I have complained about it before but I heard on of the guests from guerrilla history on the deprogram make this argument and it made me want to gouge my eyes out. This kind of trans historical argumentation is both stupid and unmarxist, just stop! Sorry I felt the need to vent.

These states were not imperialist and they weren’t settler colonies. This framing doesn’t make any fucking sense when transfered to a medieval context. Like the best you could say is that the Italian city states represented an early firm of merchant capital, but even then that is an incredibly complex phenomenon that has only a tenuous connection to modern capitalism. Calling these city states early capitalism is just a fancy way of saying “lol u hate capitalism yet you exchange good or service! Curious!”

Seriously just stop. I don’t know why this set me off but it was like a week ago and I am still mad about it.

  • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    Taking modern interpretations, standards, morals, etc. relating to the contemporary historical period then retroactively applying it to everything prior to the contemporary historical period in order to judge it as though it just happened last week - also known as lacking an understanding of historical materialism therefore understanding the past through the lens of ‘presentism’

    On my Hexbear?

    Noo~ say it isn’t so.

    • privatized_sun [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      lacking an understanding of historical materialism

      “all of history is class war between property owners and enslaved workers” (smug armchair redditors scoff) ok radlib