Eric
Hobsbawm, the great Marxist historian of the twentieth century, passed away
this week. I felt a great personal loss in his death, for he was my most favorite historian. And I feel very sad that he would no longer be there to
provide wealth of meaningful details and great insights into historical and
contemporary happenings and phenomena. While marshaling facts and arguments he
used to be ruthlessly objective and yet there was a larger humane framework in
which he conducted his profession of historiography. And this is perhaps a
reason why, although he was a Marxist historian he conducted his discourse
almost in the grand tradition of Liberalism.
Hobsbawm
was a central European Jew and was born in 1917, the year of the Bolshevik
Revolution. His father was British, his
mother Austrian and he was born in Egypt: a pedigree that perhaps qualified him
to become a true international historian with a global vision and a global
reach. He lost both his parents in his childhood and was brought up by his
uncle in Berlin, Vienna and London and ultimately he settled in UK. In those
days, especially in the inter-war years, the Jews in Central Europe had mainly
two options: they became communists or became Zionists. Hobsbawm joined communist
movement during his student days and remained a devout communist to the end.
And yet he was a communist and a Marxist thinker with a difference. He never
compromised on basic human values of freedom and liberalism. Whether it was his
observation that the Soviet communism was rooted in its ossified bureaucracy or
whether it was his direct criticism of the communist party when Soviet Union occupied Hungary in 1956, he always displayed a rare sense of independence and respect for basic
human values. Hobsbawm was a great scholar, a Cambridge Don and a member of Red
Brigade. He was not merely a great scholar; he was a great lover of music and wrote extensively on music.
His
greatest contribution was of course his four- volume World History, (from the
French Revolution of 1789 to the Collapse of Soviet Communism in 1989) with
titles, “The Age of Revolution”, “The Age of Capital”, “The Age of Imperialism”
and “The Age of Extremes”. He not only brought great scholarship to his writing
of history; he also had a great gift of
telling the story, almost as if readers are a witness to what is happening.
In 1994, Hobsbawm had finished writing his last volume of world
history, “The Age of Extremes”. Towards the end of the book he argued that, if
the Soviet Communism has collapsed, that should be no reason for the West to
celebrate. He further argued that the internal contradictions of capitalism had
sufficiently advanced to a point where there seemed to be something seriously wrong with the Western
Capitalism, which itself needed reforms. Subsequent events, especially the
crisis of the capitalism through which we are passing, only show that Hobsbawm
was essentially right. We are now debating how we may restructure the global
financial system.
Hobsbawm
also wrote prolifically on Nationalism, Globalization and Economic
History. A remarkable book that he wrote
(a collection of his essays) in 2011 was “How to Change the World: The Tales of
Marx and Marxism”. He argues in the book that although world over Marxism has
ceased to be a political ideology, Marx’s writing is still, in its sociological
and economic insights, very relevant to our times where lot of correction is
needed to the style and functioning of capitalism. He further says that Marx and
Marxism need to be presented somewhat differently and more comprehensively, for
essentially at the heart of Marxism is great concern for man. Although, I have
never been a Marxist I always found Hobsbawm most stimulating and original.
Hobsbawm was respected both on the left and right and his passing away has truly created a great void in the otherwise
weakening tradition of historiography.
No comments:
Post a Comment