Marxists are blocking socialist transition with their rigid and stale historicism

We have often been critical of marxist theories of history: the basic framework of historical materialism and the thesis of stages of production is dated now, and the critiques of socialist transformation have an easy time with the whole corpus, which is unfair because Marx, if you set aside his theories, has a huge corpus of relevant material.
It is very unlikely that the public will ever accept a marxist ideology as a foundation for postcapitalism. The whole subject needs to start over, and soon, time is short. As general background the legacy is useful, but the nature of history would be better addressed without scientism as an empirical subject.

Confronting the riddle of world history January 13th, 2018 • After all the debate and discussion from the left the stark reality remains that Marxist views of history suffer from a flawed foundatio…

Source: Eonic Effects: World history: a complex enigma – Darwiniana

 Stages of production theory is confusing leftists: starting over with simple outlines…

The model of the eonic effect, taken simply as an empirical chronology of world history, provides a kind of doubloon effect: you can take it simply as a simple outline of world history, or you can take as hypothesis a series of interpretations of that set of patterns. Continue reading ” Stages of production theory is confusing leftists: starting over with simple outlines…”

Stuck in old-fashioned materialism

Historical materialism is stuck in old-fashioned scientism of the nineteenth century: the left would be better off with simple outlines and empirical studies of world history: from that perspective the eonic effect emerges empirically and can be taken as an hypothesis, and a very useful way to balance historical study with the question of values in the realm of facts, to stand back from theories of evolution and not getting mired in bad theories, and many other issues…

——————————-
World History and the Eonic Effect
March 15th, 2017 ·
http://history-and-evolution.com/: we have produced a large number of books this year and all have open source pdf versions as listed at this website.
The books adopt the perspective of the eonic effect which is a strange approach to world history and evolution via a new type of dynamic systems model. I advocate that the world of (marxist) leftists move beyond historical materialism’s reductionism and crypto-teleology in its stages of production theory along with its feuerbachianism (which can easily be updated, the left needs a religious critique), and finally its dialectical confusions, to some kind of new and updated set of perspectives. The left needs to get cracking and get this done asap.

Personally i recommend using the so-called eonic model from WHEE: this model has an immense number of advantages but is at first a bit daunting:

the model can be simplified to a frequency hypothesis and then reduced to a chronology of world historical eras or epochs

these epochs resemble a generalized punctuated equilibrium pattern and show a pattern of transitions inside these epochs

the epoch of modernity phases in with the early modern (1500 to 1800) in the frontier zone of a subset of Europe and is the successor to the axial age and its epoch

this transition rapidly generates a global oikoumene which now has a capitalist framework but the modern transition clearly generates a counterpoint socialism and the progression of the world system beyond capitalism was a potential indication from the start

the eonic effect is this set of epochal transitions and probably goes back to the neolithic or before

the model gives expression to an ‘evolution framework’ in the general category of ‘evolution’ and can be
used to highlight the problems plaguing darwinism

the model shows a meta-teleological system which is both directional and yet open to free agency

in fact the model shows a resemblance to questions raised by the kantian teleomechanists who are the real founders of a theory of evolution

the modern also expresses well the basic idea of lamarck on evolution as a process on two levels

the model makes economic history a subordinate process inside the larger history and this allows free agents to modify such systems: there is no absolute stage of history called capitalism

the world system at the full tide of globalization is predicted to begin a shift beyond capitalism and the
prophecy of the early socialists/ marxists remain relevant…

This model is neither material nor spiritual gives ample leeway to discuss religion, adopts the endpoint perspective of modernist secularism, and automatically enforces a complex disciple of counterpoint opposites.
this model is highly flexible and requires no dogmatic conversion or belief: a model is a model, if it helps to clarify the data we use it provisionally to clarify our circumstance. Ordinary views of world history are so far off that the discovery of a non-random process behind world history is a caution to our false views of scientific history.
This model can help to extricate thought from the false ‘end of history’ delusion about the inevitability
of markets. Much of the marxist canon remains of use, e.g. the critiques of ideology, class struggle, etc…
You are already using a simplified version of the eonic effect (why do you use the term ‘modern’ or
‘middle ages’, etc…?)
This model is thus useful even under negation: you can try and apply a critique but you rapidly discover its meaning under negation (e.g. the system is teleological, the system is not teleological…). you shoot the model full of holes and it still remains more or less the same because it is based on patterns of data, e.g. the emergent cluster of archaic greece…
This approach can discuss secularism and religion in stride and is a useful account of the Old Testament genesis, the rise of proto-modernity in ancient greece, etc…

 The confusion of modernity and capitalism

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: Continue reading ” The confusion of modernity and capitalism”