The Death of History

[The Man]

I feel that if Communism is brought about, it will also be the ending of history. Not history in the sense that, "Yesterday I had a bagel", but in the sense of what is taught to us in school and stuff.

What do you guys think?

[Optiow]

Perhaps. But I do not believe communism will not stop history. People will still learn, and will still learn about the past.

Plus, I don't think that communism will solve every problem in the world, and events will still happen. I don't think for one moment that communism will offer us a society that is perfect, because nothing is perfect. Events will still happen, and where there are events, there is history.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

how history is taught in school will change. history is largely about interpretation, and as history is written by the winners, it gets their spin on it.

[greenwarbler]

Wasn't there a similar topic in this forum just a week ago? Hmmm...


The end of history as subterfuge: All the talk of the end of history leaves one's head spinning: one wonders whether the inhabitants of the dark ages (or what later became known as such) thought to themselves (Nostradamus, for instance), that, as men were forgetting to read and write (his main concern was that they regularly bathe, and go outside on occasion), that the recording of history, and thus history in itself would come to an end.

If the project of historiography, historical analysis, consists primarily in that (in the recording of various facts of social and political import), then to suspect that an imminent end to history awaits us beyond the horizon is tantamount to expecting a meteor to impact the earth tomorrow! The old adage, "one step forwards, two back applies fittingly here, in this circumstance: that the capitalist mode of production rendered the ingabitants of the Old and New worlds slumbering denizens, casting them into a renewed superstitious ans mythologized stupor is attestable to the observation of reucing the ever-fluctuating an transient nature of human social relations to an entropic, ghost-like shell! IT is tantamount to religious observance (obeisance), complete with ritual, pomp and incense!


Now, when Marx spoke of the present era (or, perhaps his own: the industrial era) as one reflecting the turn from "prehistory to history of man," what he intended -- what he meant in writing those words was that, with the advancement of technology, and the development of the means of communication and transportation, the human species was, in fact, entering a new era, by means of which the socially-oriented (and socially-rooted) human species develops -- through the process of social evolution -- beyond the short-sighted creature, constantly fending for security and shelter in the next moment. Modern man, meant Marx, doesn't have to worry about such things, and can orient himself, instead, to those tasks of personal enrichment and development of the personality, in the carrying out of which the introduction of man into _his own_ history could _begin_!

The above is a revolutionary statement, in the least! Now, being that social evolution entails all manner of "cramping"; popular social struggles, mass walk-outs, strikes, picketing, demonstrations -- even popular uprisings, as witnessed, at present in Tunisia, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, etc (this is not even to speak of the ongoing, decades- long social struggles in various other parts of the world: the Sun Belt in China, Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba-- even the United States, to name a few). These uprisings, struggles, strikes, conflicts and other events of public concern (political and social import) then render themselves as the stuff of modern history, in addition to what exists/ To suggest that "history has come to an end", in this context, is akin to arguing that "one and one makes eleven", and being satisfied with this equation!


As far as regards "that history which is taught us in school", that after a revolution, the teaching of such history would "change" is about as obvious a point as "the sky tomorrow will be blue (or covered with clouds)" -- imagine a post-Revolution history text in Cuba, advocating "how great Batista was", "what a wonderful and generous and compassionate leader" he was, etc.

[SacRedMan]

"History learns us that history doesn't learns us anything" - Voltaire

[Fawkes]

If history is the collection of and dissemination of knowledge about past events, I fail to see how it could ever die. Will the manner in which it's approached and analyzed shift? Yeah, of course, that already happens and there is an entire field devoted to the study of that (historiography).

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Capitalised 'c' Communism will probably not return successfully. It is Marxism-Leninism.

I prefer the broader term Socialism, as that does not solely include Stalin-masturbation, red flags and reverberating anthems, but rather, refers to systems of political and economic governance that place need above greed and compassion above climbing the greasy pole.

It is unlikely (sorry to disappoint all those sectarians out there) that one tendency will rule. Rather, a multitude of Socialistic tendencies - anarchic, libertarian, syndicalist, democratic socialist - will come about at the head of various popular revolutions opposed to Capitalist economic relations and over a period of time move towards a time when humans have defeated their supposed 'nature' of greed. That will be when communism (small 'c' communism: the classless society) comes about. One day, comrades.

[The Man]

Maybe I shouldn't say the death of it, rather, the 'End' of history. Like, this is where history ends.

[Tim Finnegan]

I was of the understanding that Marx described communism was bringing about the end of pre-history. :confused:

[RevLeft By Birth]

Well there will still be catastrophic events, like the explosion of the Yellowstone Caldera super-volcano (could happen in 0 to 200,000 years from now), which would plunge the earth into a true dark age and centuries of winter. In such a case, society would probably devolve into tribalism and go through all the stages of development again.

Or an asteroid or something of the sort causing the same thing. One of the few things the United States does which I support is (parts of) their space program and search for near earth objects and work on how to mitigate that threat. Such things are a threat to all mankind so it makes sense that even bourgeoisie imperialists are interested in addressing it. The destruction of all life on earth wouldn't do well for capitalist profits.

neo jpl nasa gov <- My father has a college buddy who works with the NEO project, very interesting stuff and funding actually increased under Obama.

Of course, once world communism is achieved mankind will be united in rationally addressing these concerns. It won't be subject to political wrangling by the two parties in the world's leading imperialist power, rather we will all look rationally on such threats to world wide communist utopia and work together to mitigate them, as well as spreading an equal proletariat lead mankind across the universe. But historical development, and (potentially) regression, will still be something to be studied, but I'm talking over the span of tens of thousands of years of collected history.

[greenwarbler]

Of course, once world communism is achieved mankind will be united in rationally addressing these concerns. It won't be subject to political wrangling by the two parties in the world's leading imperialist power, rather we will all look rationally on such threats to world wide communist utopia and work together to mitigate them, as well as spreading an equal proletariat lead mankind across the universe. But historical development, and (potentially) regression, will still be something to be studied, but I'm talking over the span of tens of thousands of years of collected history.

Yes, exactly, the idea of imminent end to history is about as juvenile as the Calvinist notion of predeterminism.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Maybe I shouldn't say the death of it, rather, the 'End' of history. Like, this is where history ends.

that's essentially the same thing you said before. history won't die or end, it is merely the study of evidence of the past and the analysis of said evidence. history will only die when the capability of comprehending past events ceases to exist. certain eras and epochs can be understood to end, as can certain ideological strangle holds on the interpretation of history, but history itself can't.

[Xanaphia]

Do you mean, it would be like starting anew? If that is the case, I could see that. How some would look at it as starting with a clean slate, or would hope that we could forget what had happened in the past.
However, that would be a great mistake. If we forget about history, it will repeat itself, inevitably. Although, that would be bound to happen, no matter the circumstances.