So you tend to point [size=110]2.3)[/size] or even to point [size=120]1.)[/size] - right?
Russia seems to be shifting historically as we type. China’s role is changing and while much of this is economic and not the snazzy history of wars and famous people bios, it is history.
This can also be interpretated as non-history (a-history) beacuse not little wars or civil wars, but merely great wars (=> #) are an „historical existential“.
According to Ernst Nolte there are especially the following „historical existentials“, which are translated by me ( [-o< or =D>):
• Religion (God/Gods, a.s.o);
• Rule (leadership, a.s.o.);
• Nobleness (nobility, a.s.o.);
• Classes;
• State;
• Great War;
• City and country as contrast;
• Education, especially in schools and universities;
• Science;
• Order of sexulality / demographics, economics;
• Historiography / awareness of history!Ernst Nolte wrote (ibid, p. 10):
„Es wird also für möglich gehalten, daß bestimmte grundlegende Kennzeichen - oder Kategorien oder »Existenzialien« - der historischen Existenz tatsächlich nur für das sechstausendjährige »Zwischenspiel« der »eigentlichen Geschichte« bestimmend waren und heute als solche verschwinden oder bereits verschwunden sind, während andere weiterhin in Geltung bleiben, obwohl auch sie einer tiefgreifenden Wandlung unterliegen. Die Analyse solcher Existenzialien im Rahmen eines »Schemas der historischen Existenz« ist das Hauptziel dieses Buches.“
My translation:
„Thus, it is thought to be possible that certain fundamental characteristic - or categories or »existentials« - of the historical existence have been decisively only for the six thousand years lasting »interlude« of the »actual history« and now are disappearing as such or have already disappeared, while others continued to remain in validity, although they are also subjected to a profound transformation. The analysis of such existentials within the framework of a »scheme of historical existence«is the main goal of this book.Ernst Nolte wrote (ibid, p. 672):
„Befinden wir Menschen … uns bereits in der »Nachgeschichte«, wie wir den Zustand in Ermangelung eines besseren Terminus nennen wollen, oder doch mindestens im Übergang dazu?“
My translation:
„Are we people … already in the »post-history« as we like to call the state for lack of a better term, or at least in the transition to that?“Ernst Nolte wrote (ibid, p. 682):
„Alle historischen Existenzialien … haben … grundlegende Änderungen erfahren, und einige, wie der Adel und der »große Krieg«, sind nicht mehr wahrzunehmen. Aber selbst diese haben sich eher verwandelt, als daß sie ganz verschwunden wären: Der große Krieg bleibt als dunkle Drohung bestehen, und der Adel überlebt in gewisser Weise als Pluralität der Eliten.“
My translation:
„All historical existentialia … have … been changed fundamentally, and some, like the nobleness and the »Great War«, are no longer perceivable. But even these have been transformed rather than that they were all gone: the great war remains as a dark threat, and the nobility survived in some ways as pluralism of elites.“That are some sentences Nolte wrote in his bulky book, which was published in 1998: „Historische Existenz“ („Historical Existence“).
The „historical existentials“ are merely points of reference in order to find out, whether history has ended or not.
Then lots of nations that have less Power are having wars, starvation, transitions into global economics, you had The Arab Spring, and while this did not change so much, it offers the potential for more Changes.
No, the “Arab Spring” was either a western production or a western joke!
China and Russia and not hooking in to any end of History …
That is a western interpretation.
I am not very much convinced by your text.
History has not ended yet. In that point we agree.