History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Last and First Men versus dialectical materialism

October 11th, 2014 · No Comments

It is possible my perspective is even harder to understand than the usual marxism. The original text of WHEE was hard to understand for some. But that is not needed here: we need an approach to history that is simple and yet profound, and non-theoretical.

The method in LFM abandons WHEE in bulk and replaces historical theory with an new approach that blends history and evolution: the saga of evolution turning into history is given a sight theoretical twist, with no theory, in order to challenge Darwinism with a way to point at a ‘non-random’ process in history. That cuts the cord of Darwinism’s hold on history.
We replace world history with an historical outline, one that discusses the Axial Age.
We replace economic historicism with a take on economics that emphasizes its creation by free agents, not its deterministic character as some kind of set of laws of nature.
The economic agent is a special case of a historical agent, i.e. he is not deterministically bound by eonomic situations. His free agency gives the basis to create a new form of economy.

That’s about it. Dialectic has no real place here, in the sense used by most marxists. But I still use the term anyway: dialectic means a dialogue, a debate or the contrast of two opposites. That’s what it always meant. The attempt to close on a ‘triangle’ of metalogic to reconcile opposites has never worked, and can’t be made into a theory.

Beyond that we need to start figuring out how to use computers in tandem with postcapitalist economy design, how to rewrite rights logic to heal its perversion as a capitalist tool of exploitation, a form of political science that can create a democracy inside a formerly ‘totaliatarian’ computer program mediating vestigial free markets, and from there all the key issues like climate change will find a useful and non-cuckoo environment of thought that is not Hegelian souffle, crackpot psychoanalysis and/or postmodern attempts to reinvent the big bang as jargon. We could demand that devotees of French Philosophy write their observations in French Alexandrines, or English heroic couplets. The result would certainly be superior. If marxists wish to meditate in caves to reach a non-dual consciousness, the triangle of dialectic can be reconsidered. But in the nonce practical non-mystical logic is enough to guide us toward a new socio-economic order.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment