would you say that marx depiction of the borgoisie taking over the aristocracy in the early modern era as correct?
and whether it was a result of class struggle or whether the whole theory of class struggle (also depicted by comte and dunoyer) is flawed and the capitalist replacement of feudalism was not the result of the forces of history as marx described?
I believe Dunoyer saw class as defined by political power, whereas Marx saw class as defined by economic circumstances. Raico has an excellent lecture on this very topic: Classical-Liberal Roots of Marxist Class Analysis.
well that is true. but my question is whether the cause of rise of borgoisie was the result of class struggle or whether marx had misidentified the causes.
I think it is both way.
In the past, the artistocracy often have children that survive longer than the poor. However since children cannot relies on their parents' wealth society, they were forced to migrate downward to become professionals like doctors, engineers, etc. Thus came the creation of a middle class.
Than you get the poor eventually becoming part of the borgoisie themsleves through economic opportunties, education, and such due to the process of industralization.
But that's just my pet theory based on whatever I just happen to remember.
http://libregamewiki.org - The world's only encyclopedia on free(as in freedom) gaming.