Postcapitalist futures: online texts

Postcapitalist_Futures_The_Last_Revolution_ver17abx

Decoding World History_ED1
9780984702909_Descent_of_Man_Revisited(3)
 9780984702930-LFM_text(2)

Toward a New Communist Manifesto_jlandon_kindle_10_11_16_PDF_ver2
Democratic_Market_Neo_Communism_ver_5(2)

WHEE_abrdg_kindle_johnlandon_PDF2A (1) (1)

9780984702909_Descent_of_Man_Revisited(4)

Capitalism, Communism and the Evolution of Civilization(1)

9780984702947_txt_Enigma_of_the_Axial_Age(1)
Samkya_ancient_modern2ax
The_Failure_of_Darwinism_Landon_kindle_version_pdf(1)

The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12
The Crisis of Modernity_ver6
Out of Revolution_text_kindle_johnlandon_wbf_pdf
WHEE_5thed_pdf (1)(1)Kants_challenge_resolved_nature’s secret_plan7xa_web
R48G_The Coming_Of_Postacapitalism_pdf

Postcapitalist futures: online texts

Postcapitalist_Futures_The_Last_Revolution_ver17abx

Decoding World History_ED1
9780984702909_Descent_of_Man_Revisited(3)
 9780984702930-LFM_text(2)

Toward a New Communist Manifesto_jlandon_kindle_10_11_16_PDF_ver2
Democratic_Market_Neo_Communism_ver_5(2)

WHEE_abrdg_kindle_johnlandon_PDF2A (1) (1)

9780984702909_Descent_of_Man_Revisited(4)

Capitalism, Communism and the Evolution of Civilization(1)

9780984702947_txt_Enigma_of_the_Axial_Age(1)
Samkya_ancient_modern2ax
The_Failure_of_Darwinism_Landon_kindle_version_pdf(1)

The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12
The Crisis of Modernity_ver6
Out of Revolution_text_kindle_johnlandon_wbf_pdf
WHEE_5thed_pdf (1)(1)Kants_challenge_resolved_nature’s secret_plan7xa_web
R48G_The Coming_Of_Postacapitalism_pdf

The eonic model and world history: no other model exists that can match its combination of evolutionary dynamics and free agency…Historical materialism is dated now…

We have critiqued ‘historical materialism’ repeatedly here, from the left and suggested a new approach that could serve the left better than the dated legacy of Marxism. This article starts with an attack on postmodernism and its rejection of historical laws, etc…But the issue of history is not so simple and the lack of a science does not entail the lack of analysis. The issue is falsely posed: we can reject a ‘science’ of history without rejecting a larger analysis of its essential nature.
The eonic model is a new breakthrough that distinguishes ‘system action’ and free agency and shows how the two interact as we place the issue of civilization in the context of post-Darwinian evolution.
This model uncovers the unsuspected dynamic behind world history and its connections: the category is an evolutionary model and a two-level micro/macro distinction.. No other model can match the blend of historical determination and the action of free agents inside it.

This model can easily adapt to new versions of liberalism, socialism, and what we call neo-communism. The interaction of a system and a free agent is the key to this approach and occurs in ordinary life in dozens of examples: the most obvious being the ‘system action’ of an automobile and the ‘free agency’ of the driver.

The left including Marxists would do well to recast their whole subject and start over ASAP as time runs out for the left: an old-style revolution in marxist terms isn’t going to happen: what is needed is a platform with a more generalized model of history and crucially a reminder that now ‘laws of history’ are going produce postcapitalism: men/women as free agents must construct and realize a new model of society.

The International Marxist Tendency proudly presents the Winter 2021 issue of the In Defence of Marxism theoretical journal! This latest edition is themed around the topic of historical materialism. We publish below the editorial by Alan Woods.

Source: In defence of historical materialism: new magazine out now!

progress, world history and the ‘eonic model’…//Is “Progress” at a Standstill? 

The issue of progress depends on a model of historical evolution, which doesn’t exist in the current confusions over evolution, next to religious or theological ‘myths’.
One can only recommend a study of the eonic effect and its model to see that the issue of ‘progress’ is bound up in the dynamic in question: a discrete series effect that clearly shows the way ‘progress’ can slow and come to a stop for centuries at a time: witness the rapid advances of early classical antiquity followed by the slow but steady decline in the occident followed by the collapse of Romanism and the medieval interval. Then, just as suddenly what we call modernity takes off in the sixteenth century for a rapid transition to the world we live in now. The model shows: transition as macro effect (1500 to 1800, rougly), divide (1800), change in character of rapid advances as ‘system dynamic’ passes into ‘free action’. There is no guarantee the  latter can maintain the mainline of advance or persist with the innovations in place. Note that the issue of democracy is bound up in this dyanamic.as in two cases ‘democracy’ shows a macro boost, in the first case, Greece, damping out and then disappearing for millennia. We can suspect from the example of antiquity with its ‘divide’ ca. 600 BCE that the free agency replacing the macro dynamic is in trouble within two centuries. Sure enough in the modern case two centuries after 1800 in the US at least a kind of chaotification is setting in, eerily on schedule. There is no inevitable fate here: the whole point is to pull oneself together and bring free agency by itself to the task.

It would help to study this overall picture, but in the total confusion created by Darwinism and wrong theories of evolution it is very difficult to prevent academic or scientific institutions from falling into a funk, as they have on evolution. In the current situation there are no real social resources to correct the confusion over history.

A long and thorough study of the ‘eonic model’ along with the rising chorus of dissent on Darwinism, but without the religious propaganda on the right, can reorient thinking and show how the modern ‘progress’ effect emerges in the context of a larger dynamic…Almost all the effects of progress (as a dynamic of advancing civilization) are correlated with the eonic sequence.

This kind of model requires organized study but the current confusions of academia require independent study alone.

Decoding World History ED 1_6dcdx

In 1788,

Source: Is “Progress” at a Standstill? – CounterPunch.org

The Last Revolution: Postcapitalist Futures ver13ax

The Last Revolution_Postcapitalist_Futures_ver13ax

The previous version had a problem so here is version 13ax with a new title: The Last Revolution: Postcapitalist Futures…we already have two other books called Postcapitalist Futures…

I also put in the original much better essay on Samkhya: Ancient and Modern, with a cautionary note. The realms of yoga and sufism have many who absolutely detest Marxists. The ancient sutras belong to humanity, public domain since the Neolithic. But a lot of predatory guru types don’t always think so. The lore of original samkhya however is probably harmless, ditto for the now comically global so-called (hatha) ‘yoga’. The issue of the Marxist dialectic in relation to ancient Samkhya is almost comic.

Amazon.com: What Makes Civilization?: 

This type of analysis is fallacious from the start (I haven’t read the book) because the data of the eonic effect shows that the ‘evolution’ of civilization proceeds in a completely different way from the conventional thinking that can’t challenge Darwinism, etc…
here is another…I will try to deal with these when they come out. But the material on the eonic effect which these professionally bound/brainwashed profs inside peer review cancel culture couldn’t allow themselves to read.

Civilizations emerge in relation to the eonic series in a pattern of transitions which do most of the work of creating, not civilizations, by transition zones and their diffusion fields.
World history shows a complex pattern of induced development with most of the innovations springing from the strange macro process that generates most of human culture.
Check out Decoding World History….

Is the stupidity of the professoriat beyond repair?

https://nemonemini.files.wordpress.com/2021/02/kants_challenge_resolved_natures-secret_plan7xa_web.pdf

I am often critical of the realm of professors, given the evidence of academic confusion over Darwinism, but beyond that I am simply baffled at what appears to be an ingrained and closed mindset.
Among others of Kant scholars. My thinking on what I call Kant’s Challenge in World History and the Eonic Effect, and then in a separate book as above, remains de facto censored (canceled) by academic circles. These books point to a clear answer, I would say more, ‘solution’ to the challenge he raised in his classic essay on history.
In the twenty-one years since this book was self-published via POD, not a single historian or Kant scholar has commented on this clearly outlined solution. Zero. That’s remarkable. It says something about Kant scholarship and historians in general, but finally on academic structures. It shows the way peer-reviewed publication as an academic monopoly backfires and keeps thinking enclosed in rigidly closed mindset. Apparently that’s even true of Kant scholars in Germany who seem to consider independent scholars as vermin apparently and wouldn’t descend to mention my work in any way, let alone comment. The result here is that professors closed in their system can’t think anymore, and that results in slow but steady distortion of general opinion. Here the grave dignity of the professors is mere Tom Sawyer to the yankee Huck Finn, making faces, and about to tend to his dead possum.
And it leaves the field in some ways to outsiders. Strangely, in many cases, professionals can’t compete with amateurs and can’t above all acknowledge that.

Let me say at once that I am not as such a Kantian, and have never taken a college course in Kant: I am self-taught in Kant’s thinking and find his Critique of Pure Reason needs a slow reading course in a university. The sections on the transcendental deduction are difficult, although a simple glimpse is possible: it is a distant relative of Advaita thinking. With that Kant is all the more remarkable. Let me note that a figure like Schopenhauer tries to simplify. But this is not our topic. None of this difficulty is needed for our discussion. But I have a rough outline understanding of his work find his work on the antinomies essential. And in any case not much Kant is required to read, and explicate his essay on history. The solution to what he is saying is to see he is asking a question. Unfortunately, Kant subtly blunders by suggesting his own answer, apparently, in the concept of ‘asocial sociability’. But the question Kant is asking requires a far broader range of thinking. And the eonic effect begins to answer that. It should be said that without a larger data set including the Neolithic, no solution can be considered final. But the eonic effect is a good start, and you will find slowly but surely that there is probably no other solution, granting that in such a vast subject that it is hard to even reference the whole data set, let alone explain it. But the solution to Kant’s question is actually rather simple, because it seems to succeed by default.
Here, by all means, disagree. But in this environment, since you can’t even mention certain people you can’t reference their work, and probably won’t ever hear about it, and cannot deign to comment in any way. A fatal trap in this case.
But there are reasons for all this, as I can only guess. The reign of professorial authority via peer review etc is not able to contradict reigning paradigms. For starters, no professor as far as I can see (as a Kant scholar) can disagree with Kant’s own view, which is almost incidental in any case, and wrong. He in fact is asking a question. Kant is pre-Darwin, and any comment is likely to challenge Darwin, not least for its teleological query. Kant of course had his own problems: he is harsh on Machiavelli and dislikes lying in politicians and ended in a debate over that, with Benjamin Constant. That’s a tough one and requires careful assessment of his classic ethics, but in the age of Trump, one has to wonder at Kant’s insistence or prescience here. But none of this pertains to his question which requires no Kant at all (although I have wondered in the eonic model if some macro  mechanized evolutionary process doesn’t do something resembling the categorical imperative at the level of evolutionary directionality????) But one can cite this to acknowledge that challenging Kant is entirely possible, but mostly forgotten in the tide of Marx, Hegel, Darwin, Nietsche, Heidegger, etc…
Leave that aside and we see that the eonic effect shows a directional system, an evolutionary creativity, a clear outline of the transitional driver of civilizations in sequence and parallel, etc…
As an empirical demonstration, the result is on solid footing even if incomplete. An incomplete table puzzle often shows its overall pattern even if partially completed. The solution is too simple and too obvious to reject completely.

At this point, one needs to give up on professors if only to laugh instead of hate, and only contempt for academic structures remains. This is unkind but such people would kill critics if they could. This kind of confusion in the end is dangerous to society.

I think that as the Darwin paradigm starts to collapse the world will have to ask, how could so many experts be so idiotic? The social construct could collapse. Perhaps then the issue of Kant’s challenge might come to the surface. But it need not wait and takes a half hour of your time. In the classic saith-he of Patton, nuts! Oh well, try again, another email to the journal Kant-Studien.

Postcapitalist Futures: The Last Revolution: new version

postcapitalist_ futures_NWBK_ver4a_LFT_2021

From the Conclusion

The prophetic period of the 1848 period foresaw the problematic of capitalism but the phenomenon outstripped their revolutionary intent/ Perhaps the escalation of extreme climate will prove the tipping point to action however belated. The current US system is doomed, and the echo chamber of fascist ghosts. The American Revolution was one of the very few that came to a successful term. A republic if you can keep it, as the Founding Fathers noted. We may thus allow ourselves the thought that a new revolution is founded in a hidden lemma of our Constitution, to the consternation of dismal reactionaries and capitalist hyenas. And with a new knowledge bequeathed from the era of the 1848 period, that democracy without a socialism is not democracy and that a new revolution must be the last chance for the Last Revolution, the men in three-cornered hats, now socialists in a new democratic socialist republic, to once again be a model to the world.

Another post to marxmail

Macrohistory, Marxism, modernity and the coming crisis
From: Nemonemini
To: marxmail@groups.io
Date: Sun, Sep 12, 2021 8:29 am
I apologize for any confusion. I had no idea that ‘ageism’ was such a touchy issue. But let me get to the point which is the need for the left to find an exit path into a new and extended paradigm that can deal with the real complexity of world history and in that context a path beyond capitalism. World history hides a deep structure that can help to make that possible, but it is a vast subject and invokes an immensity of study. But the pattern itself provides a partial simplification. But its study could help to expand Marxism into a more general secular humanism that can lead the way beyond capitalism. The classic Marxist formulation is problematical because economic issues are secondary to a deeper dynamic, one that is light years beyond the kind of study we find in physics of the Newtonian era. Quantum realms, who knows: the subject is so fluid and hard to fathom that we hardly know where we stand any more. The old fashioned materialism is out the window and the battle of materialism and idealism is old-fashioned. The mathematics of physics deals with material objects now in the ‘idealist’ context of mathematics. But reinventing materialism is easy and is always a useful but no longer absolute given. Continue reading “Another post to marxmail”