R48G: beyond historical theories, the eonic effect, and a new kind of history of capitalism//outline of a new blogbook
September 21st, 2017 •
Actually (see archived post below), we need only a very general outline of world history with a series of questions and a set of hypotheses: the beauty of the eonic model is that we don’t have to adopt a hard theory. The model’s manner of distinguishing a system and its action and the action of free agents plus the fact that the system acts intermittently and possibly has completed its action over ten thousand years shows that we have entered free agency mode looking backward. We don’t have to believe anything but can use periodization with a set of hypotheses to act in the present (almost always with the innovations appearing in the eonic transformation, no doubt), but with a fine sense that the eonic effect is a warning we are likely to get religious and scientific historicism wrong.
If we renounce a theory of the eonic effect, however, we still confront the endless and futile efforts of others to produce other theories of history. The Big History is one of the most recent, a delusion that won’t go away. And the evolution question enters here also. We should use the eonic model to debrief these.
Our generalized approach allows us to simply look at the facts of a non-random pattern. Consider the Greek archaic: the stunning rush of innovations followed by a slow falling off is something we can simply take as a given, whatever our interpretation. We can assemble the data on the set of such patternings and use them neat with minimal interpretation, mindful of a larger model in the background, perhaps.
This approach is far superior to both the flat histories of scientism, and/or the religious mythologies of theological historicism. Ironically, one of our hotspots in stunning synchrony with archaic greece is the core period of the Israelite Axial Age in tandem with a whole spectrum of sudden change: this material seen in a larger context both affirms the relevance and debriefs the theistic historicism which it generated. It is also a warning that we can misinterpret the eonic effect and fall into treacherous confusions. Making a religion out of the eonic effect was the classic confusion of Israelite monotheism. Time to move on. We have moved on beyond that and we can see roughly what was really happening during that period (which doesn’t include the mostly mythological history from Abraham to Moses to Solomon) recorded in the era from ca. 900 BCE to the Exile. We confront a mystery far more surprising that the now sterile tale of Yahweh, etc, and a secularized version of this (in parallel with greek/roman, indic, persion, chinese synchronies) would better serve christians and jews struggling with issues of religious legitimaacy, now increasingly hopeless.
For the left this approach could serve beautifully to update marxism and create a useful historical framework that can easily deal with democratic, communist, and religious issues, with empirical studies of the history of capitalism, class, and ideology rather than the brittle stages of production theory.
The eonic suggests that ‘feudalism’ is a specific set of issues of a medieval period, the latter a class eonic effect, or mideonic effect! It is not a stage of history since feudalisms of one kind or another have frequently appeared. The phase of capitalism is an illusion: the rising of markets must surely go back to the Neolithic or before and the real question is the balance of state economies and external/internal markets. Capitalism was always gestating throughout and it is false to declare it a specific stage. We must distinguish historical capitalist ‘social archaeology’ (from the trains of bullock carts moving across the Middle East in the wake of Sumer to the near Greek or earlier invention of capitalist finance, etc…) from the surprising eruption of fully crystallized version that came with the Industrial revolution. This became associated with a libertarian interpretation and was also a revolt against statist economic systems, more or less. This was an important insight into the question of markets but at no point did the capitalists win the argument since almost instantly this new ‘modern capitalism’ became problematical and generated at once a dialectical complement in the flux of socialism/communism. The libertarian capitalism has resurfaced in the neoliberal age (the term is distorted) and is so extreme it may induce the downfall of the whole system. The question of state and economy persists as it must. The most sensible resolution is a democratic communism in which equality demands an equal stake by all in the field of property rendered to a Commons.
We cannot expect communism to automatically succeed capitalism: we must act a free agents with a better resolution to social organization and economy to wrest social existence from the barbarous effects of libertarian pseudo-economies. As the effects of globalization mature and the effect of capitalism is increasingly destructive and dangerous the pendulum will swing back and we must be ready to refund the issue of state and economy, hopefully in a democratic/communist format.
We should retitle our netbook below to suggest our lightweight version of the eonic effect.
archive: R48G: time for a full eonic model for postmarxism…
September 8th, 2017 •
Time for a new blog book along with another archive of posts from this blog….We have been dancing around the question of the ‘eonic model’ and the left, but maybe it is time to suggest an entirely new set of perspectives for a neo-communist platform (but with some public domain historical materials form marxism as a sideline)….
It would be nice to get some feedback here, but it can’t be hoped for. Marxists are so self-enclosed they live in a fantasy world (as to theory, much of its empirical analysis of politics remains cogent).
But it is time for the left to wake up: a marxism-led theory is not going to produce anything at this point…The marxists can’t even figure out the ideological issue of 9/11.,