Within the Progressive framework: yes.

The concept of "Nationalism" is that each "nation" of people should have their own political organization that advocates for them on their own behalf. A "nation" of people is a racial/ethnic amalgamation of people who can only be represented by a government that represents their population in literal physical form.

Nationalism is antithetical to Imperialism, because (within this framework) an Empire is merely the extension of a single nation of people exerting it's coercive power over other nations. This is why Progressives supported Nationalist movements as a mechanism to break up empires.

Within Leftism, Ethnicity and Race are only definable based on whether or not you are trying to break up a group, or solidify a group. Whites have ethnic groups, and the white race is a fraudulent concept. However, blacks are a racial and ethnic group that can't be broken into sub-parts as it is part of a racial diaspora.

You'll notice that though people on the right may call themselves "American Nationalists", the Left only accept this as "racist" because Race Nationalism is a redundant term. They do not accept the concept of Civic Nationalism anymore. The US, being a capitalist empire, has no American nation in it. It is a white nationalist empire colonizing other nations/races.

The concept of National Socialism is to take that racial/national bloc of people and socialize them into a single political block. A "Volksgemeinschaft". Using an economic framework borrowing from Fascism, the race is also the political party, which is also the state, which is also the economy.

This is an inappropriate definition for nation; but it is the one that the Left operates off of. There is no difference between a Racial Marxist and a National Socialist. Everyone on the left would have immediately noticed that you can't be a "Race Marxist" when Marx is focused explicitly on class; and a Racialist wouldn't have made sense in most European languages, when "Nationalist" is much more clear about who you represent. Western Leftists used the term interchangeably.

The "Nation" that the Germans were Socializing was the "Aryan Folk".

The "Nation" that the Americans are Socializing is "Black Folk".

In fact, "Black Folk" as a term, originates in America as a result of WEB DuBois interaction with the German Volkish movement in Germany (the predecessor movement to the National Socialist movement), and his desire to do exactly the same thing in the United States. Germania is the same as Wakanda. Aryanism is the same as Yakub-ism

Within the Progressive framework: yes.

The concept of "Nationalism" is that each "nation" of people should have their own political organization that advocates for them on their own behalf. A "nation" of people is a racial/ethnic amalgamation of people who can only be represented by a government that represents their population in literal physical form.

Nationalism is antithetical to Imperialism, because (within this framework) an Empire is merely the extension of a single nation of people exerting it's coercive power over other nations. This is why Progressives supported Nationalist movements as a mechanism to break up empires.

Within Leftism, Ethnicity and Race are only definable based on whether or not you are trying to break up a group, or solidify a group. Whites have ethnic groups, and the white race is a fraudulent concept. However, blacks are a racial and ethnic group that can't be broken into sub-parts as it is part of a racial diaspora.

You'll notice that though people on the right may call themselves "American Nationalists", the Left only accept this as "racist" because Race Nationalism is a redundant term. They do not accept the concept of Civic Nationalism anymore. The US, being a capitalist empire, has no American nation in it. It is a white nationalist empire colonizing other nations/races.

The concept of National Socialism is to take that racial/national bloc of people and socialize them into a single political block. A "Volksgemeinschaft". Using an economic framework borrowing from Fascism, the race is also the political party, which is also the state, which is also the economy.

This is an inappropriate definition for nation; but it is the one that the Left operates off of. There is no difference between a Racial Marxist and a National Socialist. Everyone on the left would have immediately noticed that you can't be a "Race Marxist" when Marx is focused explicitly on class; and a Racialist wouldn't have made sense in most European languages, when "Nationalist" is much more clear about who you represent. Western Leftists used the term interchangeably.

The "Nation" that the Germans were Socializing was the "Aryan Folk".

The "Nation" that the Americans are Socializing is "Black Folk". In fact, "Black Folk" as a term, originates in America as a result of WEB DuBois interaction with the German Volkish movement in Germany (the predecessor movement to the National Socialist movement), and his desire to do exactly the same thing in the United States. Germania is the same as Wakanda. Aryanism is the same as Yakub-ism

Within the Progressive framework: yes.

The concept of "Nationalism" is that each "nation" of people should have their own political organization that advocates for them on their own behalf. A "nation" of people is a racial/ethnic amalgamation of people who can only be represented by a government that represents their population in literal physical form.

Nationalism is antithetical to Imperialism, because (within this framework) an Empire is merely the extension of a single nation of people exerting it's coercive power over other nations. This is why Progressives supported Nationalist movements as a mechanism to break up empires.

Within Leftism, Ethnicity and Race are only definable based on whether or not you are trying to break up a group, or solidify a group. Whites have ethnic groups, and the white race is a fraudulent concept. However, blacks are a racial and ethnic group that can't be broken into sub-parts as it is part of a racial diaspora.

You'll notice that though people on the right may call themselves "American Nationalists", the Left only accept this as "racist" because Race Nationalism is a redundant term. They do not accept the concept of Civic Nationalism anymore. The US, being a capitalist empire, has no American nation in it. It is a white nationalist empire colonizing other nations/races.

The concept of National Socialism is to take that racial/national bloc of people and socialize them into a single political block. A "Volksgemeinschaft". Using an economic framework borrowing from Fascism, the race is also the political party, which is also the state, which is also the economy.

This is an inappropriate definition for nation; but it is the one that the Left operates off of. There is no difference between a Racial Marxist and a National Socialist. Everyone on the left would have immediately noticed that you can't be a "Race Marxist" when Marx is focused explicitly on class; and a Racialist wouldn't have made sense in most European languages, when "Nationalist" is much more clear about who you represent. Western Leftists used the term interchangeably.