[WS:] You seem to assume that uncertainty about the future outcome should be resolved in favor of national liberation projects. That is, you seem to argue that "we do not know for sure if such a project can produce better social conditions, but let's give it a chance."
RG: Not necessarily. I'm arguing for non-interference in the affairs of *other* countries. If it's your own country I see no reason not to argue - based on experience, history etc - the toss over whether a nationalist programme is appropriate/progressive or not.
WS:] This is a fair argument, but I am not so gung ho about it. I am more inclined to carefully examine the probability of a specific national project to deliver social progress. It is a very difficult intellectual and often dangerous task, as it requires questioning the political rhetoric of such projects and calls for prudence and reason in time of collective euphoria.
RG: Well at least the nationalist euphoria is currently not much of a problem in most places. As I've said, there is a distinction to be made between criticism from the imperialist heartland (if I might use such terms) and what you do in your 'own' country.
WS:] I experienced that once in my life - during the formation of the Solidarity movement in Poland in 1979/1980. After being initially swept by a collective euphoria, I started looking critically at the undemocratic or otherwise questionable practices of the movement activist. At that point, I was told to toe-in the line or get the fuck out. I got the fuck out.
RG: Well the point here is that you were fully entitled (being on the inside) to have your own views on Solidarnosc and if necessary oppose its programme.
WS:] As to your second point, the benefits of foreign domination - this is an ideologically charged issue that is very difficult to argue rationally not only because of its ideological implications, but because it is very difficult to find a counterfactual. That is, to make a judgment whether foreign domination was better or worse than its absence one would have to compare a condition with foreign domination present to one with a foreign domination absent, everything else being equal. It is sometimes possible, but extremely difficult and always hypothetical, and thus easy to dismiss if the conclusions do not fit ideological expectations.
RG: Again the question of democracy - the right to self-determination - in the international sphere should surely take precedence no matter what anyone thinks about the specifics of the politics of a particular liberation movement elsewhere? People have to be given the space to find things out for themselves.
WS:] I tend to believe that the Soviet domination of Eastern Europe had generally a positive effect on that region,
RG: In what way - as the SU had nothing truly progressive to offer, except to temporarily delay the inevitable return of the market? Is 'absence of market relations' something positive in itself when a higher form of social relations cannot be born? The local Stalinist bureaucrats also tended to encourage nationalism as a way of overcoming the inherent lack of appeal of Stalinism - not a very pretty phenomenon. All the other possible scenarios you list are hypothetical.
WS:]The same reasoning can be applied to Africa. It is extremely difficult to find alternative conditions t which various and very different colonial rules (Arab, British, Dutch, French, German, Portuguese) could be compared. ...Under these circumstances, it is much easier to go with the nationalistic euphoria and summarily condemn "foreigners" for all the ills and problems facing a particular society. Every nation does that, the US leading the way, as demonstrated inter alia by the current immigration debate.
RG: It isn't easy to argue against nationalism as it approximates more closely to what already exists and to people's everyday experience and perceived interests. This makes it useful to demagogues. The worth of alternative arrangements has to be proved in practice - probably initially only to a small minority.
-Russell ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk