The nationality question & the right to self-determination of oppressed nationalities

Kapil Tamang

To delve into the Nationality question and the demand for self-determination, to chalk out a gross outline regarding our position with respect to it as a progressive force, we need to enter deeper into the subject.

Formation of a Nationality

In the primitive era, people used to dwell in some relatively small collectives (clan) or some of those clans lived together (tribes), the foundation of which was kinship or blood relation. With time, these tribes merged together to form a race or a nation, whose members are not only connected by blood relations, but generally it took shape by the integration of several tribes bearing different racial features.

In the pre-capitalist era, under the discrete rule or laws, nationalities that were formed encompassing several isolated collectives did not bear any economic or political tie at all. The flare of nationalistic consciousness was first seen while the process of elimination of feudalism and development of capitalism were going on. In the era before the birth of modern capitalist countries, there were established colonies in different parts of the world. Under the confinements put by the imperialists, in their interests, the nationalities started to get their shapes and it yielded in distorted economic and political development.

Capitalism created modern nations

The development of capitalism created modern nations.

.... “Nationality ... is not a racial or tribal phenomenon. It has five essential features: there must be a stable, continuing community, a common language, a distinct territory, economic cohesion, and a collective character. It assumes positive political form as a nation under definite historical conditions, belonging to a specific epoch, that of the rise of capitalism and the struggles of the rising bourgeoisie under feudalism.” [Based on J. V. Stalin, Marxism and the National Question, 1913].

The call of free market was alluring the emerging bourgeoisie to overcome the native boundaries of feudalism. They, to ensure mass support, gave a political effort to make ‘their own people’ conscious about ‘their own culture and politics’, and in this quest, new myths were discovered; several phrases and motifs were used to convert this identity consciousness into a powerful and effective emotion. This is nationalism. This is the very trump card for the nascent bourgeoisie to get into the throne of power.

Now in case of nationality-based oppression, it is for the gains of a small section of the oppressor nationality. However in doing this they try to include the oppressive nationality in its entirety and even don’t hesitate creating animosity throughout the society or promulgating riots, if required.

Nationalism- a bourgeois philosophy

Nationality struggle- a FIght for freedom

Nationalism, be it of the oppressor or the oppressed, or of any nationality, is nothing but a bourgeois philosophy. And it is based on “National Unity” which is the unity of the proletariat & the bourgeoisie of one nationality against all the other.

The struggle for nationality is generally led by the local bourgeoisie. Often they are in clash with the bourgeoisie of the dominant nationality for the control of local businesses, which eventually translates into the demand for right to self-determination. This demand can only become all-prevailing when in reality their social-cultural expressions get trampled and their socio-economic development is hindered. Then only people from all walks of life join in the fight of liberty from the oppressors. So the fight of freedom being against the oppressive ruling class of the dominating nationality, every democratic person needs to support these struggles and the baton of leadership can be carried over to the hands of one class to the other. It is imperative for the working class and oppressed people and the democratic voices in these struggles to participate and create debates within, and to influence the course of the movement. Whence these battles get concluded, struggles against other exploitations ubiquitous in the society will become inevitable, especially the class-struggle.

Right to self-determination :

A fundamental democratic right

For every nationality right to self-determination is a fundamental democratic right. It means the right of a people of a nationality living within a boundary to create a sovereign state for them within that boundary. Right to self-determination is the right to secede as well.

If at the end, we ‘Imagine all the people sharing all the world’, an essential condition to that end is the struggle of nationalities for equal rights which means revoking all the special privileges relished by the oppressor nationality along with the inequalities suffered by the oppressed. “From their daily experience the masses know perfectly well the value of geographical and economic ties and the advantages of a big market and a big state. They, therefore, resort to secession only when national oppression and national friction make joint life absolutely intolerable and hinder any and all economic intercourse.”

“We demand freedom of self-determination, i.e., independence, i.e., freedom of secession for the oppressed nations, not because we have dreamt of splitting up the country economically, or of the ideal of small states, but, on the contrary, because we want large states and the closer unity and even fusion of nations, only on a truly democratic, truly internationalist basis, which is inconceivable without the freedom to secede” (Lenin, collected volumes, English, vol-21, page 413-14).

conFLicting nationalisms :Problems in them

Time and again we see two conflicting errors on the question of nationalism. The first is the nationalism of the oppressor nationality. Those who are contaminated with the chauvinism of the oppressors, namely their brand of nationalism, only utter the question of voluntary unity. They don’t speak up against the unity historically determined by imperialism; neither do they support the right to secede, though they speak of equal rights. It is unfathomable to them that as long as the right of nationalities to self-determination is not addressed, there won’t be any real unity or equality between the people of the oppressed & the oppressor nationalities.

Those plagued with the problematic nationalism of the advanced nationality, often consider today’s countries and their boundaries to be everlasting. The right of political “secession” seems incredulous to them. But under any circumstance or time the right to politically secede, the opinion being of the majority or expressed through a referendum, ought to be supported & whether it has any basis in reality is hardly a valid question here. What is impossible today can become inevitable tomorrow.

The other problem is getting entangled in the bourgeois nationalism of the oppressed nation. Here the problem is of opposite nature. They only consider the emancipation of their own nationality, only envisage what the bourgeois of their own nationality see— but deny understanding that this very struggle has a distant goal of voluntary unification of the nationalities too. And often, failing to keep the correct orientation, this struggle gets derailed, and endangers the unity of the working class.

These two problems of two nationalisms creeping among the oppressor and oppressed nations are the reflections of the dominance of the bourgeoisie, bourgeois thought over the whole sphere, and we should oppose them.

But while opposing bourgeois nationalism of all nations, we find that there is a democratic essence in the nationalism posed by the oppressed nationality, as this one grew out of the struggle against aggression of imperialism or big capital. Thus we support this struggle against nationality based oppression. The effect of bourgeois thought on the oppressor nation is more problematic as behind it lay the imprint of the bourgeoisie of dominant nation, the bourgeoisie in power. And along with that, added is the long nurtured idea of domination among the toiling people belonging to the oppressor nation.

How relevant is nationality Question right now?

Global capital is now concentrated in the hands of a few hundred global conglomerates. Centralization of capital is at its zenith. Every day, trade worth lahks of crore dollars gets conducted between multinationals. Monopolistic capital is increasing its stranglehold over this planet and astronomical amount of money is being spent for this purpose. These few hundred corporations are aggressively pursuing a disastrous strategy with the only goal to maximize profit. At the receiving end is the working class. Every new merger brings to it news of closure, layoffs or more work load.

Without going into too many details it can be said that though no end to poverty, illiteracy or failing health throughout the globe seems to be in sight, the corporations seem to seamlessly merge into the capitalistic states and their tools of oppression. A conflict becomes apparent at this juncture. A section of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeoisie theorists have began to opine that in the present backdrop of globalization, ethnic identity is no longer as important as it had been in the past. In reality, with the strengthening of global market, the contradictions between nations have become even more intense. The history of last century is that of the revolt of production power against the limits of national boundaries. World economy has evolved in this direction and in its wake brought economic crises and world wars. The natural contradictions of capitalism have further provoked it to show it’s tooth and nail. But, not only in erstwhile colonies but even in developed capitalist countries the ethnic question has come to the fore in many cases. These questions are often getting raised in places where it had been earlier thought to be having been resolved. There is no doubt that capitalist exploitation will be on further rise.

On the other hand, the desire for freedom within the oppressed will increase with social progress. We need to realise that there is a contradiction in the formation of nationality due to the bourgeoisie or trickledown effect of capitalism on the one hand, and the process of fusion of nations or to wipe out their variations in the era of globalisation, on the other. We observe instances of backward nationalities advancing and getting more consolidated with time, and simultaneously we see some nationalities being smashed or getting extinct with time. It depends upon where the contradiction would lead.

But those who seek the ultimate solutions in this secessions or formation of small states or autonomous bodies might look at the previous instances of such formations. It is clear that the quantitatively increasing lures of self-rule will not convert to the qualitative taste of freedom for a race. 

The mode of capitalist production utilizes, among many other methods of exploitation, the practice of unfair exchange based on a repressed group’s lack of consciousness, helplessness of various forms and rampant unemployment. So to reach the desired horizon, the emphasis should be more on the issue of class struggle than on nationalist movements. But if however, the nationality movement comes to the fore, the question of identity motivates people superseding the class struggle, we need to respond to it positively, instead of turning it down. The sense of deprivation looming large needs to be attended to go ahead for a glorious destiny.