fully breaking them or violating
them in individual cases.
• The creation of “fortress
States”, the closing and armed
defence of the frontiers (for
instance, in the EU this means
“to bury Schengen”) in order
to prevent the entrance of “the
others”.
• The xenophobia and intole-
rance towards the workers
coming from other countries,
represented as “invaders” and
“enemies”; the discriminatory
practices against foreigners.
• The idea that the State territory
must give hospitality only to
one
nationality;
the
suppression of the rights of the
national and ethnic minorities.
• The construction of a national
history through the myth of
common
descent;
the
falsification, historical revisio-
nism, antiscientific and
reactionary ideas (“purity of
blood”, the rediscovery of the
“chosen” peoples, etc.).
• The defence of the traditional
religion (Christianity, Islam,
Hinduism, etc.) and its
conservative values, against
the penetration of other
religions.
The
relation
between
chauvinism, neoliberal policy
and the economic crisis
The present bourgeois
nationalism is not conceivable as
a simple “return to the past”. We
have to understand it in relation to
its class roots, the movement of the
classes and their struggle in the
present context.
The growing influence of
nationalism and chauvinism cannot
be explained by a late rediscovery
of the national identity (just as
modern racism is not based on
“biological prejudices”, but on
cultural elements); on the other
hand it must be explained by the
political
importance
that
nationalism acquires in a society
ravaged by decades of new free-
8
trade policies, by the destruction
caused by the recent world
capitalist crisis, by the hyper-
competition for markets and
spheres of influence, by the
increase in the contradictions
between the imperialist and
capitalist powers, by the mass
migrations
produced
by
imperialism.
The wave of nationalist and
chauvinist feelings that arises in
many countries is nourished by the
sense of rancour, powerlessness,
and the rejection of the policies
imposed by international financial
capital and its institutions (cuts to
social expenditures, assaults on
the rights of workers, privatisation,
bail-outs of banks, etc.), combined
with the fear of a further worsening
of the conditions of life and work.
This feeling is particularly
widespread among the western
middle-classes that are losing
many positions acquired in the
earlier historical period.
In conformity with this point of
view, the present warlike and
xenophobic nationalism is a reply
of some sectors of the dominant
class to the crisis of the free-trade-
policy model, for managing in a
chauvinist and reactionary manner
both the discontent and social
protest and the mass nationalist
and patriotic feelings, attributing the
present problems to external
factors (first to immigrants
“invaders”).
In Europe the bourgeois
nationalist forces have found a
fertile field owing to the austerity
and neoliberal politics, as well as
to the unbridled collaborationism of
the traditional social-democratic
forces.
Their growth happened after
and the exhaustion of the attempt
of the radicalized “left-wing” petty-
bourgeoisie to guide the social
protests (Podemos, Syriza, etc.).
These nationalist right-wing forces
with their populist and xenophobic
demagogy have exploited the anti-
globalization feelings and worries
of the working masses, taking up
the political space of the traditional
liberal and reformist parties, which,
in order to maintain big capital,
have eliminated the rights of the
workers, unemployed, young
people, pensioners and women,
and completely abandoned the
anti-fascist principles, spreading
reactionary and racist positions
among the masses.
With great benefit for
themselves, the liberal and
reformist parties have defined the
mass movements against the EU,
the TTIP, the austerity measures,
the war policy of NATO as
“nationalist” and “protectionist”. So
the reactionary and fascist forces
have the opportunity of presenting
themselves as “the true defenders
of the nation” against the
globalization.
In fact, the bourgeois
nationalist parties, while increasing
their prestige with slogans such as
“masters in one’s own home”, do
not give up the free-trade policy,
do not want the recovery by the
working class of the conquests lost
because of the action of the liberal-
democratic parties, and are even
incapable of lightening the
conditions of life of the great
masses. On the contrary, they are
ready
to
increase
the
authoritarianism, to destroy the
workers’ organisations and
sharpen the discriminations
against the poorest and the
immigrants.
The policy of these reactionary
forces, even if they say that they
will defend the victims of
globalization, is always devoted to
the defence of some section of the
imperialist bourgeoisie (especially
the sector of it tied to the military-
industrial complex) and centred on
the working of the capitalist market
and on the strengthening of the
State as the fundamental tool for
the support of the monopolies in
the international competition and
Class Struggle