Social patriotism: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m added more citations needed |
||
| (20 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Ideology that combines patriotism and socialism}} |
|||
<!-- Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the discussion has been closed. --> |
|||
{{More citations needed|date=July 2024}} |
|||
{{Article for deletion/dated|page=Social patriotism|timestamp=20200103073656|year=2020|month=January|day=3|substed=yes|help=off}} |
|||
{{distinguish|Socialist patriotism}} |
|||
<!-- Once discussion is closed, please place on talk page: {{Old AfD multi|page=Social patriotism|date=3 January 2020|result='''keep'''}} --> |
|||
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point --> |
|||
{{unreferenced|date=December 2009}} |
|||
{{notability|date=June 2016}} |
|||
{{mergeto|social chauvinism|discuss=Talk:Social chauvinism#Merger proposal|date=March 2019}} |
|||
'''Social patriotism''' is an openly patriotic standpoint which combines [[patriotism]] with [[socialism]]. It was first identified at the outset of the [[First World War]] when a majority of [[Social Democracy|Social Democrats]] opted to support the war efforts of their respective governments and abandoned [[Proletarian internationalism|socialist internationalism and worker solidarity]]. |
'''Social patriotism''' is an openly patriotic standpoint which combines [[patriotism]] with [[socialism]]. It was first identified at the outset of the [[First World War]] when a majority of [[Social Democracy|Social Democrats]] opted to support the war efforts of their respective governments and abandoned [[Proletarian internationalism|socialist internationalism and worker solidarity]]. |
||
'''Social chauvinism''' can be described as aggressive or fanatical [[patriotism]], particularly during time of [[war]], in support of one's own nation (e.g., government, culture, etc.) versus other nation(s), displayed by those who are [[socialists]] or [[social democrats]]. During [[World War I]], most [[left-wing]] political parties took a social-chauvinist stand, with few exceptions. Most [[Socialists]] gave up their [[anti-militarism]] and their belief in international unity among the working class in favour of "defense of the [[fatherland]]", and turned to social-chauvinism, most notably the [[Social Democratic Party of Germany|German Social Democratic Party]] and the [[French Section of the Workers' International]].{{Citation needed|date=July 2024}} |
|||
A break with social patriotism was called, leading to the foundation of a [[Third International]].{{Citation needed|date=July 2024}} |
|||
==Effects on industrial action== |
|||
The consequence of the policy on labor relations within the combatant countries was something called {{lang|de|[[Burgfriedenspolitik]]}} in Germany, a term deriving from the medieval concept of "peace (especially between feuding families) within a besieged city". Other countries had their own terms, such as the [[Sacred Union]] in France and the {{lang|pt|União Sagrada}} in Portugal. By such means, [[strike action|strikes]] and other forms of [[industrial action]] were to end for the duration. From 1916 onward, however, illegal labor strikes in Germany began to increase in number due to eroding wages as well as food and energy shortages. In June 1916, for example, over 50,000 laborers in Berlin went on strike to protest the jailing of [[Karl Liebknecht]].<ref name=":0">{{cite book |last=Patmore |first=Greg |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B4nADAAAQBAJ&pg=PA76 |title=Worker Voice: Employee Representation in the Workplace in Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK and the US 1914-1939 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-78138-268-4 |pages=75–77 |access-date=26 January 2024}}</ref> In April 1917 the government responded with military force after workers in Berlin and [[Leipzig]] rioted over bread rationing. The [[German strike of January 1918|culmination of the strikes]] came in January 1918 when over a million workers walked off the job.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bailey |first1=Stephen |title=The Berlin Strike of January 1918 |journal=[[Central European History]] |date=1980 |volume=13 |issue=2 |pages=158–174 |issn=0008-9389 |jstor=4545893 |doi=10.1017/S0008938900009080 |s2cid=145384448}}</ref> After the First World War, compounded with the example of the [[Bolshevik]]s winning a revolution, a longing for the conditions which had transpired during the war was a major motivation for [[fascism]].{{Citation needed|date=January 2024}} |
|||
==Zimmerwald Conference, September 1915== |
==Zimmerwald Conference, September 1915== |
||
At the [[Zimmerwald Conference|International Socialist Conference]] at [[Zimmerwald]], the social patriots were identified as "the openly patriotic majority of the formerly Social-Democratic leaders" in [[Germany]]. In [[France]] and [[Austria]] the majority were also so identified, while in [[United Kingdom|Britain]] and [[Russia]] some, such as [[Henry Hyndman]], the [[Fabian Society|Fabians]], the Trade-Unionists, [[Georgi Plekhanov]], [[Ilya Rubanovich]] and the ''[[Nasha Zarya]]'' were mentioned.<ref name="ISC Zimmerwald">{{cite web |title=International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald |url=https://www.marxists.org/history/international/social-democracy/zimmerwald/draft-resolution.htm | |
At the [[Zimmerwald Conference|International Socialist Conference]] at [[Zimmerwald]], the social patriots were identified as "the openly patriotic majority of the formerly Social-Democratic leaders" in [[Germany]]. In [[France]] and [[Austria]] the majority were also so identified, while in [[United Kingdom|Britain]] and [[Russia]] some, such as [[Henry Hyndman]], the [[Fabian Society|Fabians]], the Trade-Unionists, [[Georgi Plekhanov]], [[Ilya Rubanovich]] and the ''[[Nasha Zarya]]'' were mentioned.<ref name="ISC Zimmerwald">{{cite web |title=International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald |url=https://www.marxists.org/history/international/social-democracy/zimmerwald/draft-resolution.htm |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]] |publisher=[[International Socialist Commission]] at Berne, Bulletin No. 2, p. 14, November 27, 1915 |access-date=3 January 2020}}</ref> Following the conference, the political journal ''[[Vorbote]]'' was established with [[Anton Pannekoek]] as editor. In the introduction to the first issue, Pannekoek called for an "uncompromising struggle" against social patriots as well as open imperialists, leading to the foundation of a [[Third International]] through breaking with social patriotism.<ref name="Gerber">{{cite book |last1=Gerber |first1=John P. |title=Anton Pannekoek and the Socialism of Workers' Self Emancipation, 1873-1960 |date=1989 |publisher=[[Springer Science+Business Media]] |isbn=978-0-7923-0274-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WSDK3lyJGbIC&q=Kienthal+Conference+social+patriotism&pg=PA112 |language=en}}</ref> |
||
==Kienthal Conference, September 1916== |
|||
{{main|Kienthal Conference}} |
|||
== Second Congress, 1920 == |
|||
Following the founding of the [[Communist International]] the [[Twenty-one Conditions|21 conditions]] adopted at the [[2nd World Congress of the Comintern|Second Congress]] (1920) stipulated: |
Following the founding of the [[Communist International]] the [[Twenty-one Conditions|21 conditions]] adopted at the [[2nd World Congress of the Comintern|Second Congress]] (1920) stipulated: |
||
:"6. Every party that wishes to belong to the Communist International is duty-bound to expose not only overt social patriotism but also the duplicity and hypocrisy of social pacifism; to explain systematically to the workers that without the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, no international courts of arbitration, no treaties of any kind curtailing arms production, no manner of “democratic” renovation of the League of Nations will be able to prevent new imperialist wars."<ref> |
:"6. Every party that wishes to belong to the Communist International is duty-bound to expose not only overt social patriotism but also the duplicity and hypocrisy of social pacifism; to explain systematically to the workers that without the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, no international courts of arbitration, no treaties of any kind curtailing arms production, no manner of “democratic” renovation of the [[League of Nations]] will be able to prevent new imperialist wars."<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/2nd-congress/ch07.htm |title=Minutes of Second Congress of the Communist International |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref> |
||
==Literary influence== |
|||
It is this concept which lies behind the first motto of the tripartite series of [[George Orwell]] in his novel which was published in 1949, titled [[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]: ''War is Peace''. His imaginary society keeps itself from labor-inspired protest by constantly being at war.{{Citation needed|date=March 2023}} |
|||
==Critics== |
|||
Two notable examples of [[Communists]] who fought against social-chauvinism in [[Germany]] during [[World War I]] were [[Rosa Luxemburg]] and [[Karl Liebknecht]].{{Citation needed|date=July 2024}} They advocated a [[proletarian internationalism]], believing that common social relations united workers across any national boundaries. They stressed that the only violence the [[proletariat]] should use is the violence necessary in a [[revolutionary socialism|socialist revolution]].{{Citation needed|date=July 2024}} A common slogan used against social-chauvinism is "[[No War but the Class War]]".{{Citation needed|date=July 2024}} |
|||
== See also == |
== See also == |
||
* [[Chauvinism]] |
|||
* [[Kienthal Conference]] |
|||
* [[Proletarian internationalism]] |
|||
* [[Revolutionary defeatism]] |
* [[Revolutionary defeatism]] |
||
* [[Social fascism]] |
* [[Social fascism]] |
||
| Line 28: | Line 44: | ||
[[Category:Social democracy]] |
[[Category:Social democracy]] |
||
[[Category:Types of socialism]] |
[[Category:Types of socialism]] |
||
{{Polisci-stub}} |
{{Polisci-stub}} |
||
Revision as of 19:40, 13 July 2024
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (July 2024) |
Social patriotism is an openly patriotic standpoint which combines patriotism with socialism. It was first identified at the outset of the First World War when a majority of Social Democrats opted to support the war efforts of their respective governments and abandoned socialist internationalism and worker solidarity.
Social chauvinism can be described as aggressive or fanatical patriotism, particularly during time of war, in support of one's own nation (e.g., government, culture, etc.) versus other nation(s), displayed by those who are socialists or social democrats. During World War I, most left-wing political parties took a social-chauvinist stand, with few exceptions. Most Socialists gave up their anti-militarism and their belief in international unity among the working class in favour of "defense of the fatherland", and turned to social-chauvinism, most notably the German Social Democratic Party and the French Section of the Workers' International.[citation needed]
A break with social patriotism was called, leading to the foundation of a Third International.[citation needed]
Effects on industrial action
The consequence of the policy on labor relations within the combatant countries was something called Burgfriedenspolitik in Germany, a term deriving from the medieval concept of "peace (especially between feuding families) within a besieged city". Other countries had their own terms, such as the Sacred Union in France and the União Sagrada in Portugal. By such means, strikes and other forms of industrial action were to end for the duration. From 1916 onward, however, illegal labor strikes in Germany began to increase in number due to eroding wages as well as food and energy shortages. In June 1916, for example, over 50,000 laborers in Berlin went on strike to protest the jailing of Karl Liebknecht.[1] In April 1917 the government responded with military force after workers in Berlin and Leipzig rioted over bread rationing. The culmination of the strikes came in January 1918 when over a million workers walked off the job.[2] After the First World War, compounded with the example of the Bolsheviks winning a revolution, a longing for the conditions which had transpired during the war was a major motivation for fascism.[citation needed]
Zimmerwald Conference, September 1915
At the International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald, the social patriots were identified as "the openly patriotic majority of the formerly Social-Democratic leaders" in Germany. In France and Austria the majority were also so identified, while in Britain and Russia some, such as Henry Hyndman, the Fabians, the Trade-Unionists, Georgi Plekhanov, Ilya Rubanovich and the Nasha Zarya were mentioned.[3] Following the conference, the political journal Vorbote was established with Anton Pannekoek as editor. In the introduction to the first issue, Pannekoek called for an "uncompromising struggle" against social patriots as well as open imperialists, leading to the foundation of a Third International through breaking with social patriotism.[4]
Kienthal Conference, September 1916
Second Congress, 1920
Following the founding of the Communist International the 21 conditions adopted at the Second Congress (1920) stipulated:
- "6. Every party that wishes to belong to the Communist International is duty-bound to expose not only overt social patriotism but also the duplicity and hypocrisy of social pacifism; to explain systematically to the workers that without the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, no international courts of arbitration, no treaties of any kind curtailing arms production, no manner of “democratic” renovation of the League of Nations will be able to prevent new imperialist wars."[5]
Literary influence
It is this concept which lies behind the first motto of the tripartite series of George Orwell in his novel which was published in 1949, titled Nineteen Eighty-Four: War is Peace. His imaginary society keeps itself from labor-inspired protest by constantly being at war.[citation needed]
Critics
Two notable examples of Communists who fought against social-chauvinism in Germany during World War I were Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht.[citation needed] They advocated a proletarian internationalism, believing that common social relations united workers across any national boundaries. They stressed that the only violence the proletariat should use is the violence necessary in a socialist revolution.[citation needed] A common slogan used against social-chauvinism is "No War but the Class War".[citation needed]
See also
- Chauvinism
- Kienthal Conference
- Proletarian internationalism
- Revolutionary defeatism
- Social fascism
- Socialist patriotism
- World revolution
- Yellow socialism
References
- ^ Patmore, Greg (2016). Worker Voice: Employee Representation in the Workplace in Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK and the US 1914-1939. Oxford University Press. pp. 75–77. ISBN 978-1-78138-268-4. Retrieved 26 January 2024.
- ^ Bailey, Stephen (1980). "The Berlin Strike of January 1918". Central European History. 13 (2): 158–174. doi:10.1017/S0008938900009080. ISSN 0008-9389. JSTOR 4545893. S2CID 145384448.
- ^ "International Socialist Conference at Zimmerwald". International Socialist Commission at Berne, Bulletin No. 2, p. 14, November 27, 1915. Retrieved 3 January 2020 – via Marxists Internet Archive.
- ^ Gerber, John P. (1989). Anton Pannekoek and the Socialism of Workers' Self Emancipation, 1873-1960. Springer Science+Business Media. ISBN 978-0-7923-0274-2.
- ^ "Minutes of Second Congress of the Communist International" – via Marxists Internet Archive.
 | This political science article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |