It was an education to read about Leopold Von Ranke and Karl Marx although I did not perceive them to be of the same flavor. Reading about Leopold Von Ranke in the textbooks and in other places was very interesting. And for an aspiring historian, quite edifying. Once in a great while, you might happen to read about people from history whom you may never have even heard of, and yet, you sometimes discover a connection in how your views harmonize with the perspective of a long dead historian. I sometimes muse on how much or how little my own views might parallel the views of those whose writings and lives I am examining. I was pleasantly surprised at how much I agreed with Leopold Von Ranke. Two examples would be his insistence on sources and his open and welcome perspective on metaphysics. Credit can be given to him in regards to organizing a system of order in regards to historical integrity...an orderliness that could easily become compromised or muddled by a less than strict adherence to credible, traceable sources. I found the premise of a number of his quotes to be quite edifying. “You have reckoned that history ought to judge the past and to instruct the contemporary world as to the future. The present attempt does not yield to that high office. It will merely tell how it really was.” And that is what I wish to know as an aspiring historian...to know what happened. Of course, this is not always possible, but Ranke's brief quote cuts to the chase, and it is that brief logic that is remarkable and refreshing.
My dad has a sign on his desk that reads, "Creative minds are rarely tidy." Well for me, a lack of orderliness does not contribute to how creative I am. Von Ranke's establishing of historical sources as a preliminary to a good and truthful historical narrative clears up a lot by automatically separating opinion or speculation with specific details as to what actually happened, according to reputable sources. This speaks to not only historical reliability but integrity also. Von Ranke has an effect on what I write because citing sources is the hallmark of a good historian, and whether it be primary or secondary sources, reputable historians will always include sources, and that will include sources that will inform me regarding the French Revolution which is the subject of my final project. I was also interested to read on Karl Marx whom I had not read much about. Though, to not read much, and then read a little more did not really change my impression of him since the little more that I read reinforced my initial impression of him which I could not truthfully say was of a flattering nature. He famously said, “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” And yet his communist manifesto was in part an infamous instrument that enabled untold hundreds of thousands after him to partake in what might be called an opiate of oppressors in oppressing the masses while adhering to an idea that professed to free the oppressed whether from the Czar or King or government, religion, the boss, poverty or ignorance. Having not read much of Marx previously, I was blown away by how naïve and shortsighted I felt Marx was. One quote really brought this home.
“The common ownership of all means of production would bar the forming of social classes and establish a perpetual, stable, and perfect harmony between the mode of production (assumed to stay forever that of an industrial economy), productive relationships, and the superstructure.”
The principle problem is that someone would still be in control, and could enough justifiable faith be put in this person or persons that they would not become corrupt under any circumstances? With such abundant examples in the annuls of history as to the fact that power corrupts, the idea that there would be a succession of people, each of whom would set aside their own interests and selfish inclinations for an ideology that rejects any theory as to the origin of morality, to me, seemed an absurdity. And yet, it seems that this is what Marx was encouraging. If people really believed this that this was possible, what a sad delusion! And Marx's pipe dream of such noble actions by the leaders of any communist party does not play out in history. Did Marx envision through his communist manifesto checks and balances to rein in the power of the few, or could they become dictators? Have there been communists who tried to do the right thing? Yes. Gorbachev trying his best to work with Ronald Reagan is a good example but he was one of the very few exceptions. And to many, many people it is also understandable that the ideas of Marx made him something of a hero, because at that time with so many being factory workers in the age of mass mercantile production, nobody had ever heard of sick leave, pension, or pregnancy leave or other safeguards of the rights of workers, many of which, Marx's ideas seemed to address or give hope. At that point, such just aspirations may have been similar to the fiction recently published in the book Les Miserable, where Jean Valjean, masquerading as the mayor of Montreuil had a factory where most of his workers were to receive such thoughtful care. The desperation of so many factory workers in Germany and other countries may have made them view the ideas of Marx with hope, if they did not know in what autocratic direction many of his ideas would proceed. Marx's idea of course would effect how historians practiced their craft in the countries where communism and socialism held the scepter of power. "Old history, with its tales of wars, dynasties, treaties, and economic exploitation, would end. For a while historians could rewrite in the Marxist manner the story of the past prior to the great change." Not to change gears or jump to conclusions, I do recall a certain novel with what I could describe as dark communist undertones where re-writing history was one of the themes of the book. Having read the reading, I could not discern, outside of communists or socialist countries that Marx had any great following or had advanced any theories or notable ideas that still effect historians today, aside from an epitaph on how the ideas he expressed in his communist manifesto have largely failed. I have not been able to discern that any of the sources I will use for my project on the French Revolution have used Marx or anything he wrote or taught as a resource. With Von Ranke, he is from what I can derive the originator of how historians today cite sources for whatever claims or narrative they produce. Because the sources I use (secondary in addition to primary) are reputable historians, they are also subscribing to the sensible system Von Ranke came up with in citing where they get their information from.
No comments:
Post a Comment