Is it possible

[Essential Insignificance]

It is possible for the "laws" of historical development to "bend".

The materialist conception of history is an incorrigible integral moiety of Marx's analyses of the structure of society and the periodisation of successive epochs, that is to say, in a dialectical process, of the means of sufficing the subsistence that man requires to continue in existence as himself, and from this develops the means of production of appeasing these daily prerequisites.

Marx bestowed on to "science", if you like, an empirical knowledge and erudition of social relations, the course of historical development, and the existing social relations of an given society…most characteristic of imparity.

Each epoch with a definite, lewd, realm of relations each congruous from one another- mass indisputable exploitation…with the exception of "primitive communism", where there was "only" a "natural" division of labour.

The 20th century Leninist and the akin, hypothesised and even went further to put it into practice that the "laws of historical development" could "bent" if they were fervently "arduous" and focused of the "cause" , regardless of the material conditions, and by thus, the material reality of the given populace…and by so, in the predestined process, creating an abominable "state" despotism.

And as we have attested "socialised" USSR, China, East Europe, Vietnam and Cuba…, have or are emanating in the direction of an open ''free'' market, namely, capitalism.

So it must be proclaimed obviously that Marx’s laws of emphatic successive continuity, of epochs has been axiomatic, idest, the transition from feudalism to capitalism has been proven to, as idem, pre-eminently astute.

But is it possible to "skip" the slavery and "folly of feudalism" and proceed, historically from the dissolution of primitive society to the manifestation of capitalism, or in the least, accelerate profusely, the fermentative processes. I have credence that Australia, New Zealand etc, are pivotal examples…although "poor" ones…I recognize.

With that luminous now, is it fortuitous, that a particular nation can advance perceptibly from primitivism and fettler capitalism and by thus omit slavery and "the folly feudalism". Or must there be an extended epoch of the two.

[Osman Ghazi]

As I understand it, capitalism is necessary because it creates the working class. What do the slave and fuedal stages give us that is necessary to either capitalism or communism?

[Shredder]

Due to my brain's inability to understand big words, I may have completely misunderstood the question of this thread. However, I will selflessly risk embarassment to address this question to the best of my interpretation.


But is it possible to "skip" the slavery and "folly of feudalism" and proceed, historically from the dissolution of primitive society to the manifestation of capitalism, or in the least, accelerate profusely, the fermentative processes. I have credence that Australia, New Zealand etc, are pivotal examples…although "poor" ones…I recognize.

So, I conclude that this is talking about how there were like primitive people in New Zealand living in tribes and tribal communism, and that they were/are able to at any time simply jump right to capitalist society.

To address this, it is simply understanding 1) Marx's emphasis on the productive forces in determining property relations 2) Dialectical Materialism's emphasis on considering objects as living parts of a whole, instead of in isolation.

It is wrong to consider New Zealand in abstract isolation, when it is not in fact isolated. People, ideas, and productive forces can go in and out as they please!

History went in a certain order, but history does not have to repeat itself. Had the Roman Empire spontaneously invented the steam engine, electricity, and computers all simultaneously, there likely wouldn't have been any feudalism at all, but instead the world would have arrived at global capitalism much sooner.

All the technology the world has already been invented, and does not have to be invented again and again. In today's globalized capitalism, primitive societies do not invent new instruments of production in the same order that world history did--the world gives them modern technology, and so they skip to modern property relations.

[Essential Insignificance]

High quality, concentrated on the respond…undeniably(!). You have addressed the query at hand. And you give the impression to have sound acquaintance with Marxism.

I see know ''inability'' succumbing anywhere in you text.