already in his nineties, the British historian in England has just published a collection of brilliant studies dedicated to the author of Capital. The English version will arrive in Argentina in June By Diego Hurtado
To THE NATION "In short, if a deep thinker left indelible mark on the twentieth century, that was it." Among the arguments, Hobsbawm points out that, seventy years after the death of Marx, "a third of humanity living under regimes in the hands of communist parties, which held representing their ideas and made their aspirations. "Today the figure is still 20%," while the ruling parties, with minor exceptions, have dramatically changed its policies. "
This decline should not deceive ourselves:" If we seek your name on Google, it remains as the greatest of the great intellectual presences, exceeded only by Darwin and Einstein, but well ahead of Adam Smith and Freud. "One reason may be that the end of official Marxism of the USSR released Marx in his public identification with Leninism in theory and Leninist regime in practice. "The second reason, deeper roots, is that" the capitalist world globalization that emerged in the nineties was incredibly similar to the world advanced by Marx in the Communist Manifesto. "
When in October 2008 has Hobsbawm, London's Financial Times published the article" Capitalism in convulsion "," could not be more doubt that [Marx] was back in the public arena. "Even as global capitalism" continue to suffer the most disruption and crisis since the early thirties, is unlikely to make his way out of it. "However, as Darwin numerous force in the history of evolution, or the many Einstein that populate the literature, Hobsbawm notes that "Marx XXI century will almost certainly be very different from Marx twentieth century. "
The strength of the story (or rather, of history) is its ability to transfer the sound and fury of this and investigate the past ocean mass in their shifts and changes its appearance. The effectiveness of the historian is played in the ability to build a toolbox of its own: a way of thinking, a balance between greed and empirical approach cut, expressive temperament . The aim is to invent or discover the guidelines that allow plausible interpretations of the past which, in turn, illuminate and enrich the present. Artesano virtuoso in this profession, their 94, Eric Hobsbawm shows in his sixteenth book, recently appeared in English (the English version will arrive in Argentina in June), which apodictic statements about the fate of Marxism after the fall of the Berlin Wall are as volatile as were the predictions (now absurd) about the end of the story. How to Change the World. Tales of Marx and Marxism (How to change the world. Stories about Marx and Marxism) is a collection of essays written between 1956 and 2009. Hobsbawm are proposed as an inquiry on "the development and impact posthumous Karl Marx's thinking (and inseparable Friedrich Engels)." This sober characterization should not confuse readers. By reading this book, as Terry Eagleton argues, "it's easy to fantasize that history itself is speaking here, through this wisdom sardonic, all-seeing and dispassionate."
The book is arranged in two sections. The first, at times arduous, focuses on a different sides of the polyhedron complex comprising the works of Marx and Engels, from the bonds of both pre-Marxist socialism or commissioning in the context of the situation of the working class in England from Engels to unfinished works known as the Grundrisse Marx. In the latter case, Hobsbawm is on the fragmented nature of the political writings of Marx, analyzes the meaning of terms as a "dictatorship of the proletariat" and seeks to displace the common place that emphasizes the break between Marx and the Utopian socialism to emphasize his debt to the thinkers of this trend. Dazzle
British historian's ability to address, for example, the amount of nuances that are evident from the translations of the capital and led to distortion of some ideas. Perhaps one of the most impressive contributions revolves around the most widely read text: the Communist Manifesto. For Hobsbawm, the rhetorical force of the German original inaugurates a new kind of statements, whose genealogy future should include, for example, the futuristic or surrealist manifesto. Also justifies why the Manifesto, despite the "almost biblical force" of his rhetoric, does not hold a particular position.
The second part, the more attractive because of its link with stress is crucial in the divergent readings of this play is dedicated to the history of Marxism after Marx's death in 1883. Marxism is understood as a political force that, although diversified multi-national spaces trails, intellectual movements, political and global economic fluctuations, "wasted no role in the modulation of context.
In the essay "In the era of anti-fascism, 1929-45", says: "The radicalization of intellectuals in the thirties had its roots in a response to the traumatic crisis of capitalism in the early years of this decade. "Thus," the threat of fascism was more than just politics. "Just as Marx intended to erase, "I would also with Voltaire and John Stuart Mill". The threat of irrationality associated with fascism, for Hobsbawm, made this period is the only natural scientists, in significant numbers, were attracted by the character "Enlightenment" of Marxism. Since the claim of reason, progress and social planning, scientists such as Joseph Needham, JBS Haldane and JD Bernal spent part considerable time to interpret science and history in Marxist key.
As a counterpoint, in "The influence of Marxism, 1945-83", Hobsbawm work the next occurrence of this current in the illuminated part of the stage, in the sixties and seventies, to embody a version of historical materialism dominated by the search synthesis between Marxism (or some of their ideas) and structuralism, psychoanalysis and existentialism. The cult of desire and spontaneity are not considered reliable allies to science, progress and planning. In the discussion about the rift between the young and the mature Marx, familiar in the concept of "epistemological break" of Louis Althusser, Hobsbawm points rooted in "the reluctance of the orthodox Soviet Marxism Frühschriften recognize [early writings] as belonging to the corpus of Marxism." Hobsbawm's empathy towards this period is limited. This explosion of Marxist theory probably holds the seeds of its own destruction.
The essays devoted to Gramsci and the reception of his thought are based on the recognition that for Hobsbawm is the most original thinker who produced the West since 1817. The fall of the Berlin Wall, the rise of neoliberal economics and postmodern relativism are all considered in the essay "Marxism in recession, 1983-2000."
In the final section, Hobsbawm risk a prediction. While Marxism was discredited and since 1980 the Socialists "were left without their traditional alternative to capitalism," can not ignore that, after the last crisis, "believers in the reductio ad absurdum of the market society between 1973 and assumed 2008 were also left without hope. " The absence of an alternative system may not take shape on the horizon, "but the possibility of a breakup, even a collapse of the existing system can not be ruled out."
In the maze of intentions, interests, opportunities and responses that the twentieth century was built around the dissemination and cultural interpretation and policy work of Marx, the last book of Hobsbawm appears as an Ariadne's thread can take us to the contemporary vitality of this work. The historian acts as the restorer working of a work marred by dust and erosion for nearly 130 years of struggle for the appropriation of its meaning. A massive light of his voice, the works of Marx not only recovered its shine, its contours, but also the difficult and urgent relief.
THE SAME, BUT DIFFERENT
"In short, if a deep thinker left indelible mark on the twentieth century, that was it." Among the arguments, Hobsbawm points out that, seventy years after the death Marx, "a third of humanity living under regimes in the hands of communist parties, which held that represented their ideas and pursuing their aspirations." Today the figure is still 20%, "while the ruling parties, with minor exceptions, have dramatically changed its policies."
This decline should not deceive ourselves: "If we look for his name in Google, it remains as the greatest of the great intellectual presences, exceeded only by Darwin and Einstein, but well ahead of Adam Smith and Freud." One reason may be that the end of official Marxism of the USSR liberated Marx from his public identification with Leninism in theory and with the regime Leninist practice. "The second reason, deeper roots, is that" the global capitalist world that emerged in the nineties was incredibly similar to the world advanced by Marx in the Communist Manifesto. "
When in October 2008 account Hobsbawm, London's Financial Times published the article "Capitalism in convulsion", "could not be more doubt that [Marx] was back in the public arena." Even as global capitalism "continue to suffer the most disruption and crisis since the early thirties, is unlikely to make his way out of it. "However, as the many Darwin force in the history of evolutionism, or multiple Einstein that populate the literature, Hobsbawm notes that "Marx XXI century will almost certainly be very different from Marx twentieth century." Eric Hobsbawm
English Eric Hobsbawm, one of the leading historians of recent decades, was born in Alexandria, Egypt in 1917. He grew up in Berlin and later studied in the United Kingdom. Jazz lover (whom he dedicated The Jazz Scene) is known worldwide for tetralogy comprising: The Age of Revolution, 1789-1848, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875, The Age of Empire, from 1875 to 1914 , and history of the twentieth century.
0 comments:
Post a Comment