The concept of nationalism was dealt with differently by many communist theorists and leaders during the 20th century, ranging from toleration, attempts to destroy the concept and the incorporation of nationalism into the Communist ideology. Early Communist thinkers such as Marx, Engels and Rosenberg shared similar views on the issue of nationalism in that it would become an irrelevance within a fully formed socialist state. Furthermore, Vladimir Lenin implemented these views of the Marxist thinkers into the USSR and believed in the theory of international socialism, where the struggle of the proletariat did not require nationalist elements to succeed. During the leadership of Josef Stalin, the USSR changed its policy towards nationalism half
…show more content…
Marx believed that socialism was a political principle which did not require nationalist ideals for it to function, the socialist movement was international and that ‘the working class has no fatherland’. During the 19th century Marx observed examples of nationalist uprisings such as Irish revolts against British rule, he stated his opposition to dominant nations oppressing smaller nationalist groups; ‘The nationalism of the workers belonging to an oppressor nation binds them to their rulers and only does harm to themselves, while the nationalism of an oppressed nation can lead them to fight back against those rulers.’ Not only was nationalism an ideology for the smaller nations to use to revolt, but also a controlling mechanism by powerful nations. Both Marx and Friedrich Engels categorised the theory of nationalism as an ideology of the dominant class and used as a pretext for Capitalism. However unlike Marx, Engels particularly believed that nationalism could be used as a weapon to achieve emancipation from capitalist domination , but only if the working class exhibited their own theory of nationalism, the theory that their nation belonged to the proletariat. Marx believed that the emancipation of the proletariat could only be achieved through revolutionary means not democratic, yet a …show more content…
Mao was a Chinese nationalist, and his takeover was a process of a national liberation rather than a political revolution. During the 1940s Mao had used nationalism as the driving force of his revolution, attracting followers and attaining an anti-imperialist stance. Mao was not entirely motivated by political means, he did not come to power to build on the ideology of Communism, and he envisaged a militarily and economically powerful China to become a world power via the use of nationalist ideals ; ‘Mao’s concept of revolution reflected his generation’s emotional commitment to China’s national liberation as well as its longing for China to take a central position in world politics.’ Mao had managed to coerce the patriotic peasants in Northern China in to following him in his nationalist communist revolution. The signing of the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance in February 1950 seemed like an alliance of two shared ideologies, Mao however, did not ally with the USSR due to this reason. China consequentially allied with the USSR and had secured themselves strong economic links and national security, which was Mao’s aim rather than a Communist Union. The attempt to forge
Marx believed that socialism was a political principle which did not require nationalist ideals for it to function, the socialist movement was international and that ‘the working class has no fatherland’. During the 19th century Marx observed examples of nationalist uprisings such as Irish revolts against British rule, he stated his opposition to dominant nations oppressing smaller nationalist groups; ‘The nationalism of the workers belonging to an oppressor nation binds them to their rulers and only does harm to themselves, while the nationalism of an oppressed nation can lead them to fight back against those rulers.’ Not only was nationalism an ideology for the smaller nations to use to revolt, but also a controlling mechanism by powerful nations. Both Marx and Friedrich Engels categorised the theory of nationalism as an ideology of the dominant class and used as a pretext for Capitalism. However unlike Marx, Engels particularly believed that nationalism could be used as a weapon to achieve emancipation from capitalist domination , but only if the working class exhibited their own theory of nationalism, the theory that their nation belonged to the proletariat. Marx believed that the emancipation of the proletariat could only be achieved through revolutionary means not democratic, yet a …show more content…
Mao was a Chinese nationalist, and his takeover was a process of a national liberation rather than a political revolution. During the 1940s Mao had used nationalism as the driving force of his revolution, attracting followers and attaining an anti-imperialist stance. Mao was not entirely motivated by political means, he did not come to power to build on the ideology of Communism, and he envisaged a militarily and economically powerful China to become a world power via the use of nationalist ideals ; ‘Mao’s concept of revolution reflected his generation’s emotional commitment to China’s national liberation as well as its longing for China to take a central position in world politics.’ Mao had managed to coerce the patriotic peasants in Northern China in to following him in his nationalist communist revolution. The signing of the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance in February 1950 seemed like an alliance of two shared ideologies, Mao however, did not ally with the USSR due to this reason. China consequentially allied with the USSR and had secured themselves strong economic links and national security, which was Mao’s aim rather than a Communist Union. The attempt to forge