Thread—on European & American intellectual history with a special focus on the left & social science & their contradictory views on antisemirism & colonialism.

A note on sources, in general, but also the main ones used for this thread.

https://cdn.mises.org/6_2_5_0.pdf 

https://moscow.sci-hub.tw/5192/035a4bbaf797dcf47e8352373d9b86cf/green1985.pdf

So, one interesting dynamic that played out among European philosophers, political theorists. Founders of social science, left wing intellectuals is their contradictory views on a host of subjects involving colonialism, progress, antisemitism and so on.

The first question is on antisemitism, the Jewish Question, and so on. Here I focus on several groups—political theorists, philosophers, anarchists, Marxists, and founders of social science, mostly in Europe, but also US

In short,early Anarchists & German idealists tended to be antisemites,Left Hegelians,many Marxians, & the founders of most social sciences tended to oppose antisemitism, and in the Middle were various Marxians, later Anarchists & leftists, who held mixed or self hating positions

But the interesting part was that views on antisemitism, & nationalism/the national question often went in opposite directions.

The German Idealisrs & Conservatives, except Hegel, tended to be antisemitic, but also racist & pro-colonialism & pro-German Nationalism. Hegel, by contrast, supported Jewish emancipation upon condition of assimilation, but also supported Haiti & other uprisings.

Although Hegel supported these uprisings, he still saw Islam, the Middle Easy, ‘the Orient’ and so on as sites of archaism & despotism. Interestingly, as such, Marx, Engels, many of the later Marxists, and others inherited these views.

Thus, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Luxemburg, Trotsky, and so on, all held:
1. Weak antisemitic & or self hating views but
2. Supported emancipation & assimilation and
3. Saw colonialism, imperialism, & capitalism as progressive forces for overturning cultural archaism.

Albeit, Luxemburg, Trotsky & Lenin Also all saw them as fundamentally violent and awful, however, Marx & Engels opposed national liberation, including specifically in the Arab countries. Lenin supported NatLib, whereas Luxemburg did not. Trotsky varied.

Ironically, then, at the other end, while Fourier, Proudhon, Bakunin, etc, were antisemitic, they all supported national liberation & nationalist movements. Malatesta specifically supported Arab Natiobalist movements.

Goldman, Berkman, & later Anarchists had a position somewhere between Luxemburg, Lenin & Malatesta, altho they thought imperialism was less progressive & also didn’t like nationalism, but still liked NatLib movements

Outside of these groups, the founders of social sciences, and the Jewish intellectuals not tied to their specific secularist assimilationist project, all opposed colonialism & imperialism, celebrated multiculturalism, AND socialism, anti racism & emancipation.

The primary thesis of this thread is that the beliefs & arguments of various European philosophers, leftists, Marxians, Anarchists & social sciences are:
A. A product of their time
B. Often self contradictory &
C. Inconsistent with our modern expectations of what they believed

So, early nineteenth century Anarchists were antisemitic, but pro nationalist movements for emancipation, including specifically Arab Nationalism, and thoght imperialism, colonialism & so on were distinctly not progressive.

Marxians & others were pro-emancipation but also pro-emancipation, anti-nationalism, and thought imperialism, colonialism & capitalism were progressive forces, even if brutal.

The later Marxians & Anarchists, many of them Jewish held mixes of the above—for example, being pro emancipation & assimilation, but still organizing Jewish Proletarians, & thinking imperialism progressive, but much more brutal, & supported National Liberation but not nationalism

The founders of social sciences, and the Jewish left wing intellectuals not explicitly a part of the above, or who tried to synthesize Marxism & anarchism with other ideologies, tended to believe in a totally different position.

They either opposed imperialism & colonialism, & denied they were progressive, even if they supported them in other ways. Or they thought that a kind or organic, capital driven cultural imperialism detached from state power could be progressive.

They either opposed assimilation, supported multiculturalism and/or nationalism, or they supported nationalism as a way to create an organic working class, oppose imperialism. & then later, with revolution, thought assimilation would come naturally.

Finally, they opposed capitalism, and either supported non Marxian socialism, Marxism synthesized with other ideologies, especially those tied to the understand of land, territory, power & cultural ties, or synthesized anarchism in a similar way.

Since I figure this will be the most controversial section, I am going to link to the primary & secondary source material ahead of time. Both above & below these threads linked here are sources on all the texts

This is the beginning of one of the sets of relevant sources, however about half are irrelevant to this topic , so this is just the sourcing, I will link to the relevant parts below it https://twitter.com/yungneocon/status/1301329754222735360

Here’s where the relevant sources for Hess, Marx, Aflaq, Borochov, and others start, but scroll down bc there are quite a few. https://twitter.com/yungneocon/status/1301343498944352256

And this thread, both above & below it, links to primary & secondary sourcing on Marx, Engels, Hess, Proudhon, Bakunin, other leftists, Arab Nationalism, colonialism & so on. https://twitter.com/yungneocon/status/1285051999445307392

But now to add further irony, let’s look at Moses Hess—one of Marx’s main early influences and Ber Borochov,

Moses Hess advocates a kind of cosmopolitan nationalism, anti Assimilation for Jews, but also non Marxian socialism, and broad cooperation. In this, the thinker who later most resembles him is Michel Adlaq, the founder of Baathism !

Ber Borochov advocate using nationalism as a tool to fight European imperialism & to consolidate proletarians to eventually have a class revolution that would overthrow both nation & class. In this, the people he most later resembles are Maoist & communist national liberationists

These people saw themselves as *anti imperialists*, supported national liberation movements, including in the Arab world, & thought socialism or communism needed to be cognizant of land, ethnicity, tradition & religion.

Hegel, Marx, Engels, many of the later MLs, agreed with the classical secular liberals on Judaism, nationalism, religion, colonialism & imperialism, and with the German conservatives on the last 2.

Namely, they thought Jewish emancipation was good, but that Judaism was archaic & needed to be blended via assimilation. Conversely, they thought imperialism, colonialism & capitalism, including specifically in the Arab & Muslim worlds, were progressive forces.

While unquestioningly brutal,they thought it would override superstition, archaism, tradition, & so on, dissolve nationalities, create a proletariat & integrate these countries into the global world. Notably Marx later heavily revised, abandoned &/or softened many of these views

@threadreaderapp unroll