English Regionalism

There has for a long time been movements for greater autonomy in Cornwall. To a lesser extent similar movements have been established in Wessex and Mercia, these being joined more recently by ones in Northumbria and Dumnonia. The question is would socialism with syndicalist principles be attractive to movements fighting for greater autonomy? A pillar of the Phalanx is surely self determination, so is there room for this to support regionalist struggles?

To answer your first question, I would say that the overall appeal of revolutionary ideologies would be contingent upon the character of the particular movements striving for such autonomy. Historical precedent would suggest that a secessionist movement representing an oppressed or repressed national group would be somewhat more likely to gravitate towards a radical political/economic framework. (The case of certain populations within the United Kingdom opting to withdraw from that particular body could conceivably be the result of experiences with cultural repression, discrimination, or other phenomena that would conform to the aforementioned criterion.) However, I maintain very little confidence in the overall revolutionary potential of most contemporary 'national movements'. If national self-determination is going to manifest itself in a manner that is consistent with revolutionary socialist principles, it will likely be due to the political ascension of a movement that does not place its policies on the national question at the fore of its program.

[I should qualify this statement by noting that my opinions are predicated on the assumption that these 'regionalist' movements have some national dimension to them. If you're merely referring to movements that seek autonomy for political purposes, I would have to examine them on a case by case basis in order to to determine whether or not revolutionary socialism would maintain any appeal to them.]

With respect to your second question, I feel that we can only determine the value of regional secession in the context of the knowledge of the specific dynamics in question. Political secession, in and of itself, possesses no inherent value.

Personally I'd like to see England run as a regional confederacy,in a perfect world it would be based on the old Heptarchy,however that system no longer represents our current situation so perhaps it's better based on the current regions as I feel at least in the NE our economic and social issues a fairly similar to our neighbouring counties.

Beyond that I'd even want to see decision makeing delegated all the way down to town/city/village level and direct democracy for everybody as far as is physically possible.

Admin wrote: If national self-determination is going to manifest itself in a manner that is consistent with revolutionary socialist principles, it will likely be due to the political ascension of a movement that does not place its policies on the national question at the fore of its program.

[I should qualify this statement by noting that my opinions are predicated on the assumption that these 'regionalist' movements have some national dimension to them. If you're merely referring to movements that seek autonomy for political purposes, I would have to examine them on a case by case basis in order to to determine whether or not revolutionary socialism would maintain any appeal to them.]

With respect to your second question, I feel that we can only determine the value of regional secession in the context of the knowledge of the specific dynamics in question. Political secession, in and of itself, possesses no inherent value.

That is exactly how I feel about the matter! Basing a movement on self-determination is not a viable option since it is only a single-issue, despite its vast implications. The economic form that manifests in society is a much better focus for any movement since it effects the every day life of everyone and is a much stronger force that directs society. I agree with Historical Materialism so all that I just said should follow.