In the strange situation we find ourselves in we have entered the realm of the right to revolution: the capitalism dominated republic at the last chance moment can’t move in any way to meet the crisis of climate. But what does that imply?
Given the history of the left we must disown the whole legacy, referring to the marxist cadre, which however can move into a new framework easily.???
In fact this sad situation could jackknife the left and end in a civil war of the left in addition to the right.
We have suggested that unless the left can disown the Bolshevik legacy it will inevitably revert to Stalinism, We need to propose revolution with a new approach.
We have suggested that slogans of socialism aren’t enough: we must have a complex four plus term system to proceed in a way that can invite the respect of those
who cannot trust the marxist legacy.
Our four plus term system is failsafed with a balanced set of opposites. It is a neo-commmunism that disowns all previous communisms and its four plus terms
are democracy, socialist markets, planning sciences, a Commons to which all have equal access in principle, requiring expropriation of capital in the large, a new communism with economic and liberal rights, a parliament, with three dialectical parties, a fourth presidential party of executive powers and guardian of the Commons.
It has an indifference level below with the state allows let go and a sort of free zone of personal ownership, and other organizations.
The result is not leviathan aiming toward total control.
This system requires no teleological theory and can be based on a world history given via periodization: its core epoch is simply modernity, following the rise of the Neolithic, the rise of higher civilization and proximate antiquity. The Marxist system of epochs is simply propaganda and our new approach points to the need to construct a new system and not just wait for it to happen, the vice of teleological marxism.
Revolution is justified by the logic crisis and capitalist insanity, but must offer its own failsafes: procedures of revolution, revolutionary marshals, clarity as to the status of counterrevolutionaries, habeas corpus throughout to guarantee against false jacobinism, and much else. This system is benign but no fried to counterrevolutoinaries. Revolutionary transition must seize control of the fascist covert agencies at once, and start over with a new kind of intelligence agency.
This system can have immense appeal to those who confront the coming calamity of capitalism, climate and ecological disaster. Economic and liberal rights, even during a revolution void, and aiming to equal rights in the Commons.
There is a lot more to say here, and our model refers to the US, but then after that to a community based on a new International.
It is not a buddy system with the remnant leftists steeped in the hopeless muddle of Marxism and pervaded with crypto-stalinists with murderous jacobinism.
They need to say goodbye the useless baggage of leftism that nearly destroyed the socialist future in the era of Bolshevism
There is a lot more to say, here: our four term system needs to marginally increase its complexity as an experiment in real time. This system needs to take the next step and infused its dynamic with ecological socialism.
Leftist ideas provoke great resistance, but at the point where you realize you are dead in a system where rights aim apparently to sink civilization indifferent to capitalist catastrophe the path to our lifeboat becomes possible. The outcome is freedom but not the right to capitalist domination of resources.
———————— Notes
So, you weren’t able to keep it, what next…?
The ‘revolution’ option is enshrined in the lore of the original revolutionary outcome of American ‘democracy’. That the result wasn’t much of a democracy and points to a new future of the genre: an intelligent socialism is the prescription needed for a ‘real democracy’.
That may seem unrealistic but the future of the American system as is seems quite unrealistic…
Imagine that the whole literature of Marxism is obsolete and that the left has to start over. We
have done that here, at high speed with rough results. In principle with this material, a viable brand of socialism (we actually refer to neo-communism) is possible and, in principle, easy. The days of big publishers are passing and there are many ways to produce books now without interference. Our idea is to produce a specific platform with dna related to but distinct from Marxist brands and to show a specific model of social system, in detail.
The left should have been ready by now. What a moment to have ignited revolutionary (or even reformist) change. But the sudden surge of the BLM movement shows the reason: they are starting fresh where leftist/socialists are burdened with immense literatures they don’t understand
This strange situation in the US is like an invitation to revolutionary transformation. And the situation can only get worse. There is some talk of the BLM movement producing a socialist movement. They should try. But a core socialist construct is easy to come by. Although crude and rough this model could produce a new social economy tomorrow with a good chance of success. Look at the bolsheviks: with the materials they had, there was no way to succeed. But a practical approach is actually not that hard.
The revolutionary option is rejected by reformists, but the current system is itself revolutionary, in the midst of a revolution from the right. We talk to both groups with the reformists able to act in the present.
It is virtually impossible to conceive of revolution in a system so controlled as what we have now. But as this year shows, when the time is ripe, the ‘revolution’ happens out of the blue. The French and Russian revolutions were out of the blue. After four years of war the soldiers in the
WW1 trenches threw away their rifles and walked home. The revolution happened almost by default. The Tsar was laughed out and into extinction. Sadly the bolsheviks had no real program.
The way out of this chaos will be a combined approach to see what works. We should respond to a system that is subversive of its own legacy as it tries to pass into fascism with a counterrevolution’/revolution from the left that can recreate democracy, failsafed as socialism.
The current US can’t even handle its own post office: it is going, going…
Revolutions are often called out as illegitimate. But the situation now seems to be we can’t even manage a post office.
The left needs a new perspective on world history beyond defunct historical materialism:
Decoding_World_History
Instead of a theory of history we should construct outlines: the basic outline in world history can be jotted down in a minute:
-
- The Neolthic?
-
- the era of Sumer and Egypt…after ca. 3000 BCE
-
- the classical era…after ca. 600 BCE
- the modern era after ca. 1800 BCE
We are in the third near its beginning: the system is still young and trying to find a correct politics, with democracy setting a keynote.
With a simple outline, we see three age periods, we can study their economies ad hoc, empirically. That’s it for historical theory. We see that modern revolution is a novelty in world history and that should alert us to the potential latent in the modern system. Socialism/communism are not some antithesis of liberal democracy but, as the early socialists understand, the path to ‘real democracy’.
We need to go with what worked: democratic revolutions had an outcome. A socialist revolution must produce something in that spectrum. Go with what worked: the early modern democratic revolutions show that revolutions can succeed. Socialists should study their success (and failures)/
The question of the working class is so confused now noone can make any sense of it. There is a simple answer: the working class may not be revolutionary as once thought, but they should be the center of gravity of a new democracy based on equality. And the working class is any kind of wage laborer. That is almost everyone except capitalists. Egad, by that standard the managers in corporations are ‘working class’. The endless confusion over the working class needs to be laid to rest. The problem is that the proletarian of the early days of the industrial revolution doesn’t exist anymore. The working class is really middle class now and the old formulas of Marx don’t work anymore. There is still a working-class in China, and our ideas should be sidestepping with ideas on an international. We have our plan for a real neo-communism in China, soon policies as to the Great Wall.
————-
The tide is turning towards a new socialist perspective, But if the past is any guide the left will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and end up in the same state capitalism rut run by a one-party elite that was the inexorable fate of Marxist incomplete models. A new socialist social system requires a lot of work, historical, legal, constitutional, and economic.
We have a set of books and materials dealing with a hypothetical movement called The Red Forty-eight Group, with a manifesto and a neo-communist construct, Democratic Market Neo-communism in the context of ecological socialism.
We have made the point that the core left legacy,viz. marxism, by never specifying the nature of what was proposed due to Mark’s reluctance to get specific has too often wasted opportunities in fruitless wrong experiments, most notably the debacle of bolshevism. In addition, Marxism is far too complex a system for practical use, a point lost on many Marxists. Further, the complexity of the system masks a series of wrong theories. We should consider that no science in the realm of history, sociology, or economics really exists. So the pretense of having one is simply ideological propaganda. In many ways the issue of socialism is fairly simple (with complications of realization): it is a question of recipes not of historical theories like historical materialism. Marx has a host of brilliant insights but his overall theoretical perspective as in ‘Stages of Production’ theory as ‘Historical Materialism’ is egregious and mostly false, subtracting form the general cogency of his general empirical observations.
Our DMNC model is just that: a recipe approach to a neo-communist system of a new type: it is both a realizable blueprint and a model you can tinker with: issues of politics, authority, democracy, economics, markets and planning, expropriation and a Commons, etc, remind us that we must create a society that people will find just, efficient, and legally sound in the context of shared resources, equality, economic rights, and ecological socialism. A socialism (we don’t distinguish between socialism and neo-communism unlike legacy marxism) in a real sense should be immediately attractive to its publics, possibly exempting the capitalists, and we should note how the left has ended up with an antagonized public. In that case, something is wrong: people prefer the exploitation they know because they fear the outcome of Stalinism.
A model like our DMNC has nothing to do with any of that, and frankly may even leave behind Marx and marxism, save for their historical epic saga. We can put Marx on posters, and skip the rest. Let us consider the American Rebs: they had no theory, only a set of recipes, between republicanism and a barely conceived democratic idea (suffering ironically the same kind of discredit now suffered by socialism) inherited from antiquity under a cloud of discredit. How ironically similar to our current situation. they brought it off, but the result clearly suffered the diagnosis of Marx and the socialists as to the bourgeois revolution and democracy captured by capitalism. So they sermonized about ‘real socialism as real democracy’.
The point here is that the left can’t just chant mantras of socialism: they have to win over a new public with some real guarantees and future projections that are realizable, just and resolve the ecological crisis and economic terminal capitalism.
The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12(1)
—–
The left is almost paralyzed: we have suggested the need to bypass ideological exhaustion with a new framework. In a way global culture is moving toward what in antiquity generated a new religion, and we see that in the ambiguity of the old marxism which is acting like a dead religion already. That is not what we want at all but the gist of a new and more intelligent secularism might help the various ‘lefts’ to reconstruct a social activism whether reformist or revolutionary.
we have suggested:
a new perspective on world history beyond the sterile marxist historical materialism:
it is hard to think of a worse historical perspective for the left. It worked OK in the nineteenth century but is a burden now…
a new perspective on evolution beyond the sterile darwinism and social darwinism:
the original view of Marx was critical of darwinism, but then the marx cult took over, what a waste…
an intelligent secularism that is more than value-free social science and able to look at culture in terms of facts and values: thatsimple change is more than enough for a secular debriefing of religious traditions which are fading away and yet obstacles to the left
———-
Is ‘America’ doomed? Civil War 2.O…CIA in stealth mode…Death Valley temps the new normal…
The current race protests are making their grim point: the modern world was just on the verge of escaping slavery and it turned around and went backwards. And americans were a part of that tragedy.
There is at least a possibility of correction: after all, the Civil War was able to achieve abolition.
But the elusive nature of the problem has persisted and we confront another point of passage, civil war 2.0 or not.
The climate crisis and the pandemic added in show a system on the verge of revolution. We need to consider the path forward before the right and the CIA do it for us.
The question of capitalism doesn’t need a lot of theory. The point is simply the need to integrate social and economic functions, something rogue capitalism never allows as it blocks real social functioning. We don’t have much time left to change course here.
The whole system is going smash with no one to pick up the pieces.
A new approach is needed.
Decoding_World_History_ version 12
Two Manifestos
This strange situation in the US is like an invitation to pass to revolutionary transformation. The revolutionary option is rejected by reformists, but the current system is itself revolutionary, in the midst of a revolution from the right. We should respond to a system that is subversive of its own legacy as it tries to pass into fascism with a ‘counterrevolution’/revolution from the left that can recreate democracy, failsafed as socialism. The latter has to be redefined and clarifies to the point that it has popular support. That Trump’s base is unable to see their own advantage in a real socialism shows the paradox all along of the populist right. It takes a pretty big screw up by the left for that to happen. We disown the past and start with a new far-left populist socialism with both a robust new type of economy and an emergency economy as the world system slides into chaos.
Two Manifestos version
9780984702930-LFM_text(1)
The left needs a new perspective on world history beyond defunct historical materialism:
Decoding_World_History
The tide is turning towards a new socialist perspective, But if the past is any guide the left will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and end up in the same state capitalism rut run by a one-party elite that was the inexorable fate of Marxist incomplete models. A new socialist social system requires a lot of work, historical, legal, constitutional, and economic.
We have a set of books and materials dealing with a hypothetical movement called The Red Forty-eight Group, with a manifesto and a neo-communist construct, Democratic Market Neo-communism in the context of ecological socialism.
We have made the point that the core left legacy,viz. marxism, by never specifying the nature of what was proposed due to Mark’s reluctance to get specific has too often wasted opportunities in fruitless wrong experiments, most notably the debacle of bolshevism. In addition, Marxism is far too complex a system for practical use, a point lost on many Marxists. Further, the complexity of the system masks a series of wrong theories. We should consider that no science in the realm of history, sociology, or economics really exists. So the pretense of having one is simply ideological propaganda. In many ways the issue of socialism is fairly simple (with complications of realization): it is a question of recipes not of historical theories like historical materialism. Marx has a host of brilliant insights but his overall theoretical perspective as in ‘Stages of Production’ theory as ‘Historical Materialism’ is egregious and mostly false, subtracting form the general cogency of his general empirical observations.
Our DMNC model is just that: a recipe approach to a neo-communist system of a new type: it is both a realizable blueprint and a model you can tinker with: issues of politics, authority, democracy, economics, markets and planning, expropriation and a Commons, etc, remind us that we must create a society that people will find just, efficient, and legally sound in the context of shared resources, equality, economic rights, and ecological socialism. A socialism (we don’t distinguish between socialism and neo-communism unlike legacy marxism) in a real sense should be immediately attractive to its publics, possibly exempting the capitalists, and we should note how the left has ended up with an antagonized public. In that case, something is wrong: people prefer the exploitation they know because they fear the outcome of Stalinism.
A model like our DMNC has nothing to do with any of that, and frankly may even leave behind Marx and marxism, save for their historical epic saga. We can put Marx on posters, and skip the rest. Let us consider the American Rebs: they had no theory, only a set of recipes, between republicanism and a barely conceived democratic idea (suffering ironically the same kind of discredit now suffered by socialism) inherited from antiquity under a cloud of discredit. How ironically similar to our current situation. they brought it off, but the result clearly suffered the diagnosis of Marx and the socialists as to the bourgeois revolution and democracy captured by capitalism. So they sermonized about ‘real socialism as real democracy’.
———–
We have combined several versions of our ‘blogbook’ and next will reduce it all to one text.
Imagine that the whole literature of Marxism is obsolete and that the left has to start over. We
have done that here, at high speed with rough results. In principle with this material, a viable brand of socialism (we actually refer to neo-communism) is possible and, in principle, easy. The days of big publishers are passing and there are many ways to produce books now without interference. Our idea is to produce a specific platform with dna related to but distinct from Marxist brands and to show a specific model of social system, in detail.
The left should have been ready by now. What a moment to have ignited revolutionary (or even reformist) change. But the sudden surge of the BLM movement shows the reason: they are starting fresh where leftist/socialists are burdened with immense literatures they don’t understand
This strange situation in the US is like an invitation to revolutionary transformation. And the situation can only get worse. There is some talk of the BLM movement producing a socialist movement. They should try. But a core socialist construct is easy to come by. Although crude and rough this model could produce a new social economy tomorrow with a good chance of success. Look at the bolsheviks: with the materials they had, there was no way to succeed. But a practical approach is actually not that hard.
The revolutionary option is rejected by reformists, but the current system is itself revolutionary, in the midst of a revolution from the right. We talk to both groups with the reformists able to act in the present.
It is virtually impossible to conceive of revolution in a system so controlled as what we have now. But as this year shows, when the time is ripe, the ‘revolution’ happens out of the blue. The French and Russian revolutions were out of the blue. After four years of war the soldiers in the
WW1 trenches threw away their rifles and walked home. The revolution happened almost by default. The Tsar was laughed out and into extinction. Sadly the bolsheviks had no real program.
The way out of this chaos will be a combined approach to see what works. We should respond to a system that is subversive of its own legacy as it tries to pass into fascism with a counterrevolution’/revolution from the left that can recreate democracy, failsafed as socialism.
The current US can’t even handle its own post office: it is going, going…
Revolutions are often called out as illegitimate. But the situation now seems to be we can’t even manage a post office.
The left needs a new perspective on world history beyond defunct historical materialism:
Decoding_World_History
Instead of a theory of history we should construct outlines: the basic outline in world history can be jotted down in a minute:
-
- The Neolthic?
-
- the era of Sumer and Egypt…after ca. 3000 BCE
-
- the classical era…after ca. 600 BCE
- the modern era after ca. 1800 BCE
We are in the third near its beginning: the system is still young and trying to find a correct politics, with democracy setting a keynote.
With a simple outline, we see three age periods, we can study their economies ad hoc, empirically. That’s it for historical theory. We see that modern revolution is a novelty in world history and that should alert us to the potential latent in the modern system. Socialism/communism are not some antithesis of liberal democracy but, as the early socialists understand, the path to ‘real democracy’.
We need to go with what worked: democratic revolutions had an outcome. A socialist revolution must produce something in that spectrum. Go with what worked: the early modern democratic revolutions show that revolutions can succeed. Socialists should study their success (and failures)/
The question of the working class is so confused now noone can make any sense of it. There is a simple answer: the working class may not be revolutionary as once thought, but they should be the center of gravity of a new democracy based on equality. And the working class is any kind of wage laborer. That is almost everyone except capitalists. Egad, by that standard the managers in corporations are ‘working class’. The endless confusion over the working class needs to be laid to rest. The problem is that the proletarian of the early days of the industrial revolution doesn’t exist anymore. The working class is really middle class now and the old formulas of Marx don’t work anymore. There is still a working-class in China, and our ideas should be sidestepping with ideas on an international. We have our plan for a real neo-communism in China, soon policies as to the Great Wall.
————-
The tide is turning towards a new socialist perspective, But if the past is any guide the left will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and end up in the same state capitalism rut run by a one-party elite that was the inexorable fate of Marxist incomplete models. A new socialist social system requires a lot of work, historical, legal, constitutional, and economic.
We have a set of books and materials dealing with a hypothetical movement called The Red Forty-eight Group, with a manifesto and a neo-communist construct, Democratic Market Neo-communism in the context of ecological socialism.
We have made the point that the core left legacy,viz. marxism, by never specifying the nature of what was proposed due to Mark’s reluctance to get specific has too often wasted opportunities in fruitless wrong experiments, most notably the debacle of bolshevism. In addition, Marxism is far too complex a system for practical use, a point lost on many Marxists. Further, the complexity of the system masks a series of wrong theories. We should consider that no science in the realm of history, sociology, or economics really exists. So the pretense of having one is simply ideological propaganda. In many ways the issue of socialism is fairly simple (with complications of realization): it is a question of recipes not of historical theories like historical materialism. Marx has a host of brilliant insights but his overall theoretical perspective as in ‘Stages of Production’ theory as ‘Historical Materialism’ is egregious and mostly false, subtracting form the general cogency of his general empirical observations.
Our DMNC model is just that: a recipe approach to a neo-communist system of a new type: it is both a realizable blueprint and a model you can tinker with: issues of politics, authority, democracy, economics, markets and planning, expropriation and a Commons, etc, remind us that we must create a society that people will find just, efficient, and legally sound in the context of shared resources, equality, economic rights, and ecological socialism. A socialism (we don’t distinguish between socialism and neo-communism unlike legacy marxism) in a real sense should be immediately attractive to its publics, possibly exempting the capitalists, and we should note how the left has ended up with an antagonized public. In that case, something is wrong: people prefer the exploitation they know because they fear the outcome of Stalinism.
A model like our DMNC has nothing to do with any of that, and frankly may even leave behind Marx and marxism, save for their historical epic saga. We can put Marx on posters, and skip the rest. Let us consider the American Rebs: they had no theory, only a set of recipes, between republicanism and a barely conceived democratic idea (suffering ironically the same kind of discredit now suffered by socialism) inherited from antiquity under a cloud of discredit. How ironically similar to our current situation. they brought it off, but the result clearly suffered the diagnosis of Marx and the socialists as to the bourgeois revolution and democracy captured by capitalism. So they sermonized about ‘real socialism as real democracy’.
The point here is that the left can’t just chant mantras of socialism: they have to win over a new public with some real guarantees and future projections that are realizable, just and resolve the ecological crisis and economic terminal capitalism.
The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12(1)
———————–
Anthropocene, Capitalocene
We have several short books with archived material, and a blogbook a piece: we can summarise the issues in a new outline:
Capitalism, Communism and the Evolution of Civilization(2)
The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12(2)
Introduction
The current moment stands transfixed by the moving calamity of climate change, and now in our immediate present, in the US, the tragedy/farce of the Trump presidency. The eerie strangeness of such a drone fascist pretender has generated a mysterious revolution in reverse gear, a sort of tragicomic coup d’etat that moves in the tide of reactionary anti-democratic forces attempting to undo modernity as such.
The place of the left is to stand ready for a rescue operation that can diagnose the tragedy unfolding via capitalism and take the path to a new social formation, assuming it can envision what that might be. It might be socialism but the term is too vague at this point and we become specific about what that means.
The left arises in the early modern as does the modern novelty, revolution. The early Greek city-states, and elsewhere, essentially invented the genre, no doubt, but it is not until modern times that the process takes a formal rendering. We can see the Reformation as the starting point and the beautiful and preposterous Utopia of More prophecies a new genre.The English Civil War, despite its confusing history is a key moment in every respect. But then in the Restoration we see the confusing mix of counterrevolution and oligarchy smothering the democratic potential of the triumphant Parliament. This phenomenon reflects the critique of Marx of such compromised democracy manque.
The charge of utopianism is castigated from the right, and the left, and is charged by Marx himself as a mere precursor to his ‘scientific’ socialism. But if a later age finds his science wanting we are thrown back to the philosophical if not utopian ‘blue print’ formulations that pass through the early modern gestation of revolutionary action. The early modern most naturally equivocates a kind of dialectic of revolution, democracy, and finally socialism. The classic phasing of the French Revolution produced the modern version of socialism and communism in its wake, during which the issues of class, ideology and liberalism were the object of world-historical debates. There Marx’s unique contribution was to show the framework of liberalism, to spawn democracy, was de facto captured by the capitalist regime. From there he proceeded to a set of theories that seem less useful now, as they provoke their own metaphysical ideology, based on economic fundamentalism. World history is a curious enigma and will not yield easily to the regime of science. We can invoke the world of ‘models’ to consider a continuum of applied socialism in practice.
The legacy of marxism propounds a view of history that is of dubious scientific value. The tenets of productive force determinism seem dated now but served to generate a tremendous early tide of movements
The core of marxism is useful, but we must start from the beginning all over again.
Marx/Engels are almost perfect as epic figures in the core heroic saga of 1848 and the gestation of socialism in France in the wake of the French Revolution.
Our task here is to posit a new leftist formation, The Red Forty-eight Group as a superset and exit point for all the endless Socialist This/Socialist That sects that can’t fathom their deadlocked condition in the current situation which in the US is practically begging for a revolutionary action.
The idea of the red forty-eight group looks to the year 1848 whose seminal significance is a forward pass to our time of the basic milieu of revolutionary action and the emergence of modern politics.
Most of this already exists in various books which we will cite at the end of this short summary of their issues.
At a moment when in the US the shennanigans of Trump have almost singlehandedly created an invitation to revolution we find the whole left paralyzed.
In addition the coming of the Covid-19 pandemic has shown a grotesque further horror demo from the Trump and his gang. It is a moment when, if you can’t revolt, you end with your just desserts, slavehood. Slavehood and slavery are technically not the same but the difference seem marginal at this point.
We can conclude a set of books available via the web, for sale, or free, that animate a revised leftist platform and deals with a set of issues pointing to a new kind of platform. After that we will outline still another blogook as a work in progrees outlining the issues raised. We need an instant book done in one sitting and this is both a book and a mere outline of a book…
• The Crisis of Civilization
We are at a moment of emerging social crisis and collapse in the sudden decline of incomplete and fragmented modernities in which the capitalist phenomenon has started to metasthesize into a malignant social formation. We reject the idea that this is an age of capitalism: it is form of modernity that allowed unchecked capitalism to overtake the whole social formation
1.1 Ecological Calamity
The industrial revolution reaches its nemesis as capitalism turns malevolent and becomes a destroyer of an entire planetary system..
1.2 the reign of neoliberalism
The current period is designated as the reign of neoliberalism, but it is one and the same capitalist formation and ideology that emerged in the period the industrial revolution…it didn’t have to be that way..
1.3 Capitalism and modernity
Capitalism is not an epoch in world history but a component of modernity that has tried to become the definition of modernity when it should have been subjected to socialist interaction from the start…
1.4 Revolutions per second
The history of technology fascinates us but it is not the real driver of social history. Nonetheless th industrial revolution is unique moment, but prone to the mistake of technological thinking applied to all social constructs. But the business of social construction is far more complex than any technology…
1.5 1848 Red Fortyeight Group
The period of the post-revolutionary period in France produced a cascade of attempts to correct the tendencies of the the original in the birth of multiple leftist formations converging to the year 1848 with its failure to realize a properly constructed to the question of modernity…
• History and Evolution
The place of history in evolution and evolution in history are a useful generalized category pair beyond the economic fundamentalism of much leftist thinking (dominated by confrontation with capitalism)
2.1 Epochs and ages
Marxism posits a set of economic epochs but the scheme fails to fret the ultra-complex factors of world history as a whole. The ages of economic organization might better find a large periodization in what modern archaeology has found as the natural progression of the epochs of civilization, roughly the Neolithic, the wake of Sumer and Dynastic Egypt, proximate antiquity and the rise of modernity.
2.2 The Eonic Effect
The ‘eonic effect’ is basically the periodization above but comes with a crackerjack surprise in terms of an insight into the evolution of civilization. But theories of history are risky: it is enough to follow simple chronologies as above and take simple modernity and its early modern as the basic ‘epoch’; this is far larger that capitalism. The two are not the same.
2.3 The modern transition
The eonic effect shows world history fretted in a complex of transitions and the early modern is a classic example.
2.4 Man and Evolution
Ultimately man evolves in a larger schema than that given by darwinism and that evolutionary process gets a glimpse in the eonic effect itself
2.5 Last and First Men
The coming of homo sapiens is key focus for the left and coming to an understanding of human evolution is a stage in the evolution of man beyond his present, beyond capitalism to socialism. We must be wary of the terms of evolutionary discourse and isolate the ideological factors in ‘theories’ proposed, not the least by capitalist economists.
• Once and Future Socialisms
3.1 What is to be done?
Lenin’s classic tends to mesmerize us with the failed bolshevik disaster The Red Forty-eight Group disowns the whole legacy and resolves to study is failure and create a decisive break in historical continuity: a revolution in the ranks of the revolution.
3.2 Critical marxism
We have considered the classic image of Marx/Engels as inpsriational as we move rapidly through a critique of marxism to some new starting point. Dialectical materialism should be dismantled on the spot and the issue of dialectic repaired with a new insight into complex systems. There may be a higher logic in the hegelian culture kampf of geist but in the nonce straight dyadic logic is the only safe tool available.
3.3 New Manifesto
We have a new manifesto taken as echo of the Marx/Engels classic and yet a new call full bullet points for a fresh revolutionary restart…
3.4 DMNC
The shibboleths of socialism sounded in a void are not enough: we must attempt constructed socialist blueprints and the process moves from the forced focus on socialism to a complex system of interacting components: democracy/authority, markets/planning, and properties/individualities versus a Commons of expropriation, the latter the fundamental task of what is taken as or called neo-communism, as in democratic market neo-communism. This complex system contains four complexities in one and shows why bolshevik oversimplifications were inadequate to social reformation.
3.5 Ecosocialism To this democratic market neo-communism we must bring an ecosocialist content and make the basic construct serve to create an ecological socialism.
1848+: The End(s) of History 