Wei dingguang
abstract:
65438+The new development of globalization and industrialization in Europe and North America in 1960s and 1970s promoted the emergence of the first international. At the same time, in this context, the rise of modern nation and nationalism has become an important reason for the disintegration of the First International. The universal establishment and consolidation of "modern country" further weakened the strength of the first international and internal alliance, and made the national position and national position become the basic propositions of workers' organizations in various countries. Since then, the international proletarian movement has been adversely affected by the "narrow national view".
Keywords: First International Modern Nationalism
1The establishment of International Working Men’s Association in September, 864 (also known as the First International or "International" for short) was an important event in the history of the international capitalist movement. Marx once placed high political expectations on it, trying to make it "the center of contact and cooperation between workers' groups in various countries pursuing the goal of protecting, developing and completely liberating the working class". Marx devoted all his energy to protecting and promoting international growth, especially his struggle with various internal thoughts and factions, which took him nearly 10 years. However, painstaking maintenance will inevitably lead to dissolution. Why didn't Marx's political goal of painstaking efforts for the international community come true? As for the reasons of international dissolution, the popular explanation in China mainly comes down to the repression and encirclement and suppression of reactionary governments in various countries after the failure of the Paris Commune. Internal struggles between different ideological trends and factions and the resulting divisions; Then there is the new development of the so-called European and American workers' movement. Re-studying history, the author finds that the vigorous development of European nationalism and the general establishment and consolidation of nation-states under the conditions of globalization in the 1960s and 1970s from 19 may be the fundamental reasons for international disintegration.
( 1)
The establishment of international community is the inevitable result of the industrialization and globalization of European countries in the middle of19th century. Industrialization has greatly changed the class structure of European countries. In 1960s, the number of industrial workers in Europe reached 8.74 million, while the number of handicraft workers was 1. 1.23 million. Due to the improvement of the mass production level of machinery and the training of factory system, the working class in major industrial countries is more organized, conscious and combative than before the 1950s. Therefore, since the construction workers' strike in London in July 1859, the workers' movement has flourished in major European countries and influenced the rotation of European politics in various ways. Driven by globalization, the transnational movement of personnel and the intensification of competition between countries have also made workers' organizations that have initially realized domestic trade unions realize the necessity of further strengthening international trade unions. For example, when British workers go on strike, capitalists often hire workers from other European countries to break the strike. Therefore, as one of the international sponsors, British trade unions need the unity of workers from all countries to maintain the strike results.
However, industrialization and globalization have not only brought about the development of the workers' movement, but also brought about the prosperity of the national movement. In fact, the sixties and seventies of 19 were a period of rapid national growth and popular nationalism in the modern sense of Europe. Therefore, what we have neglected in our long-term research is that the international reality has been facing severe challenges since its birth.
Modern ethnology regards ethnic group and nation as two concepts with both connections and differences. The "ethnic group" once understood as a nation mainly refers to the human group formed by differences in religious beliefs, languages and customs; The concept of "nation" embodies the combination of subjective attitude and objective political will environment, which has strong subjective consciousness and distinct regional characteristics. The whole history of modern human civilization is closely related to the formation, evolution and influence of "nation". Eric? Hobsbawm once said: If we don't know the concept of "nation" and the vocabulary derived from it, we can't explain the history of mankind in the last two centuries. In ancient Europe, the so-called "Britain" and "France" were mainly geographical concepts, but did not have the nature of political entities. From16th century to18th century, the expansion of trade, commerce and market relations, the reform of technology, especially military technology, various political thoughts, the restoration of classical political thoughts, the Renaissance and other factors contributed to the situation of group disputes. Napoleon's conquest and anti-conquest in various parts of Europe greatly stimulated and triggered a wave of nationalism. For industrialized countries in western Europe, global colonial expansion is carried out under the national flag, and the need of competition constantly strengthens the dependence of the economy on the nation-state, and has been experiencing the expansion of national advantages in the process of conquering the world. For backward countries, the process of resisting foreign aggression or colonization is bound to be a period when national consciousness and "motherland" consciousness are fully formed and unprecedentedly high. Lenin pointed out in 19 13 "Criticism on Ethnic Issues": "There are two historical trends in developing capitalism on ethnic issues. One of them is the awakening of national life and movement, opposing all ethnic oppression and establishing a nation-state. The development and increasing frequency of various exchanges among ethnic groups and the elimination of ethnic barriers have formed international unity in capital, general economic life, politics and science. Both are second. " The two trends summarized by Lenin happened to coexist in the late19th century. Thus, on the one hand, the birth of the international community, on the other hand, the prosperity of the nation and the great development of nationalism. At this time, racial issues are no longer confined to industrialized countries. Mazzini, who once led Italy's national independence, believed that there were only 1 1 "real nations" in Europe in 1850. However, after the 1970s from 65438 to 2009, nationalist movements may even appear in unexpected remote corners. Moreover, the biggest feature of the national movement in this period was the equality between the nation and the country, the division of "ethnic groups" and the establishment of a nation-state became an increasingly common phenomenon. As a result, the "British", "French" and "German", which were originally mainly geographical concepts, have rich political connotations.
Compared with political thoughts such as socialism and liberalism, nationalism is more likely to affect the thoughts and feelings of ordinary people and will be revealed and expressed in international exchanges and exchanges. The idea of realizing the great unity of the world working class came into being in the late18th century, for example, in Thomas? Paine's works and the British Communication Association's manifesto have all expounded that the utopian socialist Gragu? Francois Noe l Babeyf also discussed this issue. /kloc-in the first half of the 0/9th century, there appeared three international organizations that reflected workers' desire for unity: the Rightist Alliance, the Brotherhood of Democrats and the International Association. However, these organizations have not had much impact, and they are all "short-lived". The fundamental reason lies in the contradiction between the workers' tendency of social union and the activities of political exiles, most of whom are nationalists. Workers' demands for unity within international organizations coexist with nationalism, which is essentially consistent with the two historical trends of globalization revealed by Lenin. In the first international period, under the background of the general establishment of a nation-state driven by nationalism, on the one hand, it combined the behavior of individuals or small groups in the past and developed into organizational participation focusing on the whole country; On the other hand, nationalism is accompanied by more nationalist characteristics. The reason why the international organization was established was that the workers' organizations of Britain, France and Germany supported Poland to launch a national uprising against Russia. However, in the process of international existence, ethnic issues often become the focus of debate among different factions. It can be considered that the so-called dispute between Marxist and non-Marxist ideological factions that we summarized in the past is actually an inevitable national or nationalist issue. For example, the British Trade Union Confederation, as a major international member group, obviously disagrees with the views of the International General Committee represented by Marx on the Irish issue. Marx believes that the international task "is to put the conflict between Britain and Ireland in the first place everywhere and openly stand on Ireland's side everywhere". However, due to the need to safeguard national interests, FTU has shown a narrow nationalist stance everywhere, which eventually led to a complete break between the International Federation and the British FTU. Another example is how to treat Poland, which is one of the important differences of opinion with proudhon. The General Committee headed by Marx advocated Poland's independence, because from an international perspective, "national independence is the basis of all international cooperation"; Poles "can only become an international nation if they truly become a nation-state." However, because Germany belongs to the nation occupying Poland, the Proudonists stand on the position of "Germans" and clearly oppose the Polish people's struggle for national independence and the international support for the Polish national liberation movement. In addition, in the middle and late period, workers' organizations in Mediterranean countries, represented by Italy, appeared internationally, opposing the "anti-dictatorship" attitude of a few people controlling the world. Because "this attitude has been combined with the swelling nationalism in the same industry", it has led to division and resistance to Marx's views. Of course, the cause of international division is not entirely nationality and nationalism, but in any case, it is a fundamental factor that cannot be ignored.
(2)
The reason why ethnic issues eventually evolved into an important factor of international disintegration is closely related to the achievements of "founding the country" in Europe during this period.
The establishment and development of a modern country is essentially consistent with the process of capitalist industrialization. Marx described in the Manifesto of the Productive Party: "The bourgeoisie is increasingly eliminating the dispersed state of means of production, property and population. It makes the population dense, the means of production concentrated and the property concentrated in the hands of a few people. The inevitable result of this is political concentration. All independent, almost allied regions with different interests, different laws, different governments and different tariffs have now been combined into a unified government, unified laws, unified national class interests, unified tariffs and a unified nation. " Since 1688, the British bourgeois revolution ended in compromise with the feudal dynasty, the door to the drastic change from an authoritarian country to a modern nation-state in European history was mainly opened by the French Revolution. From the beginning of 19 century to the 1960s and 1970s, major industrial countries were in the process of political transformation to modern countries. For example, in France, there is a fierce struggle between parliament and feudal autocratic forces, restored and restored monarchs, bourgeois factions and bourgeois conservatives ... In the later period of Bonaparte's Second Empire, French politics began to stabilize, and at the same time, it really became a nation-state in the modern sense. Different from the earlier national unification of Britain and France, the German nation experienced the pain of division from the late Middle Ages to the early modern times. Until 187 1, Germany, which had been divided for a long time, finally became a modern nation-state with the same language, social psychology and economic interests. For the sake of national independence and national unity, the Italian people have long launched the "national rejuvenation movement", but it was not until 187 1 that it really appeared on the European political stage as a modern nation-state for the first time. After gaining national independence, the United States faced the opposition between northern industrial capitalism and slavery in south china agriculture. After the civil war, it became a powerful homogeneous nation-state. Therefore, in the 1960s and 1970s, the major countries in Western Europe and North America basically completed the fundamental transformation from ancient countries to modern countries on the basis of unification, and the modern nation-state became the core of the emerging international order.
The "modernity" of a modern country is highlighted as "the political machine is obviously different from the ruler and the ruled, enjoys the highest management power in a designated area, is supported by a violent monopolist, and enjoys legitimacy because of the minimum support and loyalty of citizens to the country." This explanation, like many definitions in political analysis, may be different, but the same meaning lies in the determination of the legitimacy of rule. The rule of ancient countries belongs to the nature of "divine right of monarchy", but after the rise of modern liberal political thoughts, "sacred rights" are increasingly challenged and eroded, and national identity and loyalty within fixed territories and ethnic groups have become the goal that rulers have to strive for. Some people think that in modern western Europe, national identity and loyalty were mainly obtained through three ways: in the political field-expanding universal suffrage and military service; Ideological and cultural field-compulsory education and the cultivation of nationalist thoughts and feelings: economic field-tax system and social welfare policy. After the second industrial revolution, national unity and national unity were realized, and the bourgeoisie in all major western European countries needed these means to consolidate their political rule. Take the expansion of democratic rights in Britain, France and Germany as an example;
-Although Britain established a political framework with democratic connotation through the "glorious revolution" of 1688, due to the lack of effective forms, the "state" actually degenerated into a tool of oligarchy. 183 1 year, there are only 350,000 voters (2.6%) in Britain130,000 population. However, after the reform of 1867, the property requirements for voters were basically abolished, and most urban working classes began to have the right to vote; Soon, 60% of the country's male citizens won the right to vote.
From 65438 to 0789 in France, citizens' right to vote was repeated several times. 1793 the constitution recognizes the right of men to universal suffrage and stipulates that members of parliament are directly elected; The Louis Stanislas Xavier Charter emphasizes that only those who pay more than 300 francs in direct taxes have the right to vote, so only110 of the 30 million French people have the right to vote; During the Second Empire, freedom regressed and universal suffrage became the decoration of the empire. However, during the "free empire" period from 65438 to 0860, workers obtained the right to strike in May from 65438 to 0864. 1870 in may, Charles Louis Napolé on Bonaparte successfully won the "second reconstruction of the empire" by referendum.
-After the reunification of Germany, the Imperial Constitution of 187 1 also stipulated the principle of democratic election, emphasizing only that men under the age of 25, men, women and soldiers over the age of 25 who receive poverty relief funds have no right to vote.
Extending the right to vote to the working class and the majority of the society gives the bourgeois state power modern political legitimacy. We can accuse it of "hypocrisy" and maintain its class ruling nature. However, when a political power is mainly elected by the society, any class will try to seize the political power again. Unless the ruler is extremely reactionary or corrupt, he will be accused of "breaking the law". What's more, in the major bourgeois countries in Western Europe and North America, driven by social reform measures, the working class not only began to gain political rights, but also gained economic benefits from the "state". For example, in Britain, in 1870, the government promulgated the education law, requiring children aged 5- 13 to receive compulsory education; 1875 promulgated the Law on Business Owners and Workers to safeguard workers' employment rights; At the same time, the British Parliament passed the Public Health Act, which determined that the municipal authorities were responsible for local health management. With the increasingly consolidation of bourgeois political rule, the practice of workers fighting for their rights and interests through strikes is gradually allowed by law. All this, coupled with the establishment of the status and role of the country in economic life, can not but make people have a more concrete and personal feeling and understanding of the "motherland." When the relationship between the state and society becomes more harmonious because of the expansion of national identity and loyalty, it becomes more and more important to have a country of your own. When the nation-state invades people's social life more deeply and nationalism plays a wider role in international exchanges, in many cases, nationality cannot but overwhelm class and have an impact on political activities. Marx put forward the proposition that "workers have no motherland" in the Manifesto of the Productive Party. However, with the universal establishment and consolidation of modern countries in the late19th century, the concept of "motherland" became more and more popular and became an obstacle to the international workers' union. 1869, the German Social Democratic Labor Party was founded, which is the first proletarian party in the nation-state in the world. 1875 merged with La Salle School and was renamed "German Socialist Workers' Party" (1890 was later renamed "German Social Democratic Party"). In the "Gotha Program" adopted at the merger meeting of the two factions 1875, the German Party clearly defined itself as "first to carry out activities within the modern nation-state" and regarded "international brotherly unity of all ethnic groups" as a secondary or later matter. Marx pointed out that the "Program" infiltrated Lassall's "narrowest national viewpoint". Marx criticized that as a proletarian party, it cannot ignore its "international responsibility" because the "modern nation-state" itself belongs to the scope of the world market economically and the scope of the national system politically. Regrettably, however, the Program "says nothing about the international responsibility of the German working class!" "In fact, the internationalism of this scheme is immeasurably worse than that of free traders. "If we think in the above background, we are not surprised by the national and ethnic position of the German Social Democratic Party.
(3)
Looking back at history, we can't rule out Marx's idea of building the world into a worldwide production party organization. Engels once pointed out: among all the delegates attending the international founding conference, "only one person clearly knows what is happening and what should be established;" As early as 1848, he issued' proletarians of the world, unite!' The caller. At the beginning of the international establishment, Marx believed that the development of workers' movements in European countries had reached the moment when it was possible to achieve the political goal of proletarian unity all over the world, so the purpose of establishing international organizations was to "replace those socialist or semi-socialist sects with real fighting organizations of the working class." However, under the background of the universal establishment of modern nation and nation-state, in fact, it can only be the establishment and development of socialist political parties in various countries. 1875, that is, the year when the international dissolution was announced. On the one hand, Marx acknowledged that International Working Men’s Association was the "first person who tried to establish a central organ" in the international solidarity of the proletariat; At the same time, it also pointed out that "this attempt … after the failure of the Paris Commune, it can no longer continue in its original historical form". What is the root cause? Marx didn't give a clear explanation, or things were not so clear at that time, or he didn't want to admit it. But today, it mainly lies in the universal establishment and consolidation of nation-states. /kloc-In the late 20th century, not only the major industrialized capitalist countries in Western Europe and North America were nationalized, but also the industrially underdeveloped countries (such as Eastern Europe and Northern Europe) and industrialized countries began the process of establishing modern nation-states. In the modern state, whether it is the competition between developed capitalist countries or the confrontation between developed and underdeveloped countries, it will form a serious obstacle to the international unity of the proletariat, and the international capitalist movement will continue to be adversely affected by the "narrowest national viewpoint". However, because the problem has just begun to appear, perhaps because of the subjective emphasis on the international solidarity of the proletariat, as hobsbawm pointed out, Marx believes that the problem of the nation and its nation-state is "secondary" to the socialists.
Of course, we can't be too hard on Marx, because the understanding and research of practical problems often lag behind the development of facts. Ethnic issues have long occupied an important position in European politics and world politics in the19th century, but the attention and in-depth study of the whole international academic community was in the 20th century. 1907, Austrian social democratic theorist Otto? Powell once pointed out: "Science leaves almost all racial issues to lyric poets, essayists and speakers at the national assembly, parliament and beer table." However, in any case, the secondary things in Marx's thought later became the core of the second international debate. Because it poses a fundamental challenge or even conflict to the basic theory of socialism and its movement requirements, it is a social Democrat in the Second International, such as Kaucki and Rosa? Luxembourg, Otto? Powell and later Lenin. Engels later concluded that International Working Men’s Association "belongs to the Second Reich" and this "old form is out of date". Engels' summary is related to his understanding of modern countries, but this idea has not attracted the full attention of future generations for a long time. If we think about many setbacks and lessons in the international capitalist movement in the 20th century, especially the mistakes of the Third International, we will have a more accurate grasp of the nature and consequences of the problem. Lenin later commented on the First International in 19 19: "It laid the foundation of workers' international organization and prepared for workers' revolutionary attack on capital"; It laid the foundation for the international proletarian struggle for socialism. "
Summarizing the history of the international capitalist movement in the 20th century, Lenin's evaluation is obviously too "high", because at least after the international stage, there has not really been a large-scale action of workers "attacking capital for the revolution" and "fighting for socialism" in developed countries.
Under the background of the rise of the nation-state, First International finally failed to accomplish the tasks and goals designed by Marx, but today, it is the first international non-governmental organization (NGO) in the world that has a clear connotation and has made great influence against the western-led capitalist globalization. It was established before the first intergovernmental organization-International Telegraph Union (1865) under the background of globalization. Even just this, the international community can establish its historical position and make it unforgettable in the contemporary era.
Selected Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 2, People's Publishing House, 1995, page 6 10.
See Zhang Hanqing: Marx and Engels and the First International, Northeast Normal University Press, 1996, pp. 358-36 1; Edited by Du Kangchuan and Li Jingzhi. History of International Production Movement, Renmin University of China Press, 2002, pp. 25-26.
Peter art, nationalism, 1989, p.16; Quoted from Introduction to European Civilization: Ethnic Integration and Conflict, edited by Qian Chengdan, Guizhou People's Publishing House, 1999, p. 5.
Complete Works of Lenin, 2nd Edition, Volume 24, Page 129.
See [Germany] Jacques? Droz: Democratic Socialism: 1864- 1960, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1985, p. 4.
Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 32, p. 656.
The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 35, page 262.
Have you seen Jacques? Droz: Democratic Socialism: 1864- 1960, p. 17.
Selected Works of Marx and Engels, vol. 1, People's Publishing House, 1995, p. 277; Bold words belong to the original text.
[English] David Held: Great Global Change-Politics, Economy and Culture in the Era of Globalization, Social Sciences Academic Press, 200 1 Edition, p. 62.
See immanuel wallerstein, Episode of Social Science and Communism, or.
Interpretation of Contemporary History, ISA Regional Symposium, Building an Open Society in Central and Eastern Europe and Sociological Perspectives, Krakow, Poland, September 15- 17, 1996.
See Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 19, pp. 25-26; Bold words belong to the original text.
Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 22, p. 398.
The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 33, Page 332.
The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 19, page 26.
See Eric hobsbawm: State and Nationalism, Chinese translation, Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2000, p. 46.
Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 33, Pages 643 and 644.
Selected Works of Lenin, Volume 3, People's Publishing House, 1995, pp. 790 and 79 1.