History of modern Europe
Hobsbawm divides the ancient historians into two distinct categories in his book; The Age of Empire. He says that quite a number of historians who lived during the 19th century can be classified into two classes while excluding the purely pieces of literature written by them.
These two classes comprise of the forward and backward lookers. According to my opinion, Hobsbawm fits in the category of backward lookers. This is because he focuses his pieces of writing in the ancient eras. He indulges in the excavation of human irrecoverable pasts.
Additionally, he is nostalgic about some historical documents including his own past experiences. He states that he and many other historians like him are still passionately associated with some ancient periods because of their undeniable ‘breaks’ (Hobsbawm, 6).
The bourgeois capitalism, which is characterized by the perception of dual revolution, championed productive systems that lacked limits. This then led to the take-over of the earth by the capitalist economy. Hobsbawm indicates that the economy of the bourgeois society was literally unproblematic in the 19th century.
This was because their triumph had a deeply rooted positive impact on their economy. The many political hostilities of that period, from which the French revolution had emerged, were suppressed.
To some extent, it seemed like the rebellion was gradually accepting the cultural, economic and organizational domination by the victors. As a result of the Age of Revolution, which occurred in the mid of 19th century, there were only countable socialists in the continent.
The diffusion of explosive discontents during this period foresaw enormous progress in the bourgeois society with limited attention to internal contradictions.
This overwhelming progress did not show any signs of future anxiety. In the early 20th century however, anxiety struck. This was characterized by the transition of the Age of Revolution to the then Age of Empire (Hobsbawm, 8).
The unrecognized contradictions in the Age of Revolution were manifested in the Age of Empire and had full impacts on economic progress of Europe. This then became an era of interrupted peace in the western sphere which, as a matter of fact, gave rise to world wars.
This period marked the domination of fear in the world. As a result, massive groups of wage-workers emerged to campaign against the supremacy of capitalism. This saw the extension of cultural and political organizations of the bourgeois liberalism.
Hobsbawm distinguishes the bourgeois capitalism, which was characterized by the Age of Revolution, from the later demand for change through the merging of forces to shun capitalism.
He points out the manner in which tension and anxiety rose when the contradictions experienced in the previous regime were manifested in the Age of Empire (Hobsbawm, 11).
John Merriman presented an article that depicted political rivalry during the European colonialism of the 1870s. John’s article indicated that the imperial tensions that resulted from colonialism were a reflection of the deteriorated power stability in Europe.
However, Hobsbawm’s position on this is a slight contradiction of John’s article. Hobsbawm says that colonialism came as a result of political alliances as opposed to rivalry as presented by John. For instance, he gives an example of the alliance between Germany and Italy.
He also says that colonialism resulted from geopolitics as evidenced by the fact that Germany was allied with Russia and Hungary with Austria. All these nations were geographically brought together to segregate France from Europe.
As a result of this, we realize that both Hobsbawm and John had ideological differences despite the fact that they all had the aim of explaining the basics of late European colonialism (Hobsbawm, 287).
Works Cited
Eric, Hobsbawm. The Age of Empire; 1875-1914 (Revised Ed), New York: Vintage Books, 1989. Print.