What do you think?
Rate this book
الماركسية والدين والاستشراق
يجمع هذا الكتاب أربع دراسات حول نقاشات ساخنة في حياتنا الفكريّة والسياسيّة المعاصرة. وتتناول الدراسة الأولى التصوّر الماركسيّ للدين ولعلاقته بالسياسة، فتقوم بتحليل مقارن اللاهوت التحرير المسيحيّ وللأصوليّة الإسلاميّة. وتليها مقالة تناقش الموقف الماركسي من الدين بوجه عامّ، ومن تلك الأخيرة بوجه خاصّ. أمّا الدراسة الثالثة، فتنتقد نزعة "الاستشراق المعكوس" التي تتناول الشعوب المُسلِمة بطريقة "جوهرانية" لا تختلف نوعيًّا عن الاستشراق التقليديّ، إنما تقلبه رأسًا على عقب بحيث ترى في الأصولية الإسلامية ظاهرةً تقدّميّة. أما الدراسة الأخيرة والأطول، فهي تنطلق من نقد لتصنيف إدوارد سعيد للماركسية كدرب من دروب "الاستشراق" لتتفحص تطوّر ماركس وإنجلز المعرفيّ في ضوء تطوّر موقفهما السياسيّ من مسألة الاستعمار..."
142 pages
First published August 8, 2013
10 people are currently reading
364 people want to read
About the author
Gilbert Achcar
42 books122 followersGilbert Achcar is a Lebanese academic, writer, and socialist. He is a Professor of Development Studies and International Relations at the School of Oriental and African Studies of the University of London. His research interests cover the Near East and North Africa, the foreign policy of the United States, Globalisation, Islam, and Islamic fundamentalism. He is also a Fellow at the International Institute for Research and Education.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
April 14, 2020
With a name like Marxism, Orientalism, Cosmopolitanism, you're forgiven if you think this collection of essays is doomed to be a snoozefest.
Thankfully, Gilbert Achcar largely rescues this book from its absurdly functional title with clear, direct writing and, for the most part, an interesting set of topics.
You would not be mistaken if you, an intelligent human, assume this book is about, well, Marxism, Orientalism and cosmopolitanism. For those of us not quite as steeped in Marxist arguments from three decades ago, the latter two words are part of the book's mystification. "What exactly is Orientalism, and why does it make me feel so uncomfortable?"I asked myself you might ask yourself. "Does cosmopolitanism mean the study of dapper individuals who live in big cities?
But the book is more than just those three words. The first essay is in fact a provocative comparison of Christian liberation theology (which derives inspiration from Marx) and Islamic fundamentalism, while the next two essays discuss Orientalism – or, basically, a pattern of Western thought about "the Orient" used to justify imperialist policies – and its problematic, if somewhat less so, backlash, "reverse Orientalism," which fetishizes Asian cultures to the extent of presuming their superiority to the West and holding them above criticism. The third essay, analyzing the history of Marx and Engels' attitudes toward the East and defending them from what Achcar believes to be unfair allegations of Orientalism, is easily the best of the book.*
Finally, the fourth and longest essay is an exceedingly thorough history of Marxist notions of cosmopolitanism and its evolution into internationalism – not, unlike in other parts of Western thought and rhetoric, as an anti-Semitic trope, but as a cross-border, even eventually border-erasing, concept.
If you, like me, are more interested than anyone you know about the interaction of Marx and religion, the first essay is well worth the purchase price (assuming you find it, like I did, at a used bookstore for less than $10). The third essay, on Marx and Engels' evolving views about Western culture and the Middle East, was a pleasant surprise in both how interesting it was and how much I learned from it (funny how often those two things go hand in hand!). It, too, would have been worth the price on its own. Getting two such essays, plus two others of lesser quality, well ... it beats getting coronavirus!
*A medium-size quibble: I'd have swapped the second and third essays because the third explains in some detail concepts whose definitions the second assumes its readers understand.
Thankfully, Gilbert Achcar largely rescues this book from its absurdly functional title with clear, direct writing and, for the most part, an interesting set of topics.
You would not be mistaken if you, an intelligent human, assume this book is about, well, Marxism, Orientalism and cosmopolitanism. For those of us not quite as steeped in Marxist arguments from three decades ago, the latter two words are part of the book's mystification. "What exactly is Orientalism, and why does it make me feel so uncomfortable?"
But the book is more than just those three words. The first essay is in fact a provocative comparison of Christian liberation theology (which derives inspiration from Marx) and Islamic fundamentalism, while the next two essays discuss Orientalism – or, basically, a pattern of Western thought about "the Orient" used to justify imperialist policies – and its problematic, if somewhat less so, backlash, "reverse Orientalism," which fetishizes Asian cultures to the extent of presuming their superiority to the West and holding them above criticism. The third essay, analyzing the history of Marx and Engels' attitudes toward the East and defending them from what Achcar believes to be unfair allegations of Orientalism, is easily the best of the book.*
Finally, the fourth and longest essay is an exceedingly thorough history of Marxist notions of cosmopolitanism and its evolution into internationalism – not, unlike in other parts of Western thought and rhetoric, as an anti-Semitic trope, but as a cross-border, even eventually border-erasing, concept.
If you, like me, are more interested than anyone you know about the interaction of Marx and religion, the first essay is well worth the purchase price (assuming you find it, like I did, at a used bookstore for less than $10). The third essay, on Marx and Engels' evolving views about Western culture and the Middle East, was a pleasant surprise in both how interesting it was and how much I learned from it (funny how often those two things go hand in hand!). It, too, would have been worth the price on its own. Getting two such essays, plus two others of lesser quality, well ... it beats getting coronavirus!
*A medium-size quibble: I'd have swapped the second and third essays because the third explains in some detail concepts whose definitions the second assumes its readers understand.
January 31, 2021
An interesting and informative set of essays.
A discussion on the comparative sociology of religions kicks it off with some fairly convincing arguments about the elective affinity between Christianity and communism and Islam with medieval reactionism. The essay nevertheless leaves numerous things unsaid and begs several questions.
First and most glaring, Achcar's analysis of Islam incorporates passages from Engels which are clearly informed by the AMP thesis. Achcar doesn't acknowledge this connection and never indicates his position on this part of Marxist theory despite it being surely the most controversial aspect of Marx's writing on non-Western societies. Without a firm advocacy of AMP - that is without connecting Islam as a mythology/ideology to a definite mode of production - the discussion feels incomplete. Instead Achcar describes AMP uncritically but doesn't name it as such, nor muddy his hands by discussing it. He also mentions in passing that no real fusion has been achieved between Communism and Islam equivalent to the development of liberation theology. I don't know enough on the topic to comment but this again begs questions eg about Sukarno's essay on Marxism, nationalism, and Islam, or the work of Central Asian Marxists in the early-mid twentieth century. This isn't to say that Achcar is wrong in his conclusion, only that the point deserves elaboration and explanation given the extraordinary breadth of Communist power in the Muslim world during much of the twentieth century.
The subsequent essays on Orientalism are pretty convincing refutations of Said's anti-Marxist articulation of the idea. Without an existing familiarity with the academic field, though, it's easy to get lost during Achcar's more involved discussion of new/old/reverse Orientalisms.
Finally, the lengthiest piece - an essay on cosmopolitanism- fits uneasily with the other essays but is erudite, learned and politically on-point.
The book is hardly earth-shattering and isn't an especially cohesive collection. But it provides useful Marxist surveys of important questions.
A discussion on the comparative sociology of religions kicks it off with some fairly convincing arguments about the elective affinity between Christianity and communism and Islam with medieval reactionism. The essay nevertheless leaves numerous things unsaid and begs several questions.
First and most glaring, Achcar's analysis of Islam incorporates passages from Engels which are clearly informed by the AMP thesis. Achcar doesn't acknowledge this connection and never indicates his position on this part of Marxist theory despite it being surely the most controversial aspect of Marx's writing on non-Western societies. Without a firm advocacy of AMP - that is without connecting Islam as a mythology/ideology to a definite mode of production - the discussion feels incomplete. Instead Achcar describes AMP uncritically but doesn't name it as such, nor muddy his hands by discussing it. He also mentions in passing that no real fusion has been achieved between Communism and Islam equivalent to the development of liberation theology. I don't know enough on the topic to comment but this again begs questions eg about Sukarno's essay on Marxism, nationalism, and Islam, or the work of Central Asian Marxists in the early-mid twentieth century. This isn't to say that Achcar is wrong in his conclusion, only that the point deserves elaboration and explanation given the extraordinary breadth of Communist power in the Muslim world during much of the twentieth century.
The subsequent essays on Orientalism are pretty convincing refutations of Said's anti-Marxist articulation of the idea. Without an existing familiarity with the academic field, though, it's easy to get lost during Achcar's more involved discussion of new/old/reverse Orientalisms.
Finally, the lengthiest piece - an essay on cosmopolitanism- fits uneasily with the other essays but is erudite, learned and politically on-point.
The book is hardly earth-shattering and isn't an especially cohesive collection. But it provides useful Marxist surveys of important questions.
October 10, 2024
Stark. Sammlung von Essays. Gute Betrachtung der Entwicklung des Islams, besonders der Spielarten des Islamismus. Der letzte Essay Kosmopolitismus ist aber schwach und entblößt die politische Laschheit des Autors, wenn er beispielsweise Hannah Arendt als vermeintlicher Linker auf dem Leim geht. Dafür ist der Essay über Marx und Engels und ihr Verhältnis zum Orientalismus um so stärker. Da gibts auch eine gute Zusammenfassung der Kritik an Saids Buch sowie eine kurze Kontextualisierung (ich wusste beispielsweise nicht, dass die Kernthesen bereits vorher und dazu noch besser von Marxisten formuliert wurden). Bisschen trotzkistisches Gejammer hier und da, aber begrenzt und erträglich.
August 19, 2020
A fine book comprised of four essays that explores Orientalism’s intersections with Marxism and Cosmopolitanism, this book is definitely for those already engrossed in theory and not targeted towards a general audience. I find Achber’s writings on Orientalism in reverse and world-citizenship most interesting.
March 14, 2022
Book is a collection of four essays. It’s packed with useful arguments that are vital for Marxists today. Furthermore, it offers a glimpse about how Marxists consider Saudi Arabia.
November 19, 2014
Four essays that are well worth reading on Marxism and religion, on 'Orientalism in reverse' in French academia, on the limits of Edward Said's 'Orientalism,' and lastly on cosmopolitanism in the Marxist tradition. All were quite suggestive and got me thinking. I particularly appreciated the first essay, which calls for a comparative Marxist sociology of religion in drawing out sensitively the parallels and contradictions of Christian liberation theology and political Islam, the last part of which lines up with Chris Harman's work on Islam in "The Prophet and the Proletariat."
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews