论文部分内容阅读
本文集中研究伊恩·麦克尤恩的小说《星期六》,把对入侵伊拉克的矛盾心态当做是划分在入侵和占领伊拉克问题上的自由主义者和明确的马克思主义左翼的一种思考方式。那些赞成入侵的人这么做是由于他们坚信帝国主义/资本主义可能是一种进步的力量(据称马克思在谈及印度问题的时候这样说过)u0003而且确能带来进步,尽管其动机并非如此。这一点在小说中通过塔利布博士的形象体现出来,他是贝罗安的一个伊拉克朋友。贝罗安自己反复提到一个杰出的入侵拥护者,即前任《新左派评论》编辑弗雷德·哈利迪的著作。本文借鉴阿加兹·阿哈默德和大卫·哈维作品,指出对历史进程的这种马克思主义理解需要进行修正,不能再继续认为资本主义对发展是必要的,因而也是进步的。与此同时,麦克尤恩的小说也被看做是一个自由主义者向新自由主义信念转变的征候,这些信念包括在资本主义目前尚无替代品的情况下对帝国主义表示同情。
This paper focuses on Ian McEwan’s Saturday novel and takes the ambivalent mentality of the invasion of Iraq as a way of thinking of dividing the liberals and the explicit Marxist left wing in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Those who favored the invasion did so because they believed strongly that imperialism / capitalism could be a progressive force (Marx was said to have said so when talking about the Indian issue) and indeed did make progress despite its motivation it’s not true. This is reflected in the novel by the image of Dr. Talibu, an Arab friend of Beloan. Mr. Beloan himself repeatedly mentions the work of a prominent advocate of invasion, the writings of Fred Halldi, former editor of the “New Left Review.” Drawing on the works of Agatz Ahmad and David Harvey, this article points out that this Marxist understanding of the historical process needs to be amended and that capitalism can no longer be considered as necessary for its development, and therefore it is also progressive. In the meantime, McEwan’s novel is seen as a sign of libertarian transformation to a neoliberal belief that includes sympathy for imperialism in the absence of any substitutes for capitalism.