The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

The Stealth of Nations


Article # : 18125 

Section : BOOK WORLD
Issue Date : 11 / 1990  2,205 Words
Author : Paul Gottfried
Paul Gottfried is a senior editor of the Modern Thought section of The World & I and author of The Search for Historical Meaning: Hegel and the Postwar American Right.

       NATIONS AND NATIONALISM SINCE 1780
       Eric. J. Hobsbawm
       Cambridge University Press, 1990
       191 + viii pp.
       
        In 1972 I met Eric Hobsbawm after giving a response to a paper on Marx and Marxism at the annual meeting of the American Historical Association. Though a longtime member of the English Communist Party even then, Hobsbawm kept his distance form the young Marxists who attended our session. Unlike the self-described New Leftists swarming about, he was impeccably dressed in a three-piece British tweed suit. Hobsbawm took special exception to those New Leftists, including the target of my criticism, who depicted Marx inaccurately as an antiracist, feminist, Zionism, or whatever else was then in fashion. He defended Marx exclusively as a "scientific" socialist, whose socialist views led to the kind of dictatorship of the proletariat established by Lenin in the Soviet Union. Hobsbawm welcomed the ridicule that I poured on statements about Marx's sensitivity to Jews, women, and blacks. He agreed with my assertion that prejudiced though Marx may have been, his dislikes were irrelevant to any consideration of his scholarly accomplishments. Marxism's claims as a "science of history " had to be shown on the basis of its predictive accuracy. Not by portraying Marx as a modern liberal.
       
        In conversation, Hobsbawm displayed the analytical hardness that I then associated with Eugene Genovese, Louis Althusser, and other Stalinist interpreters of Marx. I remember saying to him, only half in jest, "I'd be a Stalinist like you and Gene [Genovese] if I ever did become a leftist." At that time, I ... (1990 of 14255 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy