Liberalism and Marxism as the reflection of postmodernistic objectivism of H. White

In this article we can see the reflection of Marxian and Liberal philosophical conceptions in the study of H. White «Metahistory».The author of this article attempts to compare Marxian and Liberal dialectical historical conceptions, puts the question about objectivism ofH. White positions. The author of this article considers Liberal historical conception for example of dialectical historical conception of Y. W.F. Hegel. In this conception we can see what world history is progress in the achievement of liberty. This progress is fulfilled through thestruggle of private interests. Embodiment of universal interest is a state. This ideal state is embodiment of intellect. In Marxian historicalconception state is only illusion of universal interest. The principal problem of contemporary capitalistic society is problem of estrangement.New revolutionary class conquers the estrangement and reforms old social order and old state. H. White writes that the Marxian historicalconception is mechanistic. But is not correct, because the problem of forming of new revolutionary class is the problem of political, economicaland spiritual (mental) history simultaneously. The Marxian dialectical historical conception includes the historical conception ofHegel. What conception is right: Marxian or Liberal? Answer on this question is only practical. This answer is not in conception of H. White,this answer is in the practice of social struggle. Postmodernistic conception of H. White is not objectivistic comparison of Marxian and Liberalhistorical conceptions. Formal objectivism in this question is impossible.

Keywords

Authors

References