More languages
More actions
Spookfessor (talk | contribs) (Created page with "== "Time of Origin" column is ahistorical == According to Historial Materialism, the periods of world history can be defined by the modes of production. This page implies...") |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Maybe years would be better? — ''Comrade [[Comrade:Spookfessor|Spookfessor]]'' <sup>([[Comradeship:Spookfessor|talk]])</sup> 13:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC) | Maybe years would be better? — ''Comrade [[Comrade:Spookfessor|Spookfessor]]'' <sup>([[Comradeship:Spookfessor|talk]])</sup> 13:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC) | ||
:I agree with you. We could put instead time periods such as 3,000 BCE – 1,000 BCE for instance. However, I have no idea what time periods would fit the birth of some of these modes of production in a worldwide context. — ''Comrade [[Comrade:FelipeForte|FelipeForte]]'' <sup>([[Comradeship:FelipeForte|talk]])</sup> 14:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:34, 27 May 2021
"Time of Origin" column is ahistorical[edit source]
According to Historial Materialism, the periods of world history can be defined by the modes of production. This page implies that each mode of production can neatly fall into a period of world history (Medieval, Renaissance) but the truth is opposite. The medieval period is part of the feudal period, the feudal period is not part of the medieval period. It is also eurocentric to use these terms.
Maybe years would be better? — Comrade Spookfessor (talk) 13:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with you. We could put instead time periods such as 3,000 BCE – 1,000 BCE for instance. However, I have no idea what time periods would fit the birth of some of these modes of production in a worldwide context. — Comrade FelipeForte (talk) 14:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC)