/lit/ - Literature

>>18499883
>Marx’s whole system of historical materialism is bourgeois, Eurocentric and modern, therefore it can’t be universal and timeless.
Well on Eurocentrism, who do the Chinese take more seriously? Baudrillard or Marx? I would bet Karl Marx because Western academic postmodernism only makes sense by rejecting "totalitarianism" around the same time that Fukayama was raving about the capitalist end of history. Hence identity politics and Marx was "a white European male," contemporary strains of anarchism, etc. etc. etc.

But it's started to sound a little worn out. I think the postmodern theorists did recognize Marxism was collapsing in their time, but didn't understand that historical materialist principles do hold that there will be great advances and also great retreats since there's a dialectical contradiction of success and failure, mediated through history, which can be boiled down to "there's a long march toward socialism." It's coming back though

https://youtu.be/gbMW2tjb5Ks