re: [Marxism] A brief summary of my view on Blacks as a nation

[Mike Friedman <mikedf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nationality is usually interpreted as pertaining to a particular piece of
land, and is tied to the idea of the bourgeois nation-state. But, it seems
to me that nationality and nationalism of oppressed people can also refer
to a nationhood denied by the oppressor and forged by the oppression.
African Americans do have an identity born out of oppression, I'm sure you
wouldn't deny this. That over time this has given rise to common traditions
and ethos, forms of struggle and institutions also seems non-controversial.
In this sense of nationhood, the piece of land is yet to be defined and is
defined in the course of struggle. And by the way, although some African
Americans may live "interspersed" with other ethnic groups, by and large,
entire communities, such as Harlem or Bedford-Stuyvesant are readily
definable as African American communities. And the state treats them like
occupied territories. But, if the term "Nation" seems too restrictive for
you in this case, at least recognize that the struggle against oppression
is by its nature a struggle for sovereignty and self-determination.

Mike
At 01:52 AM 11/7/2004, you wrote:
> The core of your thesis is really that, as you say, "I do not think that
> Blacks can exercise self-determination without sovereignty as a group."
> That's a valid argument. But sovereignity over what, exactly?
>
> That is the question. It is one thing to demand your own separate
> organisations and institutions as a group, but it is another leap from there
> to talking about a "nation". Normally, the concept of a "nation" is
> considered to apply to a group of people in a specific geographic territory,
> with, or aspiring to, its own governmental authority in that territory.


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism