The eonic effect would make a good substitute for the hard theory of historical materialism which despite the prestige of marx is a hopeless failure.
The massive increase of our knowledge of world history since the rise of modern archaeology suddenly shows a coherent pattern at work, what we have called the eonic effect. It should be taken empirically without the so-called model which is another near theory.
As a simple outline with a lurking set of questions and hypotheses, on the sidelines, it can be a simple chronology about which everyone can more or less agree and about which we need draw no hard conclusions remaining practical about given chunks of historical data. The whole effort to reduce history to some monolithic causal explanation falls away and we follow a simple chronology.
The problem there, and the temptation of marxist ‘histomat’, is that a theory in closed form is a useful way to dazzle idiots into a true believer’s faith armed with a prophet’s vision of the future.
The evidence has come in: the predicted future didn’t happen. But in that failure we can find the right approach: history is a story of free agents and we are at the end of the ongoing tale, like the episodes of perils of pauline, confronting the task of constructing further episodes: and it is our choice as free agents in the perils of capitalism to construct something from that flag waving of socialism: but the prophet’s vision never defined that future, and without definition we end up like the bolsheviks.
The prophecy needs specifics or it is nothing…and specifics are not so simple and belie flag waving…