Chapter 8

Chapter 8, What is Patriotism?
I need to explain what Patriotism is and what it is not. Patriotism is love, loyalty, devotion and sense of attachment to a Country recognizing it as his or her homeland. Patriotism is also the fellowship of citizens who share the same devotion to their Country. Patriotism is not national pride except in the case of National Patriots. Patriotism is not Nationalism yet it is not a mere attachment to Territory either.

I must start with some basics.
Country should not be confused with Territory. There are several factors that can identify Territory but the most basic concept of a Territory is an area of land under the jurisdiction of collective ownership. All the factors that constitute a Territory are the same as all the factors that constitute a Country. 

#1 A Country is a Sovereign land.
#2 A State is defined by a Government's estate of a Country.
#3 A Nation-state(this system is known as Nationalism) is when the State is fused with the Nation.

The earliest version of Statehood is Oligarchy. It is worth pointing out that not all Kingdoms can be called Monarchies. To make it even more difficult for the eager student, Country should not be confused with Territory. Unlike a Country, a Territory is without Sovereignty.  Sovereignty does not mean Lords and Serfs. Royalty does not mean Monarchy or Autocracy. Nobility does not mean Aristocracy. The assumption that allows for these notions to get confused with each other is called eurocentricity. 

It occurs to me that I have to go into a tangent just to deprogram you.

Let me start with the differences between the forms of Non-State Sovereignty.
#1 Monumental Sovereignty. A Sovereign Monument is a locational object which is considered sacred either symbolically and/or literally. The most ancient Sovereign Monument is not even Man made, I am of course referring to a Mountain. This concept can be expanded to a River or even a Fortress.
#2 A Constitutional Sovereignty. This is the most correct form of Sovereignty because it can be upheld by all Citizens of the Country without everyone having to visit the locational object.
#3 Royal Sovereignty. This is typically known as a Kingdom. There are no more Kingdoms because in a Kingdom the Kings and the Queens must answer to Scholars, Priests, Shamans and/or Court Clerics. In a Kingdom the Scholars, Priests, Shamans and/or Court Clerics can de-thrown a Royal Ruler handing Sovereignty to someone else.    
#4 Noble Sovereignty. This is a much lesser discussed version of Sovereignty common in Tribalism and Theocracy. This system of Sovereignty arises out of the merit of deeds. Nobility can only be passed by a Noble to his or her children by giving them hands on training in governance. A Kingdom can also be built on Noble Sovereignty. There is nothing stopping a King or Queen from being a Noble rather than a Royal.

Now I will get to the differences between the forms of State Sovereignty.
#1 Monarch Sovereignty. This is typically called Monarchy or Autocracy. This is when the King or Queen but usually King takes the Country as his entire estate of property thus owning the people on it as well. This requires Sovereign Social Overreach defining Government's estate of a Country into the landowning Statehood. Monarch Sovereignty is actually much newer than people think. Monarchy did not exist anywhere in history except in China, that is until Europe replicated this tyrannical system. European Monarchy and European Autocracy is where Capitalism first emerged as a economic system.
#2 Imperial Sovereignty. This is typically known as an Empire. This is a form of Oligarchy more than it it is a form of Monarchy. However Empire can be under Monarchic control or oligarchic control depending on what causes an Empire to form in the first place. This is when the King or Queen takes the role or maybe even title of Emperor or Empress. This expansionist position takes the Power of Statehood. Make no mistake an Empire is a State. Empire is the estate of regional hegemony.
#3 Oligarch Sovereignty. This is typically called Oligarchy. This is the earliest version of Statehood. Oligarchy is the rule of a few in power. Oligarchy in antiquity has made Royal families and Noble families dynastic, this is the foundation of Class Division. In the history of antiquity there have been other ways that Statism arose but this is the most common and repetitive in the history of antiquity. 
#4 Feudal Sovereignty. This is typically called Feudalism. Feudalism with the exceptions of Europe and China this system of Statehood was much less repressive than Oligarchy. Both in Europe and China this form of Statism is severely repressive. In the Asian Feudal States with the exception of China, Feudalism was not as tyrannical. As long as the poor classes of society did not oppose the Feudal lords and Feudal ladies. The Feudal lords and Feudal ladies did not typically repress their subjects. Contrary to popular belief Free Trade was common in these Feudal States. Theocratic welfare and even Theocratic Socialism on a local level was even possible within the Asian Feudal States. This however does not mean that Feudalism was desirable in Asia. This only means that Feudal life was more content in Asia than it was in Europe. The European Feudal States were under the indirect control of the Roman Catholic Church, the only local welfare came from the Church and there was never any Theocratic Socialism. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels threw away the historical facts in favor of a revisionist narrative, they made it seem like local equality was to be found in these places because they had repressive Communes that provided no equality on a local level in any way, shape or form. Feudal Commune living was very miserable and overbearing, every Married Couple could at least expect to loose one Child. The cost of getting Married was often not attainable in these Feudal Communes. Commune living does not always mean equality, this alone should be enough to become suspicious of the very word Communism but alas, it is more likely in their typical emotionalism and their typical Marxian Idealism that the Communists will cling on to the word Communism even more so. 
#5 Feudal Imperial Sovereignty. This is typically called Feudal Imperialism. This is when a Feudal State becomes an Empire. This happened in both Europe and Asia a lot, usually because of the desire for material possession. This was more terrifying in Europe than in Asia. Feudal Imperialism in Europe is what would give way to Monarchism.
#6 National-Tyrannical Sovereignty. This is typically called Nationalism. Nations sought independence from Monarchies by declaring their independence from the Monarchic States with Nationalism. Most of the Nations of the World did not benefit from Nationalism. Nationalism is when the Nation is fused with the State, this causes assimilation of marginalized Nations with in the Host Nation socially dominating the State, this is an ingenious form of State repression. 

The Tangent is over and I am happy to have deprogrammed you.

 

Patriotism

Patriotism does not contradict National-Cultural Autonomy. Patriotism is organic to those loyal to their Country. Nationalism is what corrupts Patriotism. Patriotism is the deepest loyalty a person can have when fighting off invasion. This is what makes British Nationalism such a mockery to proud Celts, there can be no Patriotism to being something as Colonial and as Nationalist as being White enough to say "I'm British" because it is pure assimilation. Patriotism is the People's political power of collectivist mutual aid. Patriotism is loyalty to the point of dissent against the Government in the name of the Civil Society. Patriotism requires feeding the Country, protecting the ecological environment, ensuring fairness to all who are part of the Country. Anyone calling themselves a Patriot must come to realize that the only economy that can set all Countries free is Socialism. Demarchists knowing that religiosity is a matter of orientation just as Homosexuality versus Heterosexuality is a matter of orientation need to make the appeal to the World. Socialism is not about trivializing faith, family and home. Socialism is about collective community power and stable economy. Patriotism and Socialism have no contradiction. 

National Patriotism 

National Patriotism is the Patriotism of National Countries. If we remove the notion of the State, we can from there safely say that there are Non-National Countries and that there are also National Countries. National Patriotism is in Cuba. Actually if I was to be truly honest with you. National Patriotism is a word that has a Non-Demarchist definition but that definition is not dialectical to the word's sake. Hence I will give no reference to the Non-Demarchist definition here. National Patriots tend to embrace Socialist economy. Fidel Castro is more of a National Patriot than a Communist. Che Guevara was a hardcore Communist. Che was so Communist that his Marxism contradicted Castro's National Patriotism. Che Guevara had no strategy other than fighting Revolution all by himself all over the World. Che Guevara was responsible for the Communist usage of the reactionary term "pan-americanism" even though he was not the one who coined this reactionary term. The Mexica Movement has correctly discredited the term "pan-americanism"yet several White Communists in their Neocolonial behavior keep objecting to decolonizing dialectics nevertheless. White Communists are just as bad as White Supremacists on these matters. In some instances White Communists are actually worse. White Communists have been actively sabotaging and belittling the Mexica Movement since 1992. Olin Tezcatlipoca has had only slanderous harassment from such Communists never any solidarity. Communists don't know how to show Solidarity to anyone except for other Communists and even then this is not so. Communists love to attack other Communists. Never again can the Communists be allowed to make Western historically revisionist claims. Communists hold a greater threat to National Patriotism than even Capitalists. At least the Capitalists can unite an entire population against them. Communists on the other hand don't know how to keep preserving National Patriotism even when they understand that it is essential. The theoretical foundations from the old Jewish Bund with Abraham Weizfeld's theoretical expansion and the work by Chris Hedges on Religion can be understood as being part of the basic theoretical soil of Demarchism. The Mexica Movement needs support. Along with the Jewish Bund, Weizfeld and Hedges, the Mexica Movement also has everything to do with the theoretical soil of Demarchism. National Patriotism is the Patriotism of National Countries which can be the greatest weapon against Colonialism if kept away from the Communist mindset which itself is also Colonial.

 

 

Cosmopolitanal Patriotism  

Cosmopolitanal Patriotism is when you are loyal to another Country for political, cultural or reasons of belonging to a diaspora. Having loyalty to a Country you do not live in can seem taboo yet I assure you that it is ethical too. I know Mexicans who are loyal to Mexico yet they are Citizens of the United States of America. This loyalty of theirs can be called Cosmopolitanal Patriotism as well as National Patriotism. I should mention that their loyalty to Mexico is only by default. What they really held loyalty to was the Liberation Movement of Aztlan. So the loyalty to Mexico expressed was limited. The loyalty to Aztlan by these disenfranchised Mexicans to Mexico was secondary to their loyalty to Aztlan. Cosmopolitanal Patriotism is always patriotism for a different Country, the exception to this is of course the Indigenous. Indigenous Cosmopolitanal Patriotism can be found in the Mexica Movement as well as many Navajos and Hopis in Arizona. Many of the Indigenous Mexicans rejecting the term Mestizo uphold a stance for Indigenous Cosmopolitanal Patriotism, this is the Mexica Movement which is far more advanced than any Communist organization. The very hip and informative Mexica Movement expresses a Indigenous Cosmopolitanal Patriotism for the new decolonized Cemanahuac. Cemanahuac would be all of the land called by Westerners the "americas" under the control of the Indigenous. Communists find this offensive because for them to ever admit that their Western views have never been nor will they ever be revolutionary is too much for their Hegelian dogmatic faith. Cosmopolitanal Patriotism is a near-perfect counter to Capitalist and Communist reaction. Whenever the Marxists show themselves as the cosplayers that they really are this tends to confuse the growing hungry-homeless youth in the United States. Out of this confusion they turn to Anarchism. After they have turned to Anarchism they destroy their records and stay off grid. I live off grid myself, but I have ways of securing my living arrangements. The same can not be said for these Anarchists. Demarchism is necessary because Anarchists offer no solution to the Communist insanity which is Marxism. There are Anarchists for Capitalism as well as Anarchists for Communism. Anarchists are worse than Communists. Anarchists can never even hold their own in an argument against a single Communist. This is not good, the Communists will lead us into assimilation and cultural genocidal politics if we do not oppose them. The growth of Anarchism is the fault of Marxists. The Soviet Union is gone, China has lost anything that can be called Socialist. Marxists live in the past and they lack appealing ways to bring people to Socialism. Communists have not proven that Communism works. They have only proven that Socialism works. Cosmopolitanal Patriotism is beyond the comprehension of all Communists.

Patriotic Nationalism 

Patriotic Nationalism is the tactic of Patriotic Nationalists. Patriotic Nationalism is also a transitional strategy to bring us closer to Socialism. Patriotic Nationalists are Demarchists with the aim of deconstructing Nationalism along with Capitalism. Within the First World it is Patriotic Nationalism that will separate Nationalism from Patriotism. If genuine Revolutionary Socialists are not willing to remove Marxism from the Socialist lexicon then the result will be a fully pure Anti-Socialist Globe. The result of which must never be allowed. Within the Third World the role of Patriotic Nationalism is different. Third Worlder Patriotic Nationalists highlight the best parts of Marxism then throw away the rest. The parts of Marxist theory that are kept within Patriotic Nationalism give Third World Patriotic Nationalism a sort of pseudo-New Democracy feel to it. Third Worlder Patriotic Nationalists are very popular in that place in the World we like to call the Middle East. The Terror-war carried out by the United States and its lackeys is shifting everything at a very rapid rate. In the devastated Country of Iraq the Patriotic Nationalists join in both Communist and Nationalist Parties attempting to teach Demarchism. I don't think that the Iraqi Patriotic Nationalists are going to win many people over. Communism and Nationalism both offer instant results and in a devastated Country that can be very appealing. It is actually the Islamic Republic of Iran where Patriotic Nationalism is most likely to be used. Qasem Soleimani is a friend of mine in Iran and what he teaches is Patriotic Nationalism. Iran is one of the only places where Socialism can come without violence. National-Cultural Autonomy is in the Islamic Republic of Iran. This means that the policies of Iran and the Government of Iran hold more capacity for Socialism than any of the Nationalist and Communist Parties in Iran. Qasem Soleimani is a hero. Marxists have no interest in a Modern Hero because such Heroes will never be Communists.