The Last Revolution ver1a_abx

The Last Revolution_Postcapitalist_Futures_ver1a_abx

This is a new version of The Last Revolution, still unfinished.
But the idea is for a short work.
The critique of Marxism is controversial for some leftists, but in fact, this treatment allows the key issues of Marx to come to the fore in a simpler and more practical form. We make the point that a new left platform can be produced very quickly, as here. We are running out of time: if Marxism is problematical we have to act fast to restart a new platform. Marx’s historical moment as history and core heroic saga is all we need.

We have connected our discussion to an interesting essay at Jacobin: another attempt to critique Marx’s ‘economic determinism’, with a challenge.
https://redfortyeight.com/2021/10/30/the-charge-of-economic-determinism-is-a-futile-debate-time-to-move-on-from-marxism-and-start-over/
The debate over whether Marx is an economic determinist, as we discussed the issue today re: an article at Jacobin, is a waste of time. I admire Marx but his perspective undermined his own platform and left him forever vulnerable to the charge. Those who rush to defend him have a point but can never win the argument against the phalanx of hostile anti-Marxists, who have strong evidence on their side that Marx miscalculated the place of economics in history. We are out of time for this debate that I have watched for a whole life: it is a futile debate but one that Marxists in a sort of de facto defeat can never really escape. Better to move on and start over with new terminology and foundations. Marx and Engels make a great historical introduction as a saga, but the path to socialism must be done from scratch. Look closely at Marx: he was obsessed with his theory but ended in a kind of writer’s block unable to complete Capital. The reason is obvious: he is trying to do something that can’t be done in theory.

Decoding World History ED 1_6dcdx
We have offered a completely new approach from scratch, with a new view of history that is based on empirical chronologies.
The advantage of this approach is that you don’t have to debate, say, idealism and materialism: both appear in the model at historical outcomes as part of a larger system. And so on: an empirical chronology works much better than the attempts to reduce history to some philosophy.

The eonic effect points to what might well be the solution to the quest for a science of history but it shows that the complexity is far beyond our sciences at this point: the question requires a new genre. Failing that we can examine instead empirical constellations of data as civilizations and the hidden driver of their evolution, to the extent we can understand it.

Debating Hegel versus Marx has to be the biggest waste of time ever. With our eonic model you get both.

In the meantime, it is possible to create a simple recipe approach to socialist transformation. It doesn’t require solving the Hegel/Marx debate or fussing over idealism versus materialism. All that is futile now. Our idea of ‘democratic market neo-communism’ shows the basics for a constructivist approach to a new form of economic/social system.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s