Nationalism for anti left theory

This political theory is similar to Post Zionism but applied to secular nationalisms in countries like the US and the UK 

In particular a type of ideology that is a refutation of Nationalist ideology, similar to dispoara Nationalism mentioned in the below bolded quoted text:

"Jewish people have wandered for thousands of years without nation or power ,until the creation of Israel (and even after it, though much less so than before) and are thus a refutation of Zionist and Nationalist idealogy (or even the concept of a country to being with) since their cohesion through their wanderings eliminate the whole nation-power concept from politics. 

They should be admired for keeping their identity and culture together through those thousands of years of wanderings. 

So Jewish dispora should be a model for a post nation world where nations are fluid and nomadic, more like the Jewish dispora Jews (mobile and fluid) and less like Israel Jews (Zionist/Nationalist) and static nation residents (ie US, Canada, Australia, China, UK, etc)

This political theory also entails the thoughts below:

I feel that Socialism is better than Nationalism without adjectives as Socialism is the heart of a post National world and creates better solidarity than Nationalism without adjectives and all forms of Right wing Nationalisms. However, every socialist movement had essential components of nationalism. This post by me expands on this 

However, I believe that the nation is defined as the totality of persons bound together through a common destiny into a community of character. To me, national identity is not necessarily obstructive toward class consciousness, existing as a useful praxis for the self determination of the worker. 

The issues with National identity (within a capitalist society) was not national identify itself but really the tendency of the lower classes to cling to traditions which tether them to the institutions of the old bureaucratic and capitalistic systems in addition to nationality being conceived of exclusive racial/ethnic and territorial means .

I feel that the notions of territorial principle can be substituted in situations where minority populations risked being subjugated by majorities. 

We can use Karl Renner's notion of the "personal principle" as a way of gathering the geographically divided people of the same nation. The personal principle can be used to organize nations not in territorial bodies but in a simple association of persons. (I already support national personal autonomy used in all types of societies)

This would radically disjoin a nation from its territory thus creating a non territorial associated nation. It is important to doing way with sub national territorial identities as undemocratic and allowing for the treatment of non majority populations within each nation that Karl Renner wrote about here. 

Basically, the nation should be conceived as an evolutionary process via open, plural and political construction

Nationality doesn’t exist, material conditions do exist however. Nationality is self-referentially cultural —- a person is part of a nation because the person perceives his/herself or is perceived to be part of that. 

Though material conditions are objective: one is proletarian or bourgeoisie no matter what someone believes him/herself to be. There are obvious prerequisites for being proletarian or bourgeoisie, whereas ethnicities or nationalities are not sufficiently clear and are not consistent. Being “working class” is not an identity, working class is a state of being. You can’t just choose that you are not working class.

National identities are "existent" in that they are believed in, yes, yet these identities emerge from and are molded by the subtle material forces at play: forces of capitalist production and reproduction. 

National identities are also always in flux in bourgeois/capitalist societies, and cosmopolitanism is born of the predominant nature of production every place on Earth. This is due to cosmopolitanism serving productive aims, and due to capitalism's motivation for growth and to expand out of necessity. This too is why attempting to fuse reactionary traditionalism with capitalism is doomed and will thus fail.

Nationality is an example of an imagined community, it is not an authentic relationship whereas class is. 

We obviously should show zero tolerance or ethnic discrimination, however it cannot create a sound basis for political action, since idpol not only obfuscates class along with inequality, but also reinforces capitalism, and ultimately leads to genocides. Idpol should thus be opposed.

The traditions of a community moreover are for the most part irrelevant. They are historically malleable, and continuingly exchanged and negotiated between communities throughout the ages. Greek religion robbed from the near East, Rome culture from Greece, Catholicism robbed from Rome, etc. Nothing is ongoing. What is meaningful is people, and how well people live. 

Healthy nationalism like I support (i.e the type that the NY Times editorial board would be cool with) won’t devolve into a more jingoistic or bigoted forms because such healthy nationalism is an antidote to right-wing grievance politics. “What this hyper-atomized approach to living has done is it’s denied people a sense of solidarity,” he said. “I think some people go and find it in their racial identity or ethnic identity, and I think that’s especially dangerous.”  JD Vance

The actually racial victimization, not superiority that leads people to be radicalized to become racist/white indentarian, neofascist and Racial superiority  

The foundation of racial identity is already drilled in by “anti-racist” idpol rhetoric, and then it’s a short path from “you whites are aggressors” to “do you feel like you’re on the offense? Actually us whites are the victims.” Racial superiority is the next step, which a person opens once they believe that they have been lied to about race in order to in their minds screw them over. 

Honestly it is not even necessary really, you can get plenty of out of racism/white indentarian of  the “no offense, but we want to be left alone.” line. of thought

To deter far-right recruitment, this first white victimhood step should be more focused. Because the inconvenient fact is, once idpol lets the genie of racial group interest out of the bottle, it becomes defensible and even somewhat easier to make a case for white self defense. 

Questions like “why is diversity only ever a virtue when it means less white men” ? are hard to deal with, once someone is already into the discussion about racial group interests.

If our society is actually interested in dissuading racism, if the Liberal 2.0ers especially the woke ones don’t want to lose populism to the right, 

Overkill racial idpol (like found in Liberalism 2.0) needs to be fixed/reimagined or better yet scrapped . Because an even more uncomfortable fact is that if society insists on pitting racial groups against one another, then it actually gives whites an excuse to pursue a group identity and advance their interests as such.

Common people have been left a limited amount outlets to advance their interests as wealth (and by extension power) has congregated at the top. 

They will not just magically accept zero priority. Overkill racial idpol gives various idpol groups outlets to at least feel like they are furthering their interests, and that seems to keep them placated, or at minimum diverted. 

From NAACP who made a hiccup: Gerald Griggs, President of the Georgia NAACP also issued a statement saying, “The Georgia NAACP joins the ADL in condemning all forms of hate and divisive language targeted at any minority group.   So according to these people it is ok to target hate at whites ? 

So thus I have a weakness to stomach (but still not support or condone) white grievance politics but only as long as those white grievance political points are healthy, PC, non ignorant, edifying , does not whine about ‘anti white hate speech’ like a little girl and is not dog whistling racism or bigotry . Otherwise I am against white grievance politics. 

Really, it would be better for everyone, including whites, if whites who feel that they are targets of supposed anti white ‘racism’, should turn the other cheek like the Christian bible says instead of whining about ‘hating whitey’

But if overkill racial idpol continues to dominate, and doesn’t offer any way to placate white commoners, without wokeness, so they don’t get triggered at overkill racial idpol and become radicalized to join the far right, then like all people they will seek ways of improving their lot.

“When I was saying, 'White people go to hell,' I never had trouble finding a publisher. But when I was saying, 'Black and white, unite and fight, destroy capitalism,' then you suddenly get to be unreasonable!"

Amiri Baraka