Marxist-Leninism compromised with nationalism for alliance-building.

Evidence

Like formulations on other national liberation struggles one discovers in Comintern declarations, it was political opportunism searching for theoretical justifications. It thus represented the critical importance to the Soviet Party of forming alliances with movements that were emerging from theoretically “precapitalist” societies. Given historical necessity, Marxist-Leninism compromised itself theoretically with nationalism, and as such institutionalized the force that had brought the Second International to its submission. It might be said in the most simple-minded reading of the dialectic, that the Third International was a synthesis of the thesis (socialism) and anti-thesis (national chauvinism) of the Second. — Cedric J. Robinson, Black Marxism_ The Making of the Black…, 1066

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The thesis that Soviet strategic alliance needs forced Marxist theory to capitulate to nationalism — a mechanism explaining the Third International’s trajectory — is a genuinely dense structural argument.
• XREF: This is central to the reader’s arc question about the Black radical tradition’s rise and fall within the broader communist movement. — connects to: Radical theory shifted from socialist revolution to Third-Worldist nationalism as national bourgeoisies consolidated — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 272