Revisionism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This does not cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!) This article has been tagged since June 2006.

Revisionism has several meanings. One of its first (neutral) uses was the revision of Marx's doctrine by Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky in the late 19th century. Revisionism can also refer to the reexamination of past historical events as in to question conventional wisdom on a subject and determine what really occurred during an historical event as in historical revisionism. The term also has taken on a negative meaning in which it refers to attempts to deny generally accepted past events or at least alter the view of such events for political or other advantages such as in Holocaust denial (See also historical revisionism (negationism)). The term is also used neutrally in describing fiction which alters or comments on a previous fictional work or genre.

1 Revisionism in the Socialist movement
2 Historical revisionism
3 Territorial revisionism
4 Fictional revisionism
5 Footnotes

[edit] Revisionism in the Socialist movement

Chinese poster from the first stage of Cultural Revolution, reading: "Down with the Soviet revisionists" in large print, and "Crush the dog head of Leonid Brezhnev, and crush the dog head of Alexey Kosygin" at the bottom, 1967

Revisionism (particularly in the western socialist context) has most usually been applied to the reformulation, or for its detractors, the watering down, or abandonment, of cherished principles. For the more authoritarian currents within socialism, but not necessarily exclusively, the term has been used as a term of abuse. It has, however, been used in different ways at different times about different socialist trends.

In the late 19th century revisionism was used to describe writers such as Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky who sought to revise the teachings of Karl Marx by claiming that a violent revolution was not necessary to achieve socialism. In all further uses of this term, there was an initial intent to create "guilt by association" between the abused socialist, and the actions of Bernstein in opposing violent revolution. See reformism.

In the 1940s and 1950s within the international Communist movement, revisionism was used to describe Communists who focused on consumer goods production instead of heavy industry, accepted national differences and encouraged democratic reforms. Revisionism was one of the charges leveled at Titoists in a series of purges beginning in 1949 in Eastern Europe. After Stalin's death revisionism became briefly acceptable in Hungary during Imre Nagy's government (1953-1955) and in Poland during Władysław Gomułka's government, although neither Nagy nor Gomułka described themselves as revisionists.

Following the Soviet repression of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, many people, particularly intellectuals, resigned from western Communist parties in protest. They were sometimes accused of revisionism by "loyalist" Communists. E. P. Thompson's New Reasoner was an example of this revisionism. This movement eventually became known as the New Left.

The views, so described, of Anthony Crosland, Hugh Gaitskell and their followers in the United Kingdom's Labour Party in the 1950s and subsequently, concerning the relevance of Public ownership in the party's objectives.

In the early 1960s, Mao Zedong and the Communist Party of China revived the term revisionism to attack Nikita Khrushchev and the Soviet Union over various ideological and political issues, as part of the Sino-Soviet split. The Chinese routinely described the Soviets as "modern revisionists" through the 1960s. This usage was copied by the various Maoist groups that split off from Communist parties around the world.

Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser attacked John Lewis and Marxist humanists as "revisionists".

In 1944, based on the unity against fascism (Teheran Conference), Browder declared that capitalism and Communism could peacefully co-exist (a concept that was different than that of Lenin's peaceful coexistence). In 1945, Jacques Duclos, a leader of the French Communist Party denounced Browder's policy ("Duclos letter") and Browderism was considered a new form of revisionism.

In 1948, Yugoslavia accepted US aid, separated from the Comintern bloc of countries and was accused of revisionism.

[edit] Historical revisionism

Main articles: Historical revisionism and Historical revisionism (negationism)

The term historical revisionism has a respectable meaning among historians and journalists as, illustrated in the Washington Post article "History In The Remaking: Reagan's Story Doesn't End Here" ^[1]. Historical revisionism also has a more specific meaning when it is used as a label to describe the views of historians who publish articles that deliberately misrepresent and manipulate historical evidence. An example of this secondary usage is reported in another Washington Post article, "Conservatives Celebrate Winning One for the Gipper" ^[2]:

People for the American Way saw it in a different light [...] Our primary concern is continued right-wing intimidation against the expressions of opposing points of view, whether attacks on dissent, intimidation of scientific researchers, or a demand for historical revisionism – or historical cleansing – regarding Ronald Reagan. (emphasis added).

This second common usage has occurred because some authors who publish articles that deliberately misrepresent and manipulate historical evidence (such as David Irving, a proponent of Holocaust denial), have called themselves "historical revisionists"^[3], and this label has been used by others as a pejorative to describe them when criticizing their work.

Another example of historical revisionism is as a result of political intent. In particular, one can examine the aggressive efforts of some governments to censor school textbooks and online sources. By intentionally omitting or censoring some information, such governments can pursue a nationalistic agenda. Even delays of public information can misconstrue the original events. Current examples would include:

The Chinese government for censoring criticism of how the CPC dealt with the civil protests such as Tiananmen Square Protests.
Japanese school textbooks tend to whitewash acts of aggression and atrocities by Japan during WWII Japanese war crimes.

[edit] Territorial revisionism

Territorial revisionism is sometimes used as an euphemism for revanchism or irredentism. In post-World War I Europe the term was used to connote various nationalists opposed to international treaties which have deprived their country of territory, such as Germans opposed to the Treaty of Versailles, Hungarians opposed to the *Treaty of Trianon and the like. The term regained a rather similar usage in European post-Cold War debate, where many ethnic minorities hope to change the state borders drawn up after World War II.

Revisionist Zionism was a movement founded by Vladimir Jabotinsky, who argued that the terms of the British Mandate in Palestine should be revised to make explicit the objective of creating a Jewish state there, and that the territory east of the Jordan River (Emirate of Transjordan in Jabotinsky's time, now the Kingdom of Jordan) be included in that future Jewish state. Today's Likud party is a direct descendant of the Revisionists.

[edit] Fictional revisionism

In fiction, revisionism is the retelling of a story or type of story with substantial alterations in character or environment, to "revise" the view shown in the original work. This usage is not generally considered pejorative.

- For example, the film Dances With Wolves is a revisionist Western because it portrays the Native Americans sympathetically instead of as the savages of traditional Westerns, which have been criticized as racist.
- Similarly, the novel Wicked by Gregory Maguire is a revisionist account of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, which portrays The Wicked Witch of the West being on the right side and the Wizard being evil.
- The novel Creation by Gore Vidal portrays a secret history of the Persian Empire, not implausible but neither supported by historical evidence, in which Darius murders King Cambyses and steals the throne from rightful heir Prince Smerdis, in collusion with Queen Atossa.