Comintern, India and the colonial question, 1920-37

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: The fetish of ‘the West’ in postcolonial theory

The Eurocentric Marx and Engels and Other Related Myths

This book has its origins in a panel on “Marxism and Postcoloniality” organized by the editors for a “Rethinking Marxism” conference at Amherst several years ago. The large turnout for, and lively discussion during, that session – even as a blizzard swirled around the building housing the meeting rooms – convinced us that we should try to recapture the intellectual excitement of that day by continuing the conversation in print. Some of the contributors to this volume were participants in that conference; others were invited to add their thoughts later. All, however, share with the editors the convictions that Marxism and “postcolonial studies” have something to say to each other – and that there might be more productive ways of dealing with their differences than have been exhibited hitherto. There has, in fact, been little direct, serious dialogue between Marxists and postcolonial theorists. The neglect (even ignorance) of Marxism in postcolonial studies has often been countered by the reflexive dismissal of the entire field of postcolonial studies by Marxist writers.

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: Introduction: Marxism, modernity and postcolonial studies

England, it is true, in causing a social revolution in Hindostan, was actuated only by the vilest interests, and was stupid in her manner of enforcing them. But that is not the question. The question is, can mankind fulfill its destiny without a fundamental revolution in the social state of Asia? If not, whatever may have been the crimes of England she was the unconscious tool of history in bringing about that revolution. (Karl Marx, “The British Rule in India,” New York Daily Tribune, 25 June 1853 ) By and by there will ooze out… facts able to convince John Bull himself that what he considers a military mutiny is in truth a national revolt. (Karl Marx, “The Indian Question,” New York Daily Tribune, 14 August 1857) The 1857 Revolt in British India was unique in that it was a “convergence of various strands of resistance” on a vast and intense scale, involving mutinies of sepoys (soldiers), mass insurrections of peasants, revolts of princes in central India, and taluqdars (landholders) in newly annexed Avadh (called “Oude”) and spreading across northern India (Bose and Jalal 1998: 88). In May 1857, a group of soldiers, recently mutinied from the Bengal Army at Meerut, and the rebellious villagers who joined them, entered Delhi and placed an unwilling Bahadur Shah II, the nominal heir of the old Mughal Empire, on the throne.

Comintern, India and the colonial question, 1920-37

Citations

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: The fetish of ‘the West’ in postcolonial theory

The Eurocentric Marx and Engels and Other Related Myths

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: Introduction: Marxism, modernity and postcolonial studies

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: Karl Marx, Eurocentrism, and the 1857 Revolt in British India

Marxism, Modernity, and Postcolonial Studies: Postcolonial studies between the European wars: an intellectual history

Related Papers (5)

Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism

History and Class Consciousness

Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview

The Nawal El Saadawi Reader

Black Face, Maligned Race: The Representation of Blacks in English Drama from Shakespeare to Southerne