Freedom Not Nationhood

| by ARUNDATHI ROY
( August 8, !"#, Ne$ De%hi, &ri 'an(a )uardian* Nationa%ism has s$e+t on$ards
$ith in,reasing -or,e, threatening to engu%- $or(ers. And the more the mo/ement -or
eman,i+ation o- %abour $a%%o$s in the do%drums, the more nationa%ism b%ossoms,
des+ite the -a,t that nationa% di--eren,es bet$een the +eo+%es are /anishing more and
more. &o,ia%ists, ho$e/er, $i%% ne/er a%%o$ their heads to be turned by nationa%ist
s%ogans and must resist the siren ,a%% o- +atriotism and nationa% ,hau/inism by
+ro,%aiming the unity and indi/isibi%ity o- the ,%ass strugg%e. &e+aratism $ea(ens the
$or(ers0 sense o- so%idarity and -re1uent%y dri/es them to stri(e2brea( on a nationa%
%e/e%. The +rin,i+%e o- internationa% so%idarity o- the $or(ers is an essentia% e%ement -or
the trium+h o- the $or(ing ,%ass. It is ,riti,a% -or $or(ing ,%ass +eo+%e to organise
themse%/es inde+endent%y o- a%% ,a+ita%ist interests. 3a+ita%ism ,an0t a--ord to ha/e
e/eryone %i/e $e%%.
You ha/e the right to ,hoose bet$een se+aratism or unionism, but you ,an on%y ,hoose
one thing 2 ,a+ita%ism. The ,hoi,e is ,%ear. I- ,a+ita%ism is to be maintained, business
must be a%%o$ed to s1uee4e out its +ro-its and the ban(s their interest. 5hen times are
tough it is the $or(ing +eo+%e $ho must be s1uee4ed. Fe$er $or(ers $i%% ha/e to do
the $or( on,e done by more, and they $i%% re,ei/e %ess +ay.
&o,ia% ser/i,es needed by $or(ing +eo+%e $i%% ha/e to be drasti,a%%y ,ut. And ,a+ita%ists
in/ariab%y demand harsher terms -rom re-ormist +o%iti,ians than -rom others6 the ris(s
are greater, and there-ore the returns must be greater or the sour,es o- in/estment $i%%
dry u+ and go e%se$here. During these ,risis2ridden times the sma%% gains that $ere
+ossib%e in the "78!0s are out o- the 1uestion in the +resent state o- ,a+ita%ism. Ho$
many times ha/e $or(ers been to%d 9don0t ro,( the boat: $e0%% $hee% and dea% in the
,orridors o- +o$er; to +ermit go/ernments to ,arry out their austerity +rogrammes.
5ith -u%% ,ontro% o- a se+arate &,ot%and state, the &N< $i%% ha/e additiona% +o$ers to
-or,e &,ots to 9tighten their be%ts in the interests o- the nation.;
Rosa 'u=emburg +resented the >ar=ist ,ase in regards to nationa%ism6
?A ?right o- nations? $hi,h is /a%id -or a%% ,ountries and a%% times is nothing more than
a meta+hysi,a% ,%i,h@ o- the ty+e o- ?rights o- man? and ?rights o- the ,iti4enA5hen $e
s+ea( o- the ?right o- nations to se%-2determination?, $e are using the ,on,e+t o- the
?nation?, as a homogeneous so,ia% and +o%iti,a% entityA In a ,%ass so,iety, ?the nation?
as a homogeneous so,io2+o%iti,a% entity does not e=ist. Rather, there e=ist $ithin ea,h
nation, ,%asses $ith antagonisti, interests and ?rights?.?
The -a,t that nationa%ism is a b%ind a%%ey does not sto+ +eo+%e going do$n it. The idea
o- the di/ision o- humanity into nations is et,hed into +eo+%e0s ,ons,iousness under
,a+ita%ism. I- one nationa% state -ai%s them, the easiest thing is to turn to the idea o-
,reating a di--erent nationa% state. Inde+enden,e seems to o--er a 1ui,( $ay -or +eo+%e
to brea( -rom the ho%d o- a Tory go/ernment and the e--e,ts o- Britain0s re,essions and
so su++ort -or nationa%ism has gro$n. Nationa%ist in-%uen,e is greatest $here
demora%isation among $or(ers is strongest. The +o%iti,a% -ie%d is %e-t to those $ho
+rea,h nationa%ism $hen the e,onomi, batt%e2ground is deserted. Ne/erthe%ess, the
+arties that estab%ished ne$ ,a+ita%ist states means ine/itab%y them turning against
their o$n $or(ers. 5hen the nationa%ist -ren4y -ades, the e,onomi, +rob%ems C and
$ith them the ,%ass strugg%e C sudden%y mo/e ba,( to the ,entre o- the stage.
The inde+enden,e then so,ia%ism ta,ti, is nothing but a dead2end. It doesn0t bring us
,%oser to so,ia%ism, on%y -arther a$ay -rom it. 5e0re not going to get any ,%oser to
so,ia%ism by bui%ding u+ the &N<, a +arty that re+resents the interests o- &,ottish
business. 5hether they %i(e it or not, the +eo+%e $ho ad/o,ate inde+enden,e -irst -a%%
right into ,%ass ,o%%aboration. The %e-t nationa%ists ha/e been gi/ing the &N<
,onditiona% and ta,ti,a% su++ort and in -a,t end u+ su++orting them as the; %esser e/i%;.
The %e-t2$ingers atta,(s against the &N< are on%y -or sho$. By re-using to subordinate
the nationa% strugg%e to the ,%ass strugg%e -or so,ia%ism, their o+tion he%+s (ee+
,a+ita%ism a%i/e. The ,%ass strugg%e here as e%se$here is bet$een em+%oyers and
em+%oyees. The nationa%ists say that the main enemy o- &,ottish $or(ers inside the
,ountry is the Dng%ish ru%ing ,%ass. A,,ording to this, &,ottish $or(ers ha/e %ess to -ear
-rom &,ot%and0s o$n ,a+ita%ists. But the truth o- the matter is that &,ottish ,a+ita%ists
ha/e been an integra% +art o- the British bourgeoisie e/er sin,e the "E!E Union. The
ru%ing ,%asses o- &,ot%and and 5a%es ha/e %ong been merged $ith that o- Dng%and and
the $or(ing2,%ass o- &,ot%and, 5a%es and Dng%and has %ong been one homogenous
$or(ing ,%ass. 3a+ita%ists $ho are &,ots, be they big or sma%%, are not any %ess a +art o-
the British e%ite than their Dng%ish ,ounter+arts. &e+aration is no ste++ing stone to
so,ia%ism. It ,an on%y ,hain $or(ers to the nationa% ,a+ita%ist ,%ass and ho%d ba,( the
strugg%e -or so,ia%ism. &o,ia%ism and nationa%ism in &,ot%and are mutua%%y e=,%usi/e.
One ,an on%y be +ro+agated at the dire,t e=+ense o- the other.
In a statement -rom "7"8 by some members o- the &DF<', the +o%iti,a% +arty o-
'u=emburg, they sho$ a remar(ab%e degree o- understanding on this issue6
?The so2,a%%ed right o- se%-2determination is a%so used $ith the +ro/iso that it $i%%
be,ome a rea%ity -or the -irst time under so,ia%ism and is thus an e=+ression o- our
stri/ing -or so,ia%ism. This +ro+osition is o+en to the -o%%o$ing obGe,tions. 5e (no$
that so,ia%ism $i%% do a$ay $ith a%% nationa% o++ression, be,ause it remo/es the ,%ass
interests that -urnish the dri/ing -or,e o- su,h o++ression. 5e a%so ha/e no reason to
assume that the nation, in so,ia%ist so,iety, $i%% -orm a +o%iti,o2e,onomi, unit. By a%%
indi,ations it $i%% ha/e the ,hara,ter o- a ,u%tura% and %inguisti, unit: -or the territoria%
di/ision o- the so,ia%ist ,u%tura% unit, inso-ar as this $i%% sur/i/e at a%%, ,an on%y -o%%o$
the needs o- +rodu,tion, and this di/ision $ou%d ha/e to be determined, not by
indi/idua% nations se+arate%y, -rom their o$n +o$er (as the ?right o- se%-2
determination? demands*, but through the Goint a,tion o- a%% interested ,iti4ens. The
,arrying o/er o- the -ormu%a o- ?right o- se%-2determination? into so,ia%ism arises -rom
a ,om+%ete misunderstanding o- the nature o- so,ia%ist so,iety.?
5e say s+oi% your /oting +a+er. Does this mean standing on the side%ines in this
re-erendumH Not at a%% C $e shou%d e=+ose the re-erendum as a nationa%ist nonsense
and ,a%%s -or de/e%o+ing so,ia%ist a$areness e/en moreI The s%ogan o- inde+enden,e
does not raise the so,ia%ist understanding o- the $or(ers in the s%ightest.
YD&; or 9NO; to inde+enden,e is bo=ing $or(ers into the +ro+osition o- 9Heads
(YD&* the bosses $in, Tai%s (NO* the $or(ers %ose.;
<osted by Tha/am