spiel from . . .

It's an argument that is often made, including between Luxemberg and Lenin if I remember correctly?

I think that it's also incorrect - the history from WWI to the collapse of the USSR and Yugoslavia showing that. Revolution can only be fully international.

Both from the material base - if the richest countries continue to have the means of production held by the bourgeois, their class interest can subsume profit long enough to strangle - and from the cultural/superstructure

A national based revolution will only reinforce nationalism, which means that the society will have to form hierarchy to enable defense. And that means you get either the bourgeoisie, or the nomenklatura who will revive the bourgeois

Class is real, nations are not

Never forget, the bourgeoisie rose under feudalism because they could support armies of competing princes materially!

And if you have military threats between nations, you will reconstruct the same thing. War requires accumulation and hierarchy, or at least did in the 20th cen.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Anarchism Space

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!