Define a historical theory

[amale]

Define a historical theory

Would examples of historical theories be Marxism, fascism, and capitalism, etc.?

If not then what is a historical theory? If yes, then how do you describe Marxism, fascism, and capitalism, etc.? --i.e. ways of viewing & organizing the world and history in categories and theories?

As crazy as it seems I can't find a definition of historical theory anywhere!
?

[renegadoe]

Define a historical theory:

The development of human society is based concretely in the material conditions that human beings live in. As we are the only creatures who produce our means of subsistence, our cultural apparatus has grown based on the technological developments in how we produce our means of subsistence. It can thus be said that different epochs of production are determined by the technological capabilities of the humans in each respective era, each epoch embodying a different arrangement of class forces, generally based on the producer-exploiter dialectic. As technological forces advance, however, creating a capacity for greater amounts of wealth, class differences become increasingly polarized, until class distinctions become materially anachronistic as a super-abundance becomes materially feasible, when, theoretically, crises should be rampant and the consciousness of the working class should radicalize, inducing proletarian revolution.

That's a very crude summarization of Marxist historical materialism.

Capitalism is not a theory of history - it is an economic theory. It is based on the private ownership of the means of production, which are used to produce commodities which are bought and sold over the free market for surplus-value which is pocketed by the owner and not the producers. Capitalism thus far has shown to favor liberal bourgeois political constructs in it's advanced and developed stages.

But in its stages of crisis, fascism often emerges. Fascism is also not a theory of history, but instead a political ideology. It largely originates in the petty-bourgeois and ruling class, and believes that all political affairs should be managed in concordance with the interests of the corporations and the upper strata of the bourgeoisie. If socialism can be said to be a class society ran in the material interests of the majority of the working-class, fascism can be understood as its antithetical opposite.

Hope that helps.

[mikelepore]

I've seen a several authors mention some of the main theories of history. One thing they usually mention is that some people have believed that history is cyclical and there's no permanent progress, which Marxism rejects because the invention of new tools, crafts, sciences, etc. occurs in a definite direction. Another thing authors usually mention is some people have believed that the height of human existence was a "golden age" in the past (Eden, Atlantis, etc.) and the status of people has fallen from its height; Marxism disagrees because humans began with simple tools like rocks and sticks that made people the nearly helpless victims of natural forces, and later people learned how to use the laws of nature to improve their condition.

[Black Dagger]

A 'historical theory' is an attempt to a impose a unitary meaning on the past (often in a narrative style) in order to explain what has happened (or to structure its supposed meaning) and to (some degree) make predictions about the future (such as in historical materialism). For more see: metanarrative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metanarrative)

[Invader Zim]

and to (some degree) make predictions about the future (such as in historical materialism).

Which is where I part ways with historical materialism. As a paradigm for analysing historical change it is perhaps unsurpassed in many instaces, but does it allow us to accurately guage events to come? I dont think so. Historical events are made up of the collective actions and minds of billions of individuals, as such no historical paradigm can even hope to accurately and completely provided detailed analysis of events being studied retro-actively; they have no hope of successfuly analysing trends and mapping the path of those trends beyond the present; it is just far too difficult. These paradigms provide what are, in effect, relatively simple models to deal with a calculation which is near infinate in its complexity; it simply doesn't work in anything but the most basic, simplistic and undoubtedly worthless of manners.