2.4 Class Struggles
Last modified 06/07/2008
|
The basic critique of Marx, and others of the generation of the 1840's (a
context in which Marxist thought is instantly understandable), of the issue of
democracy and class is suddenly transparent in our analysis: the democratic
revolution seemed destined to become sluggishly imbalanced in the struggle
toward equalization, and this is compounded by the class implications of the
capitalist revolution. Much of the Marxist analysis is cogently adaptable as a
plug-in component to our eonic post-transitional analysis, save only that the
issue of the industrial proletariat is open to re-analysis as an abstraction
invoking a macro dynamics that isn't there. That is, the action of the
proletariat is not the same as the action of the eonic sequence, although
nothing in our analysis prevents it from becoming so in the future. Marx's
formulation is another one of those bon idees whose future realizations
remain unknown and as yet unrealized. That free individuals should graduate to
control their eonic destiny at the putative 'end of the eonic sequence' is an
adventure yet to happen, one fraught with both logical inevitability and
considerable peril as to the outcome. We can table Marx's idea then as a
question about the end of the eonic sequence, and the danger of its cooptation
still another time by elite subclasses of State domination, etc.. In a nutshell,
Marx's idea is a first draft of something still to be realized. The Bolshevik
revolution doesn't rate much mention on that score.
The basic action of the eonic sequence is that of state formation, counter state formation (and religion formation), i.e. equalization (the revolution of the state, the revolution against the state), followed by...anarchy? Our analysis doesn't predict the future here.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||