Kwame Nkrumah

Kwame Nkrumah (September 21, 1909- April 27 1972) was a Ghanaian nationalist leader, who during the 1940’s and 1950’s led Ghana to independence from the British. He became the first African Prime Minister in the Commonwealth (1951) and Ghana’s first President after decolonization (1957), and carried with him his vision for a new Africa.

After World War II, Britain began to decline in its power and influence, while simultaneously, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was gaining influence and becoming a world superpower. This change of balance within the world would influence the political environment of Ghana greatly, and inspire Nkrumah and the nationalist movement for Ghanaian independence and his vision of a new, united, and powerful Africa. The British colonists often took advantage of the Ghanaian people; as Britain became more democratic, the same rights were not given to the Ghanaian people. In 1945, the British stole foreign exchange from cocoa farmers in order to strengthen the British Pound. However by doing so, Ghanaians were unable to invest in what they felt was necessary, and distorted investment priorities. British colonialism and its stronghold on the people of Ghana inspired Nkrumah and the nationalist movement. In addition to this, the Russian Revolution and the USSR also influenced Nkrumah and his views, as not only was the USSR nationally diverse, but was a “relatively backwards country” transformed into a “giant industrial power” (Tunteng 234). Nkrumah and the nationalist movement in Ghana was a result of the political climate during the start of the Cold War era, and the ideas and changes made under Nkrumah would influence the future of Ghana and Africa.

Nkrumah sought to improve the lives of Ghanaians, which he did by expanding and improving infrastructure across the state. This was a necessary action by Nkrumah, as much of the infrastructure in Ghana, especially the poor regions to the north, was extremely lacking. By making improvements to education, health care, transport, and energy, Nkrumah “started to create the economic infrastructure that Ghana needed if it were to become an efficient exporter of primary goods” (Ray 13). The changes of infrastructure were apparent within the nation, especially improvements to health care, which increased the life expectancy “from 40 years in 1960 to 55.2 in 1984” (Ray 4).  As beneficial as these changes were to Ghanaian society, the origins of these changes held dangerous consequences.

Much of Ghana’s development under Nkrumah was due to a need to “catch up” with the West, as Ghana had, like other colonial nations, been “deprived” of the “resources to pursue Western Style economic development” (Mishra 74). Nkrumah’s actions were a result of his mimetic desire to obtain the wealth and prosperity for Ghana like those in the west, such as the United States. However, British interference and colonialism had drained Ghana of many of its resources, making it difficult for Ghana to integrate into the world market. The economy of Ghana was unable to keep up with the costs of all the improvement to infrastructure, and Nkrumah sought loans from Western nations in order to try and remedy their economic problems. Mimetic desire led in part to Nkrumah’s fall, but despite this he continued to inspire and many Ghanaians and Africans.

Nkrumah introduced many young Ghanaians to socialist ideology, which would influence later revolutions such as the December 31^st Revolution in 1981. This same socialist ideology would spread throughout Africa, influencing other colonies to seek independence for themselves. Nkrumah’s ideologies manifest through the belief which has been coined Nkrumaism: “Every vestige of colonialism must be wiped away from every corner of Africa. That is the policy for Africa” (James 162). Furthermore, Nkrumah wanted the people of Ghana to undergo “a political and mental revolution at the same time,” changing not only the political institutions of Ghana, but also changing the minds and ideologies of the Ghanaian people (Tunteng 233). Nkrumah’s lasting impact on Ghana through the way that “he created the political symbols and political psychology of patriotism and sovereignty in Ghana against which all others are still measured, and which to the left are still the touchstone of truth” (Ray 13). Nkrumah changed African ideology and spearheaded the African independence movement.

Lor Richardson

Works Cited

James, C. L. R. Nkrumah and the Ghana Revolution. Allison & Busby, 1982.

Mishra, Pankaj. Age of Anger: a history of the present. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2017.

Ray, Donald. Ghana: Politics, Economics, and Society. Francis Pinter, 1986.

Tunteng, P. “Kwame Nkrumah and the African Revolution.” Civilisations, vol. 23/24, no. 3/4, 1973/1974, pp. 233-247., doi: 130.113.69.47.

Other Relevant Readings

Davidson, Basil. Black Star: a view of the life and times of Kwame Nkrumah. Westview Press, 1989.

Howe, Russell Warren. “Did Nkrumah Favour Pan-Africanism?” Transition, no. 27, 1966, pp. 13–15., doi:10.2307/2934195.

Gupta, Anirudh. “Kwame Nkrumah: A Reassessment.” International Study, vol. 12, no. 2, January 1973, pp. 207-221. doi:10.1177/002088177301200203.

Smertin, Yuri. Kwame Nkrumah. International Publishers, 1987.

Benito Mussolini

July 29^th, 1883 – April 28^th, 1945

Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini was born in Predappio Italy, his father was a blacksmith and a socialist journalist, and his mother was a primary school teacher. Mussolini received a formidable education and was able to graduate with a teaching diploma. He read the philosophical works of political thinkers such as Fredrich Nietzsche and Karl Marx¹, where he most likely formed his own political opinions. Mussolini was able to become politically active at a young age, where he would call for strikes and violence against the ruling elites¹. In March 1919, Mussolini was able to form the Fascist Party of Italy, they were able to gain much support from unemployed war veterans. Benito Mussolini was able to form these veterans into armed squads known as the black shirts, who were notorious for terrorizing their political opponents². Mussolini was able to successfully work his way up to the position of Prime Minister, which was offered by King Emmanuel III in 1922¹. He slowly dismantled the democratic systems within Italy, until eventually he had created his own dictatorship with himself the sole individual in power¹. By the time he was 42, he was already the fascist dictator of Italy, his rule even being praised by western leaders of the time such as Winston Churchill, who believed that a return to order was needed¹. Mussolini grew increasingly ambitious, and hungered for even more power. In 1935, he launched a campaign against Ethiopia to further Italy’s colonial holdings, they were successful in their invasion, but Mussolini’s aggressive actions caused him to be denounced by much of the western world. Due to Italy’s reputation after the invasion of Ethiopia, Mussolini then decided to side with Hitler during World War II. Not long after, in 1945 Mussolini was abandoned with just a handful of men, which lead to his capture and subsequent execution. The early 20^th century was a trying time for Italy, they were also a country that got hit heavily by the great depression, so there were many citizens who were looking for answers, and were upset with their government because they felt like they had failed them². This anger and discontent created the perfect climate for Benito Mussolini to rise. He was a strong, charismatic figure who was able to rally others into violent opposition of the Italian government. What Mussolini was able to do In Italy became a common trend across Europe, soon Germany followed with Adolf Hitler, along with Spain, who turned to a fascist leader Francisco Franco. The impact that Mussolini had can still be felt to this day, not only did he pave the way for fascist dictators like Hitler and Franco to rise, but his extreme nationalism and aggressive foreign policy contributed to World War II, one of the most destructive and bloodiest world conflicts in the world’s history¹. Mussolini’s influence has reached beyond his own years however, as every July 29^th, due to said date being Mussolini’s birthday, thousands of tourists from around the world, typically those who are involved in far right-wing circles, travel to Predappio to celebrate the life of Mussolini⁴. It is a major source of income for the city of Predappio, many shops sell souvenirs, along with t-shirts that portray Mussolini’s likeness on t-shirts⁴. Though the consensus is that Mussolini is dead, and along with him died fascism, it is clear to see that his influence still reaches people nearly 80 years later, as many flock to his birthplace to celebrate him, and to praise what he did throughout his life⁴.

Spencer Sullivan

Bibliography

Lorenzini, Pietro. “Benito Mussolini.” Salem Press Biographical Encyclopedia, January 2017.

“History – Historic Figures: Benito Mussolini (1883-1945).” BBC. Accessed November 08, 2017. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/mussolini_benito.shtml.

Richardson, Charles O. “The Rome Accords of January 1935 and the Coming of the Italian-Ethiopian War.” The Historian 41, no. 1 (1978): 41-58. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6563.1978.tb01227.x.

Paradiso, Max. “The Polite Cult of Mussolini.” New Statesman 146, no. 5382, 13-14.

Gilbert, Martin. “The Rise of Fascism in Europe in the twentieth century: lessons for today .” India International Centre Quarterly 29, no. 2 (2002): 31-38.

Other Relevant Reading

Bruckner, Tim A., Andrew Noymer, and Ralph A. Catalano. “Life Expectancy during the Great Depression in Eleven European Countries.” Population and Development Review 39, no. 1 (2013): 57-74. doi:10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00573.x.

Nelis, Jan. “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità.” Classical World 100, no. 4 (2007): 391-415. doi:10.1353/clw.2007.0069.

Adam Mickiewicz

Dec 24, 1798 – Nov 26, 1855

Adam Mickiewicz was a Pole, born in 1798, on grounds taken over by the Russian Empire. He lived during the World War II, and the Nazi Occupation. This was a time when Poland was fighting for their independance. Poland’s existence, was under a lot of pressure. Adam Mickiewicz took the events of World War II, and the effect that the events had on humanity, and he turned it into beautiful poetry.

Adam Mickiewicz was a Polish poet, who practically invented romanticism in Poland, and in Europe. Mickiewicz fought for Poland’s independence. He believed in patriotism, and religion above all other. Adam Mickiewicz was able to bring poetry into life. He understood humanity, and nature. He gave Poland hope during the nazi occupation. Roman Koropeckyj states, “His name served as a point of reference whenever the survival of the polish nation was at stake, and whenever ideas about its fate needed legitimation” (Koropeckyj, Preface, ix) Poland’s independence, and patriotism was highly influenced by Adam Mickiewicz. He inspired many Poles to fight, and to never give up on their country.

His two most finest poems are, Dziady, and Pan Tadeusz. Pan Tadeusz has become the national epic poem of Poland. In his poems he intertwines, horror, and death with nationality, and patriotism. His poems are clear, and pure. Adam Mickiewicz was greatly inspired by Byron. Adam Mickiewicz was not afraid to say what he thinks, and feels. His poem, Dziady was banned because, it made the russians uncomfortable due to the poems anti-russian remarks. His poems embrace religion, nationalism, patriotism, and humanity. His poems taught the world how to love, and respect a country. He inspired people to do everything, and anything for their heritage, and country.

Adam Mickiewicz earned his historical significance by being a great poet, as well as being a great enforcer of nationalism. He was interested in politics, and always fought for the good of the people. His fight for Poland’s independence, and his love for his country is what inspired many others. His poems touched the hearts, and lives of people universally. His spirit, and emotions influenced, and changed patriotism all around the world. His thoughts, ideas, and words; his poems, embraced all humanity. Manfred states, “ Mickiewicz always united the Polish cause with that of the whole of humanity and never lowered his ideals to the level of narrow nationalism” (Manfred, 355). Thus, his poems were universal. He rejected separatism, and embraced unionization. Mickiewicz did not discriminate, he believed all people deserve rights, and freedom. He stood up for humanity. Mickiewicz understood social, and political problems nationwide. While fighting for independence, he was also fighting for liberation.

 

The name Mickiewicz has become a well known and well respected name. Adam Mickiewicz has caught the attention of many other historical figures. For instance, M azzini Giuseppe described Mickiewicz as, “more than a poet: a prophet” (Nagorski, p.99). Today, Poland thanks Adam Mickiewicz for fighting for Poland, and for inspiring others to fight. Kridl Manfred states, “He is the main spiritual source of modern Polish patriotism…” (Manfred, 359) His writings, have made Poland’s patriotism, and religion into what it is today. On the global level, Adam Mickiewicz transformed Romanticism and made it his own. He was a genius who brought poetry to life. His works are raw, beautiful, and relatable.

Agnieszka Prymicz

 

Works Cited

Blum, George P. “Nazism.” Salem Press Encyclopedia (2017): Research Starters , (accessed November 9, 2017).

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/eds/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=1b322f79-493 b-4f45-9f71-caf282391ae1%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcG U9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=96397535&db=ers

Cochran, Peter. “Roman Koropeckyj. Adam Mickiewicz: The Life of a Romantic.” Pushkin Review 11 (2008): 193+. Literature Resource Center (accessed November 9, 2017).

http://go.galegroup.com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/ps/i.do?p=LitRC&sw=w&u=ocul_mcmaster& v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA259467591&asid=57a63f42b6a65c30939f362d72e68946 .

Kridl, Manfred. “Adam Mickiewicz (1798-1855).” American Slavic and East European Review 7, no. 4 (1948): 340-60. (accessed November 9, 2017).

Click to access 2491889.pdf

Nagórski, Zygmunt. “The Adam Mickiewicz Year.” The Polish Review 1, no. 1 (1956): 99-107. (accessed November 9, 2017).

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25776032 .

Trencsenyi, B., Kopecek, M. “National Romanticism: The Formation of National Movements.” Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (2007):1770–1945,
(accessed November 9, 2017).

http://books.openedition.org/ceup/2229

Koropeckyj, Robert. “Adam Mickiewicz: The Life of a Romantic” Cornell University Press (2008). (accessed November 9, 2017).

https://quod-lib-umich-edu.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=acls;idno=heb32418#

Other relevant reading(s):

Zakrzewski, Christopher A. “Pan Tadeusz.” Sarmatian Review 35, no. 3 (2015): 1939+. Academic OneFile (accessed November 10, 2017).

http://go.galegroup.com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=ocul_mcmaster &v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA428998858&sid=ebsco&asid=86482ef42efa557512312e609442f d1b .

Richard Wagner

May 22, 1813 – Feb 13, 1883

Wagner was born in Leipzig, Germany to Carl Friedrich Wagner and Johanna Rosine. His father died nine months after his birth and his mother married his father’s friend, Ludwig Geyer, who was an actor and playwright. The interests of his stepfather were also found in Wagner who grew to become a theatre director as well as a composer, conductor and a polemicist. Wagner’s works in the theatres were influenced by other well-known artists and composers such as Ludwig van Beethoven and William Shakespeare. Wagner is known today for his musical contributions and controversial anti-Semitic works. Wagner’s contributions extend into the performing arts as well as the thoughts of intellectuals. Weber (2006, 508) notes that during Wagner’s early life, Leipzig had strict notions of music imposed upon it by the Church. The population was ready for a change in its musical capacities and Wagner delivered with his works and compositions. Wagner introduced leitmotifs, a characteristic sound for a person, object or event. Kregor (2017, 547) details Wagner’s leitmotifs and how they are still used today in movies and television because the masses still find them entertaining. Wagner used tonal centres, chromaticism, various sounds of quantity and quality to produce a new quality of music. Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde that premiered on June 10, 1865, was a musical masterpiece in its various combinations of sound, but is as Classen (2013, 338) suggests, a work that romanticizes the material and greedy aspects of human nature. Wagner would use dream sequences in his works as Lippman (1990, 54-56) describes, in ways that were fairly insightful into what dreams really were before any formal investigation into the matter. Wagner was more than an artist, he was an influential thinker, a polemicist who had controversial ideas and a magnetic character that allowed his ideas to spread. Wagner still has followers known as Wagnerians or Wagnerites who are devoted to him and his works. Wagner’s essay on Jewish music is as Loeffler (2009, 3) describes, reflective of the stereotypes during his time. Hall (2017, 54-60) details how Adolf Hitler had gained a deep interest in Wagner’s works, specifically the anti-Semitic ones. Wagner had indirectly influenced the Nazis and as such, a select few pieces of his works were being used as propaganda and his music was played during their events. Emslie (2012, 17-25) details how Wagner’s works in music and literature helped some to define what it meant to be German. Wagner was creating a cultural identity with his works, and as a result, he helped to define clear lines between Germans and Non-Germans for those who had a deep sense of nationalism. These dividing sentiments in culture contributed to the feeling of ressentiment between the Germans and Non-Germans, only to explode into a conflict such as the Holocaust during World War II. Wagner was an innovative composer and thinker whose influence was far reaching in areas involving the arts and intellectual thought. He has had an impact on the minds of many and has had a hand in shaping history as a result.

Shariful Sakib

Works Cited

Classen, Albrecht. 2013. “Visuality and Materiality in the Story of Tristan and Isolde ed. by Jutta Eming, Ann Marie Rasmussen, and Kathryn Starkey (Review).” The Comparatist 37 (1): 338–41. doi:10.1353/com.2013.0003.

Emslie, Barry. 2012. “Being German: Richard Wagner and Thomas Mann.” Being German: Richard Wagner and Thomas Mann. 6 (2): 17–32.

Hall, David Ian. 2017. “Wagner, Hitler, and Germany’s Rebirth after the First World War.” War in History 24 (2): 154–75. doi:10.1177/0968344515608664.

Loeffler, James. 2009. “Richard Wagners “Jewish Music”: Antisemitism and Aesthetics in Modern Jewish Culture.” Jewish Social Studies 15 (2): 2–36. doi:10.2979/jss.2009.15.2.2.

Kregor, Jonathan. 2017. “Understanding the Leitmotif: From Wagner to Hollywood Film Music.” Understanding the Leitmotif: From Wagner to Hollywood Film Music 73 (3): 547.

Lippman, Edward A. 1990. “Wagners Conception of the Dream.” Journal of Musicology 8 (1): 54–81. doi:10.1525/jm.1990.8.1.03a00030.

Weber, William. 2006. “Redefining the Status of Opera: London and Leipzig, 1800–1848.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 36 (3): 507–32. doi:10.1162/002219506774929764.

Giuseppe Mazzini

June 22, 1805 – March 10, 1872

Giuseppe Mazzini was born in Genoa, to Giacomo and Maria Mazzini. Italy, at the time of his birth, was torn apart, ruled by no singular power, and in some areas, ruled by foreigners. Mazzini’s parents were both strong supporters of democracy (Hinkley, 2013), which quite evidently had an impact on his personal philosophy. The legal system in Italy was based heavily upon the Napoleonic code (Falchi, 2012). He became a Doctor of Law at the University of Genoa later in life, and following his completion of his education, became a proponent of democracy in a monarchist Italian state. It was this love of democracy that lead him to join the Secret Organization of Carbonari. He was subsequently arrested because of his views opposing the monarchy, but the government justified his arrest was because “the Government did not approve of young men of talent, fond of solitary walks, the subject of whose musings was unknown to them” (Hinkley, 2013). In was during his time in prison, and following time in exile that Mazzini developed much of his beliefs of Italian Unification, under a republican state through the concepts of nationalism and fraternity (Ridolfi, 2008). Arguably, the state Italy was in during his child had a strong impact on his opinions on unification, as the Italian states had been brought together by Napoleon, and then fell back into individual states afterwards. Mazzini then became one of the largest voices advocating for a democratic and unified Italy, and is credited by many for starting the Italian reformation (Ridolfi, 2008). He also defined nationalism in a new way, in stark contrast to the German definition of nationalism as cultural unity, as the Italian states shared no common culture. Instead, Mazzini defined nationalism as unifying together to complete a national mission, that was every person’s responsibility to accomplish (McMenamin, 1998). His philosophy is also credited with being used as a doctrine to help for the Indian Nationalist movement, with Bipin Chandra Pal, a popular politician of that period, citing Mazzini as in inspiration of his movement (Das Gupta, 1956).  This is a single example of how, although Mazzini’s writings are directed towards unifying Italy, they have a broad application with the ability to work to inspire and help many other movements the doctrines they need for a democratic republic. Mazzini’s views on democracy appealed to many women writers who believed there was inequality between the sexes, such as Margret Fuller, Emilie Ashurst and Jessie White Mario (Falchi, 2015). However, Mazzini’s philosophy is also criticized by some to have enabled totalitarianism in Europe, and advocated for the unification of all similar states, such as the Germans, the Slavs, the Baltics and so forth (McMenamin, 1998). The notion of totalitarian applications of Mazzini’s philosophies are still prevalent in modern contexts. Today, many nations are struggling with far-right nationalism, which bears a resemblance to his idea that free individuals are responsible to help achieve a national goal of progression. Mazzini has influenced a plethora of nationalist movements because the foundations of the nationalism rely on united countrymates. Giuseppe Mazzini was the man with the idea that brought Italy together, but those principles have a wide variety of applications.

Jake Woodcroft

 

Works Cited

Falchi, F. (2012). Democracy and the rights of women in the thinking of Giuseppe Mazzini. Modern Italy, 17(1), 15-30. doi:10.1080/13532944.2012.640084

Falchi, F. (2015). Beyond National Borders; ‘Italian’ Patriots United in the Name of Giuseppe Mazzini: Emilie Ashurst, Margaret Fuller and Jessie White Mario. Women’s History Review, 24(1), 23-36. doi:10.1080/09612025.2014.920672

Hinkley, E. (2013). Mazzini: the story of a great italian. S.l.: Wildside Press.

McMenamin, I. (1997). ‘Self-choosing’ and ‘right-acting’ in the nationalism of giuseppe Mazzini. History of European Ideas, 23(5-6), 221-234. doi:10.1016/s0191-6599(98)00003-5

Ridolfi, M. (2008). Visions of republicanism in the writings of Giuseppe Mazzini. Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 13(4), 468-479. doi:10.1080/13545710802407493

Sarti, R. (1997). Mazzini: A life for the religion of politics. Westport, Conn: Praeger.

Other Relevant Reading

Ghisalberti, C. (1999). THE UNITARY STATE AND FEDERALISM IN ITALY. Parliaments, Estates & Representation, 19173-181.

Lago, E. D. (2012). “We Cherished the Same Hostility to Every Form of Tyranny”: Transatlantic Parallels and Contacts between William Lloyd Garrison and Giuseppe Mazzini, 1846–1872. American Nineteenth Century History, 13(3), 293-319. doi:10.1080/14664658.2012.729663

Urbinati, N. (2012). Mazzini and the making of the republican ideology. Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 17(2), 183-204. doi:10.1080/1354571x.2012.641412

Marine Le Pen

August 5, 1968 –

Marine Le Pen is the current leader of the right-wing French nationalist party the ‘National Front’ (FN) after succeeding her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the party in January 2011. Jean-Marie Le Pen created the party in 1972 during a rough economic period for France as it was during this time the nation began to feel the effects of Americanization and globalization. This resulted in many French individuals becoming angry and feeling a loss of their identity, like Mishra describes in Age of Anger , due to American proponents inhibiting, eliminating, and morphing their lives. Consequently, a group of nationals lead by Jean-Marie Le Pen, cultivated a new political party that was set on far right policies. Through exploiting the populations emotions, the FN created ideologies that promoted deportation of immigrants, degradation of minorities and promotion of nationalism. By promoting these policies it created the notion that tribalism was the solution to their economic dismay. The party began to gain traction through the following years, but it wasn’t until Marine Le Pen took the helm, and reformed and modernized their policies that the party started making a real waves in the French and global political spectrum.

After becoming the leader, Marine invoked a ‘reform’ of their policies in order to appeal to the modern day masses, rather than specifically the aging community. Through ‘detoxification’ Marine composed her party’s values of both the far left and far right, packaging it into a toxic, yet compelling policy. She adopted ideas such as anti-immigration, protectionism, and nationalism, while simultaneously modernizing other ideologies by becoming more inclusive to female, homosexual, and pro abortion communities. Due to this overhaul, it created a party

with modern policies that appeal to the entire population, while subliminally retaining the former xenophobic, authoritarian ideologies.

Marine’s primary policy is turning France into an nationalistic power house by returning its identity to the people through various different mechanisms and proponents. The first proponent being anti-immigration, Marine wishes to minimise the flow of people through her borders. In regards to who would be allowed in she declared that citizenship should be “inherited or merited” (Branford & Nowak, BBC ). She wants France to once again become a nation of purebred citizens without foreigners inhabiting its borders. Similar to many other far right parties, she believes foreigners are destroying the nation’s job availability and culture so to combat this problem they must have the immigrants removed. Additionally, Marine wishes to completely shut down the borders muslim and islamic nations as they are the ones fueling the ongoing terrorism epidemic. Marine utilizes fear to prey on her citizens and brainwash them into electing her, by consistently referring to the recurring attacks throughout her nation and the world. Marine uses political scare tactics in order to secure votes, by utilizing the notion of an ‘us vs them’ argument through tribalistic rhetoric. Common between far right politicians, Marine initiates the argument that the nation must come together and unite as one in order to fight the outsiders wanting to destroy them.

Additionally, Marine wishes to implement a policy in which she calls ‘national priority’. This ideology in the concept that French nationals should have priority over ‘foreigners’ in regards to privileges, rights and commodities. Through removal of entitlements like free public education from foreigners, Marine wishes to eradicate the outsiders through combatting financial and social policies against them.

Thus, Marine Le Pen is bent on morphing her nation into a nationalistic and authoritarian power house by eliminating and eradicating all foreigners. Although Marine reformed her father’s medieval policies, it is still vividly evident that they still resonate in her political ideologies. Her reformation has often be referred to ‘de-demonization’ as she has retained her father’s policies but softened them through rebranding their policies on other prevalent matters to disguise them amongst updated modern ones. This process of modernization has made her appear far more appealing and has resulted in a incredible rise in popularity. However, although on the surface she appears as a modern populist, she really is an authoritarian fascist, motivated by anger and frustration at the loss of her nation’s identity. In an interview, Marine described that as a child her house was bombed by those opposed to her father’s policies and as a result she stated “politics for me started in violence, against me.” (Alduy, The Atlantic). Thus exemplifying the notion that violent motives in politics only create a cycle of more violence in the future which hurts all. Marine Le Pen is evidently motivated to change her nation by reversing it to its former glory through racist, xenophobic methods. She is leading a scary populist movement that if come into power will implement authoritarian and fascist ideologies in an already treacherous time. If she comes into power, unspeakable things will result as of her racist and xenophobic motives. One only has to look into history to understand that this could be a repeat of catastrophic disaster.

Graphic above illustrates the Islamophobic parties within Europe, which subsequently are also Marine Le Pen’s allies in the political spectrum.

Joe Mullins

Relevant Readings:

• –  National Identities in France by Brian Sudlow
• –  T he National Front and French Politics: The Resistible Rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen

Bibliography

Alduy, Cecile. “The Devils Daughter.” The Atlantic. Last modified October 2013. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-devils-daughter/309467/ .

Branford, Becky, and Marysia Nowak. “France elections: What makes Marine Le Pen far right?” BBC News. Last modified February 10, 2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38321401 .

Lichfield, John. “Why we should be scared of Marine Le Pen’s Front National.” Independent. Last modified December 8, 2015. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/why-we-should-be-scared-of-marine-le-pens-f ront-national-a6765751.html .

Marcus, Jonathan. The National Front and French Politics: The Resistible Rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen . New York: New York University Press, 1995.

Mayer, Nonna. “From Jean-Marie to Marine Le Pen: Electoral Change on the Far Right.” Parliamentary Affairs 66, no. 1 (January 1, 2013): 160-78. https://doi-org.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/10.1093/pa/gss071.

Shields, James. “Radical or Not so Radical? Tactical Variation in Core Policy Formation by the Front National.” French Politics, Culture & Society 29, no. 3 (2011): 78-100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42843724 .

In Text Graphic
“ANATOMY OF ISLAMOPHOBIA.” World Policy Journal 28, no. 4 (2011): 14-15. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41479299 .

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar

28 May 1883 – 26 February 1966

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar born in Bhagur, British India, was an Indian poet, lawyer, politician, writer and pro-independence activist. Savarkar is considered to be the intellectual founder of Hindu Nationalism. He is the author of “Hindutva” (1923), a book which explains what it means to be a Hindu. “Hindutva” is considered to be one of the most influential works that shaped Hindu Nationalism, it has influenced many nationalists and revolutionaries in India. He was described as an extremist, revolutionary, anarchist, terrorist and a militant nationalist and has greatly influenced these groups in India and other places. His early writings had a wide audience of anarchists, nationalists, anti-imperialists, revolutionaries, socialists, Nazis and Fascists alike. He was also an atheist, but none the less identified as an Hindu and was a known spiritual and a believer in mysticism.

Savarkar was a revolutionary figure who played a major role in framing Indian national identity as a Hindu national identity. He was involved in liberation movements since the age of sixteen. He was involved in Mitra Mela, a Hindu movement in Pune and Nasik. He founded the secret anti-colonial society Abhinav Bharat. His focus on writing the history of revolutionaries has inspired many young Indian men to become revolutionaries themselves. His work, “The Indian War of Independence of 1857” (1909), glorified the revolutionaries, even Muslims, in an attempt to recruit more people to his cause. This book was later banned by the British Government, but it was still published secretly.

Savarkar was involved in the assassinations of two British Colonial Officials and he was also responsible for circulating bomb-making instructions among his colleagues, which he learned from a revolutionary that was involved in the Russian revolution of 1905. From these events, it is evident that Savarkar was central for promoting political violence against colonial oppressors and in popularizing the concept of an Indian national identity based on a Hindu platform.

His concept of national identity was to create a nation of India that included Hindu’s, Jain’s, Buddhist’s and Sikh’s, while excluding the Christians (British and converts) and Muslims. Later on he became the president of Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, A Hindu chauvinist party, which was highly anti-Muslim. Many sources claim that he transformed from a revolutionary that was willing to work with Muslims to a Hindu Nationalist who was an anti-Muslim, during his imprisonment by the British.

He is alleged to have played a central role of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, for the person that assassinated Gandhi was Nathuram Godse, a member of Hindu Mahasabha and an editor of a daily newspaper, which Savarkar had invested in. Due to this, he was under suspicion and after the assassination of Gandhi, he was put on a trial, but he was not found guilty. After this, he was forced to agree to not get involved with politics, and he was mostly forgotten until 1980s, where his ideology started to have a greater impact on politics. Now, he is being remembered by many Hindu nationalists as an important figure and he was even paid tribute by the Indian Prime minister.

Savarkar died in 26 February 1966 at the age of 82, he stopped eating for he believed that his mission in life was over and decided to die. Savarkar is seen as a key figure in the anti-colonial movement in India and has greatly influenced anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiments among the Indian population. Even though he was in jail for 10 years, he did not give up on his dream of an independent India and consistently worked towards his goal. He was at odds with Gandhi, for he believed that India can only be independent through a violent revolution and actively encouraged and created political violence. His idea of Hindutva has influenced many Indians and is still used in Indian politics today. In conclusion Savarkar was known for his idea of Hindutva, Hindu nationalism and the Indian independence movement.

Jaan Parekh

 

Works Cited

1. Pincince, John. “On the verge of Hindutva: V.D. Savarkar, revolutionary, convict, ideologue, c. 1905–1924.” Dissertations Publishing, 2007. ProQuest

2. Chaturvedi, Vinayak. “ A Revolutionary’s Biography: The Case of V. D. Savarkar.” Postcolonial Studies, vol. 16, no. 2, June 2013, pp. 124–139. ProQuest, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2013.823257.

3. Nandy, Ashis. “ A disowned father of the nation in India: Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and the demonic and the seductive in Indian nationalism.” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, 2 Jan. 2014, pp. 91–112. ProQuest, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649373.2014.882087.

Other Relevant Reading

1. Hindutva
2. The Indian War of Independence of 1857

Narendra Modi

Well-known for his Hindu nationalist approaches, Narendra Modi was appointed as India’s Prime Minister in India’s general election of 2014 (Hindu Nationalism in India’s Heartland, 2017). He was born on September 17, 1950, a few years after the Partition, in a small town in Gujarat, India. Even with tension between Hindus and Muslims at the time, Modi was raised in a community mixed with Muslims, and grew up with many Muslim friends throughout his childhood (Marino, 48). At the age of eight, Modi joined the RSS youth wing, where he began to realise his interest in debating about issues concerning the world. The RSS is an organization that was formed in 1925, with the purpose of promoting Hinduism, and after many years with the RSS, he was offered the position of the sambhag pracharak, which was the regional organizer. He was later promoted in 1990, becoming one of the seventeen members of BJP’s National Election Committee (Marino, 51). With each promotion leading up to his election as Prime Minister of India, Modi was determined to work towards his goals of remaking India and making Hindu nationalism a priority (Marino, 53).

In recent years, the Indian state has attempted to spread the religion of Hinduism across the country through reform and favouritism. Otherwise referred to as Hinduisation, this has been a particular goal for Narendra Modi and the BJP Party (Khalidi, 2008). Modi has been referred to as anti-Muslim because of his efforts in implementing Hindu culture across the country. His resentment for Muslims is associated with the Partition in 1947, which created tension that continues to remain amongst Muslims and Hindus even today. On February 27 of 2002, the Ram temple in Godhra was presumed to be attacked by Muslims, killing over 59 people. That same evening, Modi had televised the ceremony to the public, which unleashed violence towards Muslims as he blamed them for the attack (Jaffrelot, 2015). In many instances, Modi has been given credit for his use of both body language and different intonations, as they are said to demonstrate his strength as an orator for the public (Marino, 47). After the attack on Ram temple, one of Modi’s key tactics involved the manipulation of television with the means to provide reassurance and protection to the public. During the election period, one of his BJP television commercials consisted of a train pulling into the Godhra station, followed by terrified screams and the sounds of rifles being fired. Afterward, his image would be shown in order to demonstrate the protection he could offer against Muslim violence (Jaffrelot, 2015). This has remained to be one of his key tactics for gaining attention and popularity amongst Indian citizens.

In Hinduism, cows are seen as sacred animals as they are thought to represent different deities, motherhood and wealth (Lodrick, 71). To further prioritize Hindu nationalism in India, Modi had stigmatized the consumption of beef and slaughtering of cows in general. He created a ban on the consumption of beef, which was supported by many Hindus as the slaughter of cows is considered taboo (Hindu Nationalism in India’s Heartland, 2017). In one incident, a Muslim labourer was beat to death with bricks by Hindu nationalists for slaughtering a cow. These Hindu nationalists claimed that Muslims’ consumption of beef demonstrated disrespect to Hindus (What Hindu Nationalism Means for India’s Future, 2016). This incident along with others emphasizes the anti-Muslim sentiment many Hindus hold today as a result of Narendra Modi’s beliefs.

In September 2006, Modi’s BJP legislature passed a law against conversion to Islam, but enabled conversion to Hinduism, as Hindu assimilationists argued that conversion to Islam was viewed as a form of denaturalisation (Khalidi, 2008). This anti-Muslim sentiment held by many in India is also commonly held amongst others in different countries, and is also referred to as Islamophobia. The heightening of Islamophobia over recent years has become an important issue, as many Muslims are targeted for their culture. Although Donald Trump may be more of a well-known political figure that holds Islamophobic beliefs, Narendra Modi has proven more than once the resentment he holds for Muslims as well. He has played a significant role in India by trying to prioritize Hinduism over other religions, while also spreading anti-Muslim sentiments across the country. As he remains the Prime Minister of India, he is viewed as an influential leader, and therefore the beliefs he holds will continue to have a great impact on Indians as well as Muslims (Jaffrelot, 2008). In India’s current state, discrimination is most apparent through certain institutions restricting religious freedoms other than Hinduism, and Modi’s goal to remake India as a prominently Hindu nation continues to exist (Khalidi, 2008).

Mira Kashyap

Works Cited

“Hindu Nationalism in India’s Heartland.” Stratfor Analysis, Apr. 2017, p. 33. EBSCOhost, libaccess.mcmaster.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=123510972&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Jaffrelot, Christophe. “Narendra Modi and the Power of Television in Gujarat.” Television & New Media, vol. 16, no. 4, May 2015, pp. 346-353. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/1527476415575499.

Khalidi, Omar. “Hinduising India: Secularism in Practice.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 8, 2008, pp. 1545–1562. JSTOR, JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20455129.

Lodrick, Deryck O. “Symbol and Sustenance: Cattle in South Asian Culture.” Dialectical Anthropology, vol. 29, no. 1, 2005, pp. 61–84. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/29790728.

Marino, Andy. Narendra Modi: A political biography. HarperCollins Publishers India, 2014.

“What Hindu Nationalism Means for India’s Future.” Stratfor Analysis, June 2016, p. 1. EBSCOhost,libaccess.mcmaster.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=116776789&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Liang Qichao

1873-1929

Liang Qiacho was a late 19^th and early 20^th century Confucian scholar and political activist from China (Nguyen).  He started his traditional schooling at an early age of 5, but by the age of 17, rejected this classic form of education and decided to study “New Text Confucianism” under the guidance of Kang Youwei (Nguyen).  These men were two of the foremost thinkers involved in the Hundred Days Reform of 1898 in which they presented a case to modernize China while preserving the country’s cultural heritage (Wong).  This ideological revolution stemmed from the defeat of China in the Sino-Japanese wars and from the realization by men such as Liang that China’s “self-strengthening” movement was not strong enough to usher country into a modern era (Wong).  The period of reform ended in failure and Liang was forced to flee to Japan where he resided until he returned to China in 1913, a year after the Republic of China was founded (Kockum).

While residing in Japan, Liang was no less motivated to reform his country and began three journals (Qingyi bao, Xinmin congbao, and Xin xiaoshuo) as well as an international school named Datong xuexiao (Kockum).  His journal Xin xiaoshuo was a reflection of his dedication to reforming China’s literary field as it was devoted to the presentation of new Chinese novels (Kockum).  Liang also published theories on the “New Novel” in his magazine, pointing out the only two existing forms of stories in Chinese novels (hero stories and love stories) and called for a revolution in the field of literature with the introduction of the political novel (Kockum).  The political novel would have been an asset to Liang’s cause as its introduction in China would have helped spur the political reform that Liang was hoping for with the Hundred Days Reform.  Liang also influenced the appearance of the western library in China by encouraging the Qing government to seek out western works and fund the project as well as providing bibliographies of translated western works for the general Chinese public (Liao).

Nationalism and liberalism were major components of Liang’s theory of the New Citizen which discarded the idea of a benevolent ruler introduced to him by Kang (Nguyen).  Liang put forth a theory placing emphasis on “new citizens” that upheld civic virtue and independence in a powerful nation (Nguyen).  These two conditions for a new citizen were based on the basic principles of individual rationality and selfless civic virtue found in Buddhism (Nguyen).  Liang made national power and individual rights co-dependent by stating that it was a citizen’s right and duty to rise against the government and authoritarian rulers if it would benefit the country (Nguyen).  The New Citizen theory used Buddhism as a faith system (a system Liang believed China was lacking due to modernity) and education to popularize Liang Qichao’s ideas (Nguyen).   Overall, Liang’s New Citizen theory placed emphasis on individual rationalism and moral struggles (Nguyen).

Liang Qichao’s ideas went through a radical change from the beginning of his life to the end.  In his early years, Liang advocated for a shift to western ideals, but about midway through his life, he started advocating for a new respect of Chinese culture (Nguyen).  Due to this dramatic shift in ideologies, Liang was, and still is, often seen by scholars as a man who possessed no concrete ideals, but if looked at more closely, this shift in thought can be seen as Liang adapting ideas to an everchanging landscape of modernity in the 19^th and early 20^th century China (Nguyen).

Anne Houser

FURTHER READINGS

Sino Japanese War:

Jansen, Marius B., et al. “The Historiography of the Sino-Japanese War.” The International History Review, vol. 1, no. 2, 1979, pp. 191–227. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/ 40105728.

Boxer Rebellion:

“Boxer Rebellion”.  History.com, 2009, A+E Networks, http://www.history.com/topics/boxer-rebellion

May Fourth Movement:

Chen, Joseph T. “The May Fourth Movement Redefined.” Modern Asian Studies, vol. 4, no. 1, 1970, pp. 63–81. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/311753.

Works Cited

Kockum, Keiko.  “Liang Qichao: The Japanese Years.” Cina, no. 21, 1988, pp. 195–203. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40855642.  Accessed 6 Nov. 2017.

Liao, Jing. “The Genesis of the Modern Academic Library in China: Western Influences and the Chinese Response.” Libraries & Culture, vol. 39, no. 2, 2004, pp. 161–174. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25549174..  Accessed 6 Nov, 2017.

Nguyen, Anh. “Reconstructing Liang Qichao”.  Earlham College, Spring 2016.   earlham.edu/ media/2858509/reconstructing-lian-qichao.pdf.  Accessed 3 Nov. 2017.

Wong, Young-Tsu. “Revisionism Reconsidered: Kang Youwei and the Reform Movement of 1898.” The Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 51, no. 3, 1992, pp. 513–544. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2057948. Accessed 6 Nov, 2017.

Yukio Mishima 三島 由紀夫

1925-1970

“Fair is the knight who lieth slain
Amid the rush and the reed…” Oscar Wilde

Yukio Mishima, born Kimitake Hiraoka in Tokyo, was 16 years old when Japan entered into the second world war. An alienated child, Mishima spent most of his time reading, growing obsessed with the “beauty of the violent or excruciatingly painful death of a handsome youth.” The Japanese, a historically isolated nation, supported war efforts by promoting worship for their benevolent Emperor while parading racial and cultural superiority. Mishima, an aspiring writer, formed close ties with a band of literary nationalists who formed the Nippon Roman-Ha (Japanese romanticism) movement.

The movement was an embodiment of Japanese ethos: “elegance and that of samurai” An exalted warrior class, The Samurai was honour bound “to lay down his life for duty” as well as remaining “spiritually prepared to meet death bravely and fittingly at any time.” A certain Samurai spirit was revived during the war by conscripted university students boarding kamikaze planes towards a sacrificial death and romanticized by writers who viewed the war as “sacred”. Mishima yearned to satisfy his own desire for death in the military but he was declared unfit for service after embellishing a cold.

Japan surrendered in 1945, enacting a new constitution implemented by allied powers that prohibited the nation from maintaining a military and forced the Emperor to renounce his benevolence. After the war, Mishima made his debut as a novelist, releasing his first book Confessions of a Mask. A deeply revealing autobiography, the novel surprisingly made no reference to the war that marked his adolescence. For the next 20 years, Mishima would write thirteen novels and ten plays, remaining remarkably apolitical despite Japan’s rapid and forceful modernization.

In 1965, bubbling extremism in the form of public demonstrations piqued Mishima’s dormant interest in politics. The Japanese, according to Mishima, accrued a large amount of stress after being forced to “an ultra-modern way of life in [a] short space of time…” After a literary decline, he formed the Tatenokai (shield society) his “spiritual army” comprised of right-wing university students who would get together to perform military exercises and sing about “ballads of cherry blossoms, kamikaze pilots, gangsters…the spirit of old Japan.” On November 25^th, 1970, Mishima committed ritual suicide (hara-kiri or seppuku) at the Ministry of Defense in Tokyo after an attempted coup d’état by four members of the Tatenokai. Before disemboweling himself, Mishima delivered a speech to a confused and irritated regiment who had been assembled at his request. The speech, barely audible, was a call for constitutional reform and restoration of Japan’s greatness.

“Modernization” writes Mishima, “damage[s] the totality of culture.” It is thus that “what is most exquisite in a national culture is tied closely to what may also be most disagreeable.” Mishima had recognized that since the end of the second world war the West “underrated the importance of the ‘dark’ side of Japanese culture.” The Japanese aesthetic, admired by Westerners, which includes the tea ceremony, Zen Buddhism, and haiku poetry only shows “one side of a moon, to the West, while pushing on busily with modernization.” As a result, Japan suppressed its martial tradition and, as stated ominously by Mishima, “insane incidents occur…wherever national culture seeks to regain its totality.” Referring to the “painful condition of Japanese culture” in which the rational humanism of Modernization “turns the eyes of modern man towards the brightness of freedom and progress” while “[wiping] the problem of death from the level of consciousness, pushing it deeper…turning the death impulse…to an ever more dangerous inner-directed impulse” Mishima poetically prophesized the dangers of unmitigated modernization upon cultures with incompatible traditions.

Hidden deep in the subconscious mind, Mishima writes, is the “impulse to be free and the impulse to die” which arise from the “fundamental contradictions of human existence.” Post-war Japan “overflowing with a mood of peace” could not fulfill “the impulse for surrender and death.” Thus individuals seek out “a goal worth dying for” in order to “avoid the boredom and fatigue that seep into an age of peace.” At the age of 45, Mishima was hardly the young handsome youth whose death he had so craved but by his own hand he had restored the traditional Japanese balance between “the chrysanthemum and the sword” for which he sacrificed his life.

In the 47 years following Mishima’s death, Japan’s incredible modernization fueled by “sacrificing everything for industrial growth” allowed them to catch up with and advance beyond other nations. It wasn’t until the 1990s when the country’s economy stalled that the extreme nature of the country’s progress came to light. According to Japanologist Alex Kerr, the nation fell into the pitfalls of both developing countries and advanced economies, “concreting its own rivers and seashores”, and mismanaging public wealth, resulting in a soaring national debt. Recently, Japan’s current prime minister Abe Shinzo has resurrected Japanese nationalism, pushing forward revisions to Article 9 which would end the country’s post-war pacifism. Mishima’s life and death serves as both a testimony and tragedy to the lingering human spirit that earnestly desires to detest, eagerly seeking out a cause to action for which one’s energy may be spent.

Jacob Krone

Works Cited:

Mishima, Yukio. Death in Midsummer and Other Stories. Penguin Books, 1971.

Scott-Stokes, Henry. The Life and Death of Yukio Mishima. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1974.

Mishima, Yukio, and Kathryn Sparling. The Way of the Samurai: Yukio Mishima on Hagakure in Modern Life.

Basic Books, 1977.

Ihara, Saikaku, and Caryl Ann. Callahan. Tales of Samurai Honor. Monumenta Nipponica, Sophia University, 1983.

Kerr, Alex. Dogs and Demons: The Fall of Modern Japan. Penguin, 2002.

Pekkanen Robert J., author, and author Pekkanen Saadia M. “Japan in 2014 : All about Abe.” Asian Survey no. 1

(2015): 103. JSTOR Journals, EBSCOhost (accessed October 21, 2017).

Other Relevant Reading:

Wolfe, Alan Stephen. Suicidal Narrative in Modern Japan. Princeton University Pres, 1990.

Mishima, Yukio. Confessions of a Mask. New Directions, 1958.

Mishima, Yukio, and Michael Gallagher. Runaway Horses. Vintage International, 2002.

 

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

19 May 1881–10 November 1938

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, born Mustafa Pasha (1881-1938) was the founder of the Republic of Turkey and its first president, memorialized in Turkish culture as the father of the republic (Kissane, 2014). Born into a liberal middle-class Muslim family, Atatürk spent his early years receiving a secular schooling, later graduating top of his class from a military education founded in Western ideals and taught by Western-educated professors. This education, which stressed the importance of science and mathematics above religion, would prove to have an indelible effect upon the state Atatürk would later found (Hanioglu, 2017). After achieving minor fame for his exemplary leadership in the Gallipoli Campaign of World War One, Atatürk turned his post-war attentions to unifying resistance groups fighting against Greek imperialism and abuses of power by Entente forces (Alaranta, 2014). Though initially struggling to hold power over the Istanbul-based Sultanate, general opposition to the Sultan’s British alliance led to the legitimization of Atatürk’s Ankara-based parliament and the foundation of the Republic of Turkey on October 29, 1923 (Alaranta). During his tenure as president, Atatürk both westernized and secularized the Turkish Republic through the abolishment of the Caliphate, the closing of Sharia courts and opening of Western ones, the closing of religious schools, and the replacement of Arabic script with the Latin alphabet, among other things (Brown, 1996). He also effectually removed all political opposition and attempted to remove any association with minority identities by rallying the Turkish people behind a banner of monocultural Turkish nationalism (Kedourie, 1999).

Atatürk grew up in an Ottoman Empire which was beginning, however slowly, to embrace Western culture and ideals (Hanioglu). This empire, however, was experiencing social breakdown between the numerous ethnic factions coexisting – in order to quell dissent, statesmen attempted to introduce a kind of messianic nationalism rooted in the Ottoman Empire, though this later morphed into pan-Islamism, which exacerbated already existing religious tensions between Muslim and Christian factions (Hanigolu). The secularly educated Atatürk found this politicization of religion to be inappropriate but took note of the unifying properties of messianic nationalism, a concept which would later form the precepts of his eponymous doctrine of Kemalism (Hanioglu). French influence and thoroughly Western ideologies left over from the Ottoman reform era also made an impact upon Atatürk, who harmonized Enlightenment principles with an authoritarian regime to become a sort of enlightened despot (Alaranta).

Atatürk’s legacy lives on today through legislation and his status as something to emulate in Turkish politics (Brown). Though Islamist leaders have taken hold of power in Turkey since Atatürk’s death, his ideologies have become a quasi-system of checks and balances; especially in the military, which has thrice intervened to protect Atatürk’s state secularism (Brown). State secularism is also protected by complicated legislature which prevents the passing of laws favouring specific religious institutions, a foil of many would-be Islamist leaders (Brown). Atatürk’s persistent cult of personality has also deified him as the “ideal” leader, to whom subsequent Turkish political leaders and parties have all claimed to descend from and emulate in their policies (Brown). Atatürk’s controversial policies and removal of political opposition have permeated the current political scene, in which current President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has silenced critical journalists and often used brutal force to quell dissent and maintain political control (Timur, 2016).

Atatürk’s methods have also permeated world politics, most notably the precepts of the Nazi Party (Ihrig, 2014). After the end of WWI, a dilapidated Germany turned to Turkey as an example of which they would emulate to once again become a dominant European power (Ihrig).

 

Atatürk’s strong leadership, coupled with military might and rampant nationalism, became the ideal model of government to many far-right newspapers, and in turn, to many people who espoused these views (Ihrig). Nazi circles lauded Atatürk’s revolution as a sign that no matter how derelict a nation has become, a Volk uprising could always succeed (Ihrig). Hitler himself frequently spoke of Atatürk being a personal role model and idolized Atatürk’s movement, considering it a sign that the “analogous” Nazi movement in Germany would be successful as well (Ihrig). According to Ihrig (2014), Atatürk’s example “underlined where [the Nazis] were coming from. Yet, the ideological building blocks of this cult [of Atatürk] offered a variety of propagandistic and political tools that emphasized where they wanted to go” (146).

All in all, Atatürk’s reformations set a precedent for Westernization and created a secular state in a part of the world thoroughly entangled in Islamic traditions (Hanioglu). His impact on history is indelible, pervading not only the course of Turkish history, but also world history through his idolization by the Nazi Party and Adolf Hitler (Timur, 2016 and Ihrig, 2014). His governance further exemplifies the applications of messianic nationalism and its potent implications with regards to state nationalism, as well as the successes and difficulties of maintaining a secular state (Kedourie).

Nia Langdon

Works Cited

Asian Wall Street Journal, Sep 30, 1996. Hanioglu, S. (2017). Atatürk: An intellectual biography. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ihrig, S. (2014). Atatürk in the nazi imagination. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kedourie, S. (1999). Turkey before and after atatürk: Internal and external affairs. Portland: Frank Cass Publishers.

The Review of Politics, 76
Timur, S. (2016, July 17). Turkey cracks down as coup unravels after a deadly night. The New York Times, p. 10N.
Webster, D. (1973). The turkey of atatürk. New York: AMS Press.

Other Relevant Reading

Insight Turkey, 15
Mango, A. (2000). Atatürk: the of the founder of modern turkey. Woodstock: Overlook Press. Qureshi, M.N. (2014). Ottoman turkey, ataturk, and muslim south asia. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Alaranta, T. (2014). Contemporary kemalism: from universal secular-humanism to extreme

Turkish nationalism. New York: Routledge Press.

Brown, Brian A. “Ataturk’s Legacy and Turkey’s Army.”

Kissane, B. (2014). Atatürk and after: Three perspectives on political change in turkey.

(2), 293-307.

Heper, M. (2013). Islam, conservatism, and democracy in turkey: Comparing turgut özal and

recep tayyip erdogan.

(2), 141-156.

Che Guevara

June 14, 1928 – October 9, 1967

Ernesto “Che” Guevara was born in Rosario, Argentina to a middle-class family. Guevara was a Marxist revolutionary, along with being an author and physician. His countenance has become a symbol for rebellion, due to his involvement, and prominent position in the Cuban revolution. It is also due to his important role in the Cuban revolution that Che Guevara has become one of the most famous and widely known revolutionaries in all of world history. Guevara was named in Time Magazine’s “100 Most Influential People of the 20th Century.” Even a photo taken of Guevara entitled “Guerrillero Heroico” has been called “the most famous photograph in the world and a symbol of the 20th century”. Guevara’s name, ideologies, and also his very image has become a cornerstone for revolutionary thinkers in the modern era; those who believe exploitation and injustices can be cast away through revolutionary means look to Guevara for inspiration. Guevara showed himself to be a very prominent leader within Fidel Castro’s ‘26th of July Movement’ and was also a trusted advisor to Castro, who was the leader of the Cuban Revolution. Guevara was granted Cuban citizenship on January 9th, 1959 and was quickly recognized as one of the most influential members of Castro’s regime. With the support of the new Cuban Government, Guevara undertook many missions, both commercial, and diplomatic. Che Guevara is often regarded as one of the pioneers of Guerilla warfare, however Guevara did not emanate the key points of Guerilla warfare. Guevara merely adopted the principles of Guerrilla warfare to better suit the Latin American environment. The United States even used the principles laid down by Guevara in his book Che Guevara on Guerrilla Warfare as an anti-Guerilla warfare training manual for the American military. Che Guevara and his work have had an immense influence on the development of social and political thought in Latin America. The ideas which Guevara held have inspired many of the radical groups within Latin America to mirror the ‘Cuban Example’ and so they took off into the countryside or mountains, just as Guevara and Castro did. Following his death in 1967, Che Guevara remained a very prominent face and name on a worldwide scale. Admirer’s of Guevara remember him as an idealistic man, dedicated to the revolution; however, critics of Guevara see him as a mentally unstable, bloodthirsty man, who was a failure in all of his endeavours. Arguably the most valuable thing left behind by Guevara were the lessons learned through the example of his unsuccessful campaign in Bolivia. This campaign demonstrated that in order for Guerilla tactics to be successful they must be in

cooperation with local rural communities, and also that Guerilla tactics can be susceptible to “regular troops trained in counterinsurgency tactics.” As a trained physician, author, and Marxist revolutionary, Che Guevara became one of the most prominent figures in the Cuban revolution, and also a symbol for many revolutionaries within Latin America and other places around the globe. To the present day Che Guevara remains one of the most recognizable faces of rebellion, and one of the most widely known faces and names in all of history.

 

Gary Ghag

Bibliography

Crain, David A. “Che Guevara” Salme Press Biographical Encyclopedia (2017)

Harris, Richard L. “Che Guevara: A Biography” ABC-CLIO, LLC (2011)

Scauzillo, Robert J. “Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara: A Research Bibliography.” L atin American Research Review 5, no. 2 (1970)

 

Other Relevant Reading
Jazeera, Al. “Who was Che Guevara?” Cuba News | Al Jazeera. (2017)

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/che-guevara-171008111523876.html. James, Daniel. “Che Guevara: A Biography” Cooper Square Press. (2001)