Why is England so unradical ?
Rev O'Lushen | 10.02.2001 14:56
For anyone who has ever puzzled why England has shown an ingrained aversion to left, socialist, or indeed any radical ideas, an important theoretical breakthrough by PERRY ANDERSON
Anderson's important work is not new, indeed his thesis was first set out in the early 1960's in the now out-of-print issues of New Left Review, No.s: 23, 35, 161.
Essentially, Anderson claims that there was no "industrial Revolution", that the industrialist class was compromised by a pre existing empire based on agricultural aristocracy. What this meant is that the proletariat, which appeared with the British empire as established fact (unlike other european powers), had no radical exmple of revolution to follow. The English revolution of 1642 , Diggers, Levellers &c has its adherents of course, but the event has no historical link to the modern day workering class.
Perry's essays are collected into a book "English Questions", ISBN 0 86091 375 9. I recoomend his ideas as a new starting point for the new radicals.
Essentially, Anderson claims that there was no "industrial Revolution", that the industrialist class was compromised by a pre existing empire based on agricultural aristocracy. What this meant is that the proletariat, which appeared with the British empire as established fact (unlike other european powers), had no radical exmple of revolution to follow. The English revolution of 1642 , Diggers, Levellers &c has its adherents of course, but the event has no historical link to the modern day workering class.
Perry's essays are collected into a book "English Questions", ISBN 0 86091 375 9. I recoomend his ideas as a new starting point for the new radicals.
Rev O'Lushen
Comments
Display the following comment