My thoughts on the Marx-man and the dialectic theory of history

Altogether:  a stupid simplification.  Let's consider a couple of important aspects, starting with the premise:  The history of the world is the history of class struggles.  This argument falls under one of two headings:  obviously accurate or obviously inaccurate; either way, it's useless.  Of course the thesis is true if we define classes broadly as "groups of people," but if we take the definition that Marx uses later when he lists the classes in Rome, i.e. socio-economic classes, then the thesis becomes obviously false.  The sacking of Rome was due to workers rising up against their oppressors just as much as the conquests of Napoleon represented the gilded heel of oppressive decadence striking against the unarmed peasantry of Europe.  The mechanism for creating unrest among the workers then neglects several aspects of the world that reverse his mechanism:  the constant drive for innovation, the cultural imperative (at least in the United States) for production and consumption, and the availability of credit.  Predicting the future, as they say, is a risky business, but more so when predictions are based on somewhat limiting assumptions.