>
> Among Lenin's arguments is that Kautsky etc are in a revolutionary
> situation demonstrating "support of 'their own governments in an
> imperialist war, notwithstanding the fact that *both* sides are waging the
> war in such a way as systematically to violate the 'independence' of weak
> nations and *for the purpose* of tightening and increasing their
> oppression." April 1916. So in certain circumstances a small nation may
> really be oppressed but its defence is carried out in imperialist ways by
> imperialist powers.
No. Imagine the left talking like this today!:
" ..the socialists of the oppressed nations must particularly fight for and put into effect complete and absolute unity, including organizational unity between the workers of the oppressed nation and the workers of the oppressing nation. Otherwise it is impossible to uphold the independant policy of the proletariat of other countries against all the subterfuges, treachery and trickery of the bourgeoisie. For the bourgeoisie of the oppressed nations constantly converts the slogans of the national liberation into a means for deceiving the workers; in internal politics it utilizes these slogans as a means for concluding reactionary agreements with the bourgeoisie of the ruling nations (for instance, the Poles in Austria and Russia, who entered into pacts with reaction in order to oppress the Jews and Ukranians); in the realm of foreign policy it strives to enter into pacts with one of the rival imperialist powers for the purpose of achieving its own predatory aims (the policies of the small states in the Balkans etc.)" V.I. Lenin, The Socialist Revolution and The Right of Nations to Self-Determination,1916. Foreign Languages Publishing House, p179-80. 1954.
Plus ca change...
Chris, repeating your position over and over does nothing to strengthen it. Lets try and move the discussion forward a bit.
Sam Pawlett