Samir Amin

[GracchusBabeuf]

.

[blake 3:17]

I've been curious about him. I just read an essay of his in the Socialist Register, which I found quite compelling. Some of his political judgements I found quite challenging.

I tried to put an order on Eurocentrism from the library, but apparently it's unavailable for borrowing, needs to be read there.

Would you be able to share his basic argument or any parts of the book that stand out for you?

[blake 3:17]

Thanks! Great to get such an enthused and engaged response! Ideas do matter!


Specifically, he shows how the myth of the alleged Greek origins of Europe were actually an invention of the nineteenth century while it was inf fact the Islamic and Jewish scholars, including Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and Maimonedes who were truly responsible for the revival of the secularist/liberal traditions of Hellenism through their writings, the gist of which was later appropriated by Europeans like Aquinas. He goes on to show how the myth of the so-called progression from Ancient Greece to Rome to feudal Europe and this so-called ancestry of the "West" was a myth created during the Renaissance.


Cool. Does he examine these forms of early modernity? Does he take issue with the idea of modernity? Pro-Enlightenment but anti-Western? BTW, you get Maimonides in there, it's probably pretty interesting.


'Eurocentrism is a culturalist phenomenon in the sense that it assumes the existence of irreducibly distinct cultural invariants that shape the historical paths of different peoples. Eurocentrism is therefore anti-universalist, since it is not interested in seeking possible general laws of human evolution. But it does present itself as universalist, for it claims that imitation of the Western model by all peoples is the only solution to the challenges of our time."


Yeah, frigging white man's burden. Does Amin make distinctions between colonialism and imperialism?


A couple of friends have been pretty enthused about The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World.

[Barry Lyndon]

" Eurocentrism is a powerful factor in the opposite sense. Prejudice against against the Third World, very much in favor today, contributes to the general shift to the right. Certain elements of the socialist movement in the West reject this shift, of course. But they do so most often in order to take refuge in another, no less Eurocentric, discourse, the discourse of traditional trade unionism, according to which only the mature (read European) working classes can be the bearers of the socialist future. An impotent discourse, in contradiction with the most obvious teachings of history." He also adds: "No Great Wall separates the center from the periphery in the world system. Were not Mao, Che, and Fanon heroes of the progressive young people of the West at one time?" and emphasizes the importance of supporting revolutions in the Third World.

This is the core of my disagreements with groups like Platypus, but a lot of socialist groups Iv'e rubbed shoulders with in general, who are very quick to affirm the core importance of the Western proletariat over the working masses of the Third World. I do not think a lot of this is conscious racism so much as a mechanical acceptance of traditional Marxism but not realizing how depoliticized the working class has become in the industrialized capitalist world in the last century, or even in the last 40 years.