Histoire Lyonel Kaufmann

Archives pour 6 novembre 2011

The Age of Revolution

by

lareviewofbooks:

JON WIENER

on a lifelong Communist historian’s
reconsideration of the revolutionary project.
Die Passion Eines Menschen [One Man’s Passion] Frans Masereel 1921
Courtesy of Spencer Museum of Art
Eric Hobsbawm
How to Change the World: Reflections on Marx and Marxism
Yale University Press, September 2011. 480 pp.

He’s Back! cried the headline in The Times of London in fall 2008 as global stock markets crashed and banks failed. The “he,” of course, was Karl Marx, who had written 160 years earlier about the periodic “crises of capitalism.” President Sarkozy of France was photographed reading Marx’s Capital, as British Labor MP Tristram Hunt pointed out, and the German edition soon appeared on that country’s best-seller list. Even Pope Benedict XVI praised what he called Marx’s “great analytical skill.” This was the point at which Eric Hobsbawm set out to publish a new book about Marx with a putative call to action for a title: How to Change the World.

Hobsbawm, who lives and works in London at the ripe old age of 94, is probably the world’s best, and best-known, Marxist historian. His first book, Primitive Rebels, appeared in 1959, and his second, The Age of Revolution: 1789-1848, in 1962; both were widely read not only on the left but by generations of college students. The first provided an unforgettable account of “social bandits” in 19th- and 20th-century Italy and Spain, men the law regarded as criminals but who were seen as heroes in their peasant communities; the second conveyed the big picture of sweeping social transformation in Europe. He went on to write more than a dozen vivid and compelling studies of the politics and history of the capitalist world, making him one of the most recognizable Marxist icons today. Tom Stoppard’s 2006 play Rock ‘n’ Roll features a young Czech student at a British university arguing about Communist Party politics with his professor, an unrepentant party member who seems a lot like Hobsbawm.

(Full disclosure: Even though I grew up as part of the New Left that dismissed the CP as authoritarian, conservative, and out of touch, Hobsbawm himself has always been a hero of mine. I still remember him at dinner in my kitchen in 1981 after a conference at UC Irvine when the news came that Reagan had been shot. We gathered around the TV and Hobsbawm said matter-of-factly, “I hope it wasn’t a leftist.” Hobsbawm had returned to New York before we found out that John Hinckley’s motivation had not been fomenting revolution but impressing Jodie Foster.)

Read More

The New Deal : A Modern History | Michael Hiltzik

by

Tout d’abord laissez-moi affirmer ma ferme conviction que la seule chose que nous devons craindre est la crainte elle-même… une terreur sans nom, irraisonnée, injustifiée qui paralyse les efforts nécessaires pour la convertir et nous permettre d’avancer.

Discours d’inauguration de Franklin D. Roosevelt

Cb4fe The New Deal A Modern American History by Michael Hiltzik

1 million de kilomètres d’autoroutes, 8.000 parcs, le pont de Triborough : les conservateurs qui s’attaquent au New Deal ont-ils vraiment conscience de ce que le pays lui doit? La réponse est déjà dans la question posée par l’historien Michael Hiltzik lorsqu’il présente le New Deal dans un texte repris par Slate (« Ce que le New Deal a apporté aux Etats-Unis »).

Pour Hiltzik, une bonne partie de l’héritage de Franklin Roosevelt repose sur ces infrastructures nées du New Deal, mais

une autre partie, plus grande encore, est liée aux transformations qu’il opéra dans les structures sociales et économiques du pays.

Ensuite, «le New Deal a également concouru à instiller, dans l’esprit des Américains, la foi inébranlable dans la capacité du gouvernement à leur venir en aide en cas de crise. Pour le dire autrement, le New Deal a établi le concept de la sécurité économique par responsabilité collective.»

Enfin, «le New Deal a cessé de fait en 1939, alors que Roosevelt était contesté et que la menace de la guerre se précisait. A bien des égards, il demeure inachevé.»

Route newdeal

La construction d’une route en 1933 / Franklin D Roosevelt Library and Museum, via Wikimedia Commons

Cet inachèvement peut s’apprécier à la lumière de la situation économique actuelle et de l’extrait suivant tirés de The Modern Corporation and Private Property (1932) écrit parAdolf Berle et Gardiner Means :

When nearly seventy per cent of American industry is concentrated in the hands of six hundred corporations; when more than half of the population of the industrial east live or starve, depending on what this group does . . . the individual man or woman has, in cold statistics, less than no chance at all. The President’s stricture on “regimentation” . . . is merely ironic; there is regimentation in work, in savings, and even in unemployment and starvation. . . . What Mr. Hoover means by individualism is letting economic units do about what they please.

Le problème mis en avant par Berle et Means reste entier et s’est largement amplifié alors qu’aujourd’hui la santé économique d’un pays, voire mondiale, dépend de la santé financière d’un nombre limité d’instituts financiers.

Sur la Grande Dépression et le New Deal, nous avons déjà publié les articles suivants en lien avec leur enseignement: