Benedict Anderson: The age of globalization (2013, Verso)
255 pages
English language
Published Sept. 13, 2013 by Verso.
The rise of global anarchism corroborated Cuban and Philippines nationalism movements during the second half of 19th century againt Spanish Empire
Benedict Anderson is brilliant. Somehow he manages to tell a scattered story of nationalism and all its influences through the bios of two Filipino writers. It's a fascinating book, covering a lot of territory. And it makes international connections in a way that no other book I have read does - from Europe, Asia, Americas...Really well done.
Anderson argues that people, events and ideas occurring around the same time in an era of international travel and communication have an impact on one another. That seems like a pretty safe proposal - of course it’s the details that matter. In particular his focus was on the overlaps between Filipino, Cuban, and Puerto Rican thinkers and revolutionaries with European thinkers and revolutionaries. It makes sense, and Anderson global outlook and wealth of sources are impressive, but many times I felt like the proposed connections were very tenuous and that the immense amount of background information provided felt like an attempt to grasp at straws.
I feel that the book was more successful as a global recap of that period of time than it was in really making solid arguments for all the links he proposed. However, that thesis of course makes sense. Anarchists are internationalists, so naturally they’d support …
Anderson argues that people, events and ideas occurring around the same time in an era of international travel and communication have an impact on one another. That seems like a pretty safe proposal - of course it’s the details that matter. In particular his focus was on the overlaps between Filipino, Cuban, and Puerto Rican thinkers and revolutionaries with European thinkers and revolutionaries. It makes sense, and Anderson global outlook and wealth of sources are impressive, but many times I felt like the proposed connections were very tenuous and that the immense amount of background information provided felt like an attempt to grasp at straws.
I feel that the book was more successful as a global recap of that period of time than it was in really making solid arguments for all the links he proposed. However, that thesis of course makes sense. Anarchists are internationalists, so naturally they’d support the rebellions against empire - even if nationalist in articulation. And the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Cuba were all colonized by Spain. Of course travel from the colonies to the metropole would not be uncommon, and Spain is in Europe, as were most of the anarchists, so it’d figure that they’d interact.
Personally, I wish he had talked more about anarchism and less about assorted insurrectionist anarchists. And, though I’m not sure what the implications are regarding his argument, it’s disappointing to learn that Anderson had never heard of Indymedia until 2004 (Postscript). I know he’s older and all, but still.
