The left needs a new historical paradigm (one approach is the eonic model) in a form that is simplified and used as an historical outline that avails itself of the immense amount of new data that has expanded our knowledge of world history. It is not a hindrance but in reality an advantage to see from such a study that history isn’t really driven by economic forces:
the later have a definite compelling force and their manner of coming to dominate social systems can give the misleading interpretation they drive history, which is not the case. The confusion of capitalism and modernity is another aspect of the misleading economic reasoning that has become a norm on the left.
Marx and Engels got it right the first time, prior to the failure of the 1848 revolutions: they understood that capitalism could be a destructive force behind its developmental accelerative character and considered that socialism should play a role as soon as possible. One problem was the extreme contrast of opposite modes when a more realistic approach might try to blend social economic aspects and/or to bring markets into a socialist framework.
Our model of ‘democratic market neo-communism’ does just that…