By completely neglecting the study of non-european societies and their own different stages of development, he unknowningly gave the greatest tool for these post-colonial nations; the theory of imperialismThe belief that non-european societies had already "passed through" all other stages of production, that they were part of a broader "global capitalism", and that poverty and underdevelopment was the fault of being victims of it
>>18464526He believed that only developed countries should take the leap to Communism, since Communism was meant to succeed Classical Liberalism. Non-Europeans weren't apart of this conversation
>>18464554marx was based?
>>18464556He was of his time. Nothing more, nothing less.
>>18464526>>18464554Nah, Marxists consistently produce cope historiographies like "muh hydraulic empires" to try to explain why their epic historical materialism historiography doesn't apply to Asian societies like Chine, who ended feudalism very early in their history but did not pokemon evolve into capitalism for 2000 years.
>>18464556Yes but so was everyone. it was a different time.
>>18464628Do you even know what hydraulic empires mean?
>>18464554>>18464624>>18464631>Communism was meant to succeed Classical Liberalism.More like it was inevitable rather than "succeed". Non-Europeans wouldn't fit in that mold so how they would pan out would be hard to guess as is the case with many other things.
>>18464660Yeah, ones who based their transport and food supply on water/sea. Hydraulic features are the push-pull factors defining the empires' economy.
>>18464526Did Marx specifically say anything regarding the American Civil War in writing?
>>18464671Him and Engels wrote a fair bit about it. Marx thought the end of slavery was necessary for the development of American labor and he sent Lincoln a letter of congratulations for winning the war.
>>18464678Did Carlyle do the same for the south?
