciousness, hides the contradictions that exist between those who live by productive labor and those who benefit by seizing and monopolizing the fruits of productive labor. This to the detriment of the great masses of people and to the planet we live on, of which we are not merely on, but an inseparable part of. Like the bumper sticker says, "There is no Planet B". One of the images that brings this home for me is the, "Earth Rise" photograph taken from the moon by Apollo Astronauts. There it is, Earth, this small, fragile ball, moving in the midst of this incredible Black Void. There it is. And that is all of it. Finite. Existing as friendly to human habitation due to the happy confluence of a myriad of environmental factors or heat, pressure, gravity, atmospheric composition, history, etc, change one of these factors even a tiny bit, relative to the Cosmos in all its vastness, and I would not exist to write this, nor you to read this. The take away becomes, we are on a very finite planet, and we are OF this planet, not merely ON this planet. The Capitalist form of socio-economic organization, the very foundation of the system is incompatible with the fact that we live on a finite world, as capitalism drives the quest for ever greater profits, ever greater expansion of the system to acquire more by ever greater exploitation of the resources, human and natural of the planet. This imperative is incompatible with continued existence on a finite planet. My high school home room teacher, who was a history teacher, whom I never actually had as an instructor, used to muse that humanity was a failed experiment in Nature's quest to experiment with forms of life. I have heard scientists speculate about what a post-Apocalyptic world would be like. That it might take natural processes some 3 to 5 million years or so to recover from the mess we made as a species of the planet. Our species being its own extinction event. And after those brief millennia had past, a mere blip in the 4.5 billion year history of our planet and even more infinitesimal in the light of the 13.8 billion year history of our universe, there will be a new flowering of the species and Earth will get along just fine without us.
So, we live on a finite planet. Nationalism under girds a political-economic system, ultimately incompatible with the continued existence of our species. Thus, nationalism, the form of tribalism local oligarchs use to manipulate us to serve their ends, can have no progressive aspects.
One of the quips that people debating the reform vs. revolution question borrowed, is the old observation about the state of things: A little bit of Nationalism (which Lenin etc, saw as a good thing), is like being a little bit pregnant. One is either pregnant or not. Pregnancy follows its own path with no regard for the one who is pregnant, once it is set in motion.
Yet, nation states are the principal form of organization and the ideology that creates nation states is the dominant ideology of our time. Yet another contradiction has to be raised: The coercive apparatus that maintains capitalism, armies etc., are organized on national criteria. Yet, much of our oligarchy is Globalist. They exist astride the Earth, they wish to exploit all and everything, yet their coercive apparatus is organized on the basis of states, which in turn are under girded in their existence by Nationalism.
So, whole tracts have been written about the questions of the relationship of Nationalism, how Nationalism under girds an unsustainable economic order, Reform vs. Revolution, the virtues or lack of virtues of potential answers to these questions.
I have left out of consideration many things in this handful of paragraphs. Perhaps, one might conclude I am indulging in a great deal of Idealism (or idea--ism). Let me just mention 2. One contemporary and one which may be foundational to how human societies have evolved--or devolved if one is familiar with the arguments about how modernity is a descent of humanity. The contemporary is identity politics, a particular form of tribalism which tells us to avert our eyes from the whole and spend lots of time, gazing at each other's navels. The second is the role of Sexism, which some feminist scholars hold, maybe, correctly, is the "ism" that underlies all other unfortunate "ism's" human culture embraces. Failure to over come sexist divisions is another factor that has been identified as self-destructive of reformist and revolutionary movements alike.
A final observation in the line of "A little bit Nationalist, is like being a little bit pregnant". Extreme forms of nationalist ideology are being used to drive the Ukrainian War. The regime in place in Kiev, now is championed by certain people, some among the most strident, Neo-Liberals, who are nominally Jewish. The ultra-nationlists embrace extreme ideas as to what constitutes the "Essence of the Ukrainian people and one of the underlying tenets of this "essence" is anti-semitism. In fact, the now in exile, Ukrainian Jewish oligarch, Zelensky's sugar daddy, Igor Kolomoisky, is reported as being the principle financial under writer of bringing into existence, the rabidly anti-semitic Azov Battalion.
Peace be with you.
It's therefore why only a Jew, Marx, could write Capital.
In Das Kapital, Marx wrote about the exploitation of labor. As far as I know, he did not address the exploitation of the world by British financial institutions, which existed in his time. It is true that capitalists exploit workers, but capitalists from the countries that issue "hard currency" exploit not only workers but also governments and capitalists in other parts of world. Nowadays, American capitalists can get unlimited amounts of bank credit to buy companies, land, and people, so that governments and capitalists everywhere are threatened by owners of the American dollar. How can workers of the world unite, when they are in such a different position? What do Trotskyites think about it?
I'm not ignoring you, my response has been stalled by circumstances. Further, in addressing your e-mail's question, I value a certain degree of theoretical precision.