Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Source: Critical Inquiry , Vol. 40, No. 4, Around 1948: Interdisciplinary Approaches to
Global Transformation, edited by Leela Gandhi and Deborah L. Nelson (Summer 2014),
pp. 298-313
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Critical Inquiry
Georges Bidault, the French foreign minister, in London for the first
United Nations General Assembly meeting in January 1946, looked around
the room and noted his surprise at “the extent to which Europe is absent.”1
A few months later, Gilbert Murray, who was a supporter of the League of
Nations and a prominent internationalist, touched on the same theme. In
an article entitled “Retrospect and Prospect” on the shift from the League
of Nations to the United Nations, he wrote that we need to restore Europe
to restore civilization: “Some great movement for unity and constructive
reconciliation in Europe is an absolute necessity for civilization. . . . Of
course Europe is not everything. There are other continents.”2
From one viewpoint, the years from 1945 to 1948 can be seen as a story
about European reconstruction; from another, they emerge as the opening
chapter of decolonization. Putting these two stories together raises the
question of how Europe’s relations with the world changed in these years
and, in particular, how contemporaries thought about Europe’s changing
place in the world. This in turn was bound up with the ways in which they
read the war and how the experience itself shaped their sense of Europe’s
relationship with the world. This helps explain both Bidault’s surprise and
Murray’s anxious discovery that there are other continents.
The Second World War marked the end of a long period of European
ascendency, whose critical starting point was not the sixteenth century, let
alone the Renaissance, but somewhere at the end of the eighteenth or the
1. Quoted in Mark Mazower, No Enchanted Palace: The End of Empire and the Ideological
Origins of the United Nations (Princeton, N.J., 2009), p. 151; hereafter abbreviated N.
2. Gilbert Murray, “Retrospect and Prospect,” From the League to the U.N. (New York,
1948), pp. 191, 197.
298
This content downloaded from
128.112.203.193 on Tue, 14 May 2019 15:49:48 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Critical Inquiry / Summer 2014 299
early nineteenth century. The age of Eurocentrism spanned the period
from 1800 to 1945 in several senses. First, it marked the emergence of Eu-
rope as a center of world power through its formal colonialism and the
technology gap created by the Industrial Revolution. Concurrently, there
was the rise of settler societies, of which the “Anglo-world,” as James Belich
tells it, was the most successful—although there was also the German-
Russian settlement expansion south and eastwards, as well as its smaller
Ottoman version.3 Subsequently, there was a kind of diplomatic intellec-
tual counterpart to this European ascendancy: a new discipline of interna-
tional law, one that enshrined the notion of a standard of civilization, that
Gerrit Gong wrote about and that rested on a differentiated categorization
of sovereignties in different parts of the world.4 This was accompanied by
a changing conception of Europe. Paradoxically, as Europe expanded in
power, Europe as a concept shrank. In 1840, for instance, the European
powers could plausibly propose to Mehmet Ali that if he stopped threat-
ening to invade Istanbul they would allow him to become part of the
system of Europe. Forty years later, that was not an offer anybody was
making. The geographical conception of Europe had become more fo-
cused even as Europe became more powerful.
In this epoch, the rest of the world increasingly functioned as a place
for exploration and scientific inquiry, as a resource base for commod-
ities and labor, and as a proving ground for ruling virtues and the
spread of civilization. The notable exception to most of this was, of
course, the Western hemisphere. It was of enormous significance that
the Americas came to define themselves, or to be defined by Washing-
ton, as a place where European states could not do as they pleased. The
emergence of the United States initially, as a hemispheric power (as
distinguished from a world power) pitted against European ascen-
dancy, was critical to later developments.
Taking the story through to 1945 implies that this great age of European
expansion did not, as it is sometimes presented in older history books, end
with the Scramble for Africa between 1880 and 1914. It would be more
3. See James Belich, Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Anglo-
World, 1783–1939 (New York, 2009).
4. See Gerrit W. Gong, The Standard of “Civilization” in International Society (New York,
1984).
5. Anecdote conveyed in Robert Jackson oral testimony, Oral History Archives, Butler
Library, Columbia University.
6. See Eugene Kulischer, Europe on the Move: War and Population Changes, 1917– 47 (New
York, 1948).
7. Ibid., p. 312.
8. See Elizabeth Wiskemann, Germany’s Eastern Neighbours: Problems Relating to the Oder-
Neisse Line and the Czech Frontier Regions (London, 1956).
9. See Kulischer, Europe on the Move, chap. 2.
10. See Neil Smith, American Empire: Roosevelt’s Geographer and the Prelude to
Globalization (Berkeley, 2003).
11. See Mazower, Hitler’s Empire: How the Nazis Ruled Europe (New York, 2008), p. 119.
12. See J. A. Hobson, Imperialism: A Study (London, 1902).
13. See Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color against White World-Supremacy (New
York, 1920).
15. See Mira Siegelberg, “Unoffical Men, Efficient Civil Servants: Raphael Lemkin in the
History of International Law,” Journal of Genocide Research 15 (Sept. 2013): 297–316.
16. Quoted in Mazower, “The Strange Triumph of Human Rights, 1933–1950,” Historical
Journal 47 (June 2004): 396.
17. Quoted in ibid., p. 393.
20. Matthew Connelly, A Diplomatic Revolution: Algeria’s Fight for Independence and the
Origins of the Post-Cold War Era (New York, 2003).