As you have all noticed, this seems to be a point of contention here. This is a good thing, since it means someone will learn something.
Now we seem to be all over the place, with this general area of thought, provoking many questions. Whether or not PatSocs are socially conservative, what is position on social conservatism? Many of us are very young, both in age and ML experience, so an online discussion would be a great learning tool.
- Are socially conservative individuals allowed to be apart of the leftist movement?
- A. Are socially conservative individuals victims of bourgeois propaganda?
-B. If socially conservative people are turned away by the left, where do they go?
-C. How high of a position would a social conservative be allowed in a ML party?
-D. How has or will MLs educate socially conservative folk?
-E. &tc, &tc.
- What exactly is Patriotism?
-A. Does patriotism depend on culture?
-B Is possible for a distinction between patriotism for a country and wanting to abolish the state?
-C. Is patriotism corrupted in the Core?
-D How have post imperialist countries with Communist experiments built patriotism?
-E. &Tc &TC
- Who even are the PatSocs?
-A. If the label is too convuluted, should we make a distinction between Maupin and American exceptionalists?
-B. Who of the leaders do we consider MLs?
-C. Should patriotic socialist be distinct from socialism or is inherent in socialism?
-D. How much do WE even know if PatSocs?
-E. &Tc, &tc
We can look at the USSR and GDR for these questions. Remember the Hammer and Sickel came from somewhere.
Things to look out for about the US:
-It is the imperialist power, AND a settler state.
-Low levels of cultural development
-The culture that is there is taken from marginalized groups.
-Americas are the most propagandized people in the World.
-It is huge and incredibly diverse
More questions about the US could follow:
-Should the US be balkanized? If so how does patriotism be built in balkanized regions?
-How does land back go about? Will indigenous countries emerge, and if so should we reconsider American MLs as different MLs for the Regions in North America.
-If we see different nations and regions in North America how does that affect culture? Is the question of how we view the land a prerequisite to discussing patriotism, is it contradictory to call yourself an American Patriot if you decide to divide up the land until regions?
There is so much potential for deep political for North American based Comrades, this is a rabbit hole I do want to delve into. I’ll cross post this to GZD but I want it mainly on Leftist Infighting.
Edit: spacing issues
1 A—Depends much on the historical conditions of the country, countries that went through military dictatorships (like Brazil) tend to have a much more conservative population. Principally between older people (40 – 80) that see LGBT+ as defying their old ways and customs, with usually seeing them as “ugly” (speaking from personal experience). So bourgeois propaganda can be a big factor but not all the time, the bourgeois will always do what gives more profit, if that means being “woke”, so be it. Religious extremism is also a factor, but religion itself is not the reason.
1 B—I believe it depends on their current material conditions, if the current economic situation is terrible for them, they will choose a candidate that promises appeasing the situation while keeping the social situation more conservative or the same. If that is not possible or does not exist one who promises as such, they will still vote for a more left candidate.
1 C—Congress maximum, the problem is not having one, two, twenty social conservatives but having an amount that stops the progress in social areas. Though one could also argue that for such reason they should not be allowed to be lawmakers since that could result in having an enough amount of social conservatives that stop the progress.
1 D—I really like this quote from Paulo Freire: “When education is not liberating, the dream of the oppressed is to be the oppressor” social conservatives are only social conservatives because they did not have enough education on that subject or have prejudice against a group. Education is the best, although slow and long way to handle the situation.
2 A—I don’t think so, I like defining patriotism as a love for the people of your country and due to that wanting to do the best for them. I don’t think anyone here became a ML for selfish reasons, but wanting to help your people and understand the reality we live on.
2 B—Yes, if we use my definition of patriotism (which is above). You don’t like your government or the bourgeois, but you want to do the best to help the people and if that means abolishing the state, then it shall be done.
2 C—The so-called “Patriotism” is very much used as a tool of masses control in the Imperial Core, but this is a different kind of patriotism. It is used to make people proud of how things are or of their past (which, in the Imperial Core, has not been any good).
2 D—This is an extremely important question, I think education about the past crimes committed by the bourgeois governments is a good start. Then begin teaching socialism at schools, which is very essential to the creation of a national identity. This will create a good kind of patriotism, the one that is love for your people and being proud of those who fought for and the current achievements of socialism.
Okay it seems I agree with everything you are saying, great input. We are using a label we haven’t agreed on to describe a wide range of people, instead of stating our positions on issues like conservatism and patriotism. I believe once the fog is cleared we will come to realize we all have similar position.
Now the biggest wonder I have which I’ll probably make in the next post is if those actual, socially progressive MLs who call themselves PatSocs, are being redundant or not. For one, socialists want to build culture and thus patriotism in a new society so saying you are a specifically patriotic socialist is benign and a major reason why you are associated with American exceptionalism. And two, if you agree that the US (and Canada) is superficial settler STATE (a government, again not represented by the people) and that there are different regions and nations like New Afrika and dozens of Native Tribal states, why are you an “American patriot”?
As I have been writing this and pondering lately I think this goes much deeper to be a call of balkanizing US and Canada to more representative regions and nations. And if that’s the case should people like me start calling myself an ML based in North America?
I think Maupin is a very import figure right now for the North American left, but I don’t quite understand why he calls himself an “American Patriot” and that “he loves his country” even though positions seem to contradict that.
My fascist family uses the same lines when they run for office to convince old timer democrats to vote republican. This is an example of someone trying to manipulate colonial discourse into their favor.
Maupin’s error is assuming that all class consciousness is good, that it all leads to proletarian revolutionary consciousness. He is incorrect.
If you tell people whoes livlihood depends on maintaining the wealth they recieved during the Homestead Act of 1862, or from super profits that are recycled into super wages for the Global North’s working class, that they have nothing to lose but their chains and that America deserves better, they will not hear the same thing a Haitian, or otherwise imperialized/colonized person hears. They will hear a call for fascism, for another round of colonial conquest and extraction, so they can get theirs once again.
deleted by creator
Amazing analysis! This is the stuff we need here, well informed objective analysis, not fear mongering!
This is the best summary of Maupin’s political stance and faults summed up, and on top of that doesn’t paint him as a rabid Nazi wishing for the destruction of all minorities. You could use this comment as a blog post even. Wish I could favorite twice. You basically said all of what I conveyed.