Socialist Patriotism

Socialist patriotism is a core socialist value which can literally be found in the textbooks issued to elementary school children in every Communist state in history. The notion that Communists in America must be motivated by deep patriotic feeling, and a sense of belonging to their country and its people, has always been basic Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy. All of this changed when fat anti-social retards in universities declared that Marxism-Leninism (or "Stalinism") itself is "fascist," and decided that socialism was about scolding ordinary people for not being "enlightened" enough about transgenderism.

Socialist patriotism is not the same as so called "Patriotic Socialism."

Socialist Patriotism refers to the national and patriotic form which Socialism has assumed which is part and parcel to its meaning. As evinced by the DDR, Polish People's Republic and other Eastern Bloc states' grounding of their respective Communist Parties in the soil of their own peoples was not incidental to their country's involvement in the process of decolonization. The indisputable fact that communism invariably assumed a deeply national and patriotic form is not in fact a matter of happenstance– it is directly tied up with the essence of socialism itself. As first stated by Marx (and later elaborated upon by Stalin and Mao), the universal truth of Marxism finds expression only in specific national characteristics and its acquisition of a definite national form.

One must begin with the realities that actually exist and not proceed from abstractions of the imagination; So too must one first and foremost recognize the national realities in the land itself that gives rise to a definite and historical people. It is only from a recognition of this premise that what is common between a people can come to the fore, in this way socialism discloses a people's living and material being or what Heidegger calls their historical Dasein the meaning of their history, tradition and their cultural achievements.

Marx's materialism proceeds from Earth to Heaven as opposed to Western leftists who proceed from Heaven to Earth. For Western leftists the essence of socialism exists in spite of the concrete sociality or the living being of a people, they proceed from empty abstractions, from cosmopolitan man uprooted from his substantive base; whereas Marxism teaches us to proceed from the people as they actually exist. It is the reactionaries who in fact share with them a one-sided and idealist conception of the nation. Like the liberal cosmopolitans, reactionaries confuse the outward appearance of the nation with its essence, which is inexhaustible and irreducible to its existent form, rather than keeping up with the reality of the people whose development of national being they restrict with the weight of dead abstractions. Reactionaries and their idolatry of superficial appearance are not sufficiently rooted in the traditions of their own people. It is the same idealism that permeates the idolater's corrupted vision of Internationalism which exists at the expense of national realities. It is the development of the essence of the nation that proceeds from national premises itself. That is why (for Marxists, historically) internationalism comes into being through the nation and corresponding to a deepening of national realities rather than their forsaken.

"Land back" is a feel-good pipe dream for the overwhelmingly white American left. The vacuous and performative "land back" position of american leftists, meanwhile, bears no organic connection with the actual claims of American Indians– who are used as cannon fodder for the Calvinist left seeking to extirpate itself of all the sins of its forefathers. The extremity of such a position can only be made in the minds of those who are insulated from such communities and from working people in general. What they channel, in fact, is nothing more than their own mental reconstruction of American Indians and other historically oppressed groups. Such mental reconstructions– which bear little resemblance with the realities of black and indigenous peoples– are utilized solely for the purpose of invoking feelings of moral superiority in leveraging this over their peers. The moral economy that "land back" and other childish rhetoric rests upon is thus only for the purpose of saturating the feelings of guilt felt by white leftists. The impossibility of these demands is clear to all parties including themselves; and as a matter of strategy such extremist positions will never win over the American masses– not even her (America's) non-white sections. Their Puritanical finger-pointing distances them more and more from the American people. Strategically it is a non-position, which is why "J Sakai leftists" never have and never will pose a threat to the existing establishment and they are, in practice, the radical left flank of actually existing white supremacy.

Communism has nothing to do with land back and everything to do with land reform. It is only in the re-parcellation of land as the most basic means of production that the productive capacities in entrepreneurial spirit of the American people can be unleashed. Communists do not win by opposing everything the American people find sacred– a childish and anarchistic position they do not win with, a "burn it all down" attitude– Communists will win by fighting for American working people, giving them recognition in their words and in their deeds, and promoting the prosperity and dignity of America's working masses. That one finds pride in their country and love for her people is in no way irreconcilable with making good on the promise of "forty acres and a mule", nor does it annul the necessity of recompense and dialogue with tribal authorities and the increased autonomy that socialist reconstruction would give way to. On the contrary; it is a precondition for these things as patriotic sentiment is the surest sign that one is connected with and fights on behalf of the masses. The reality is that "land back" leftists, who screech and bemoan the fact of America's existence, do the work of the right by poisoning the well with all sorts of unjustifiable and impossible demands that they themselves don't believe. Whether they are aware of it or not these same people open the door to the exact claims being levied against the People's Republic of China and to a lesser extent Russia– other convenient coincidences where radical liberal discourse mysteriously aligns with U.S. imperialism.