Talk:Marxist historiography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Dialectical vs. Determined
I think there is a general problem with this article, in and so far as it suggest that historical materialism (dialectical materialism) is a teleological approach - I challenge the author to find a passage where Marx explicitly states that the working-class -will- do something. It is commonly said that the working-class has historical interests, as well as necessary (versus sufficient) features, but Marx was not a -vulgar- materialist, he clearly understood the subject component to history, else his analysis in civil war in france would have made no sense (i.e. the leadership of the commune played a subject role in determining the fate of the commune as a whole).
There is also a point in the article where the author uses the word dialectic and determined interchangeable: clearly a mistake! Dialectics is the understanding that the world is in motion, that there are no static, no 'absolutes'. If Dialectics were the same as Determinist approaches, clearly Marx's approach would be called: Historical Determinism.
I encourage the author to take these criticisms into consideration.
(Also, the text referred to below is the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon.)
66.227.111.238 14:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Red13
"The German Peasants War is overdetermined and lacks
Marx's most important historical contributions were the 18th Brumaire of ."
What does that mean?? We seem to be missing a couple of words.
Peregrine981 04:46, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Fixed. Now all that needs to be done is get some other Marxists on this, fix my POV, fix my bad links, write daughter articles, do sections on IInd international histiography, academic marxism, German sociological marxist history etc. etc. etc. Fifelfoo 05:29, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I recently added the link to the Category Marxist historians, which is completely relevant to the issue, so why Zzuzz cut it off ? J. A. Vergara
Surely this article massively overstates the present day influence of Marxist historical thought? Yes it inspired an interest in social history, but its teleological nature means that it is widely discredited in Anglo-Saxon historigraphy at least, which is more heavily influenced by Rankean tradition of seeking to understand history on its own terms? RGCoopey 14:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd doubt it. German sociological history, Italian social history, Thompson/Hill/Hobsbawm style work, US "class-race-gender" stuff. Additionally there's a core trend in Australian history dictated by Marxism: knowable social being, social being as created, processes as teleologically self-determining even if history itself isn't teleological. Fifelfoo 23:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Types of histories
IN Das Kapital, what were the histories Marx used in contrast to materialist ones?
