Primal

Has any scientific journal or institution stated that Marxism is a scientific theory? Or a science?


Second how do I misread Diamond? I'm merely saying you cannot just flat out 1) Discount how Diamond displaced Marx as a stronger historian in terms history. What you call premodern, which by that, I hope you mean before 17th century or so. 2) You cannot just discount Diamond completely or establish Marx by saying "things have changed". That is because Marxism hasn't been applied there. Marxism was applied to two areas: 1) "Premodern: history: where is failed. 2) The mechanisms that determine revolutionary personalities: where again it failed.

Marxism is thus untested in regards to "modern" history and where it has been tested: it has failed the tests. Diamond's has been tested in a large area of history and has failed the test.

Now I am not saying enviroment plays as much of a role as it used to directly, however the fact that it still plays a strong role seems like a reasonable assumption.

Please read Frank Sulloway's "Born to Rebel".

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: Primal ]</p>