Class struggle is not actually the engine of history. Disease is. Disease kills more soldiers on the battlefield than combat. Disease kills more workers and owners than class struggle. Tuberculosis continues to kill over a million and a half people per year, despite its known cure. While conflicts between classes, elites, and economic groups have certainly shaped political movements and social change, many of the most dramatic turning points in human history were triggered or accelerated by biological forces that transformed populations, economies, and systems of power.
Disease has repeatedly disrupted the assumptions of civilizations. The collapse of the Roman Empire, for example, cannot be explained only through political corruption or class tensions. Epidemics such as the Antonine Plague weakened the empire’s population, strained its military capacity, disrupted trade, and reduced the tax base needed to maintain its institutions. Social conflicts existed before the crisis, but disease changed the conditions under which those conflicts unfolded.
The same pattern appeared during the Black Death in the fourteenth century. The plague killed a large portion of Europe’s population, creating a severe labor shortage. This shifted the balance of power between workers and landowners because surviving laborers could demand higher wages and better conditions. In this case, what looked like a class struggle was partly the consequence of a biological event that altered the supply of human labor. The disease did not merely influence class relations; it reshaped them.
Disease has also influenced the rise and fall of empires. European conquest of the Americas was not driven only by weapons, political ambition, or economic competition. Smallpox and other infectious diseases devastated Indigenous populations who had little prior exposure to Eurasian pathogens. These epidemics weakened societies, disrupted political structures, and made colonization easier. The outcome of global power struggles was shaped not just by armies and rulers, but by microbes.
Even modern history shows the same pattern. The influenza pandemic of 1918 affected societies already destabilized by World War I, influencing labor markets, public policy, and political attitudes. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed weaknesses in economic systems, changed patterns of work, accelerated technological shifts, and intensified debates over inequality and government responsibility.
This does not mean class struggle is irrelevant. Economic conflicts determine how societies respond to crises: who receives protection, who bears the costs, and who benefits from recovery. But class struggle often operates within conditions created by larger forces. Disease can change population size, labor availability, migration patterns, state capacity, and the organization of everyday life. It can create the circumstances in which new social conflicts emerge.
History is therefore not simply a story of workers versus owners, rulers versus subjects, or oppressed groups versus dominant classes. It is also a story of humans adapting to biological realities they cannot fully control. The invisible pressures of disease have repeatedly redirected the path of civilization, sometimes more decisively than any revolution, war, or political movement.
True but climate is even more important than disease
It basically goes
Climate > Disease > Class Struggle > Everything Else
I mean what causes these diseases to spread to the point where they can actually impact the course of history though? Without the classless clan societies adopting animal husbandry, many of the worst diseases would not have existed in the first place. Without increasing international trade as societies developed more intricate social relations these diseases would be nothing more than isolated tragedies rather than globe spanning cataclysms that change the course of history.
Also why does a disease killing a huge percentage of the population in one social formation produce result X and in another produce result Y? I'm reading Lineages of Absolutism rn and in a footnote Anderson says the following in the context of the general crisis of the Feudal mode of production, caused in great part by mass death due to the plague:
>The resolution of structural crises in a mode of production always depends on the direct intervention of the class struggle; but the germination of such crises may well take all social classes by surprise in a given historical totality, by deriving from other structural levels of it than their own immediate confrontation. It is their clash within the unfolding emergency which […] then determines its outcome.
Of course other material factors such as disease or the others mentioned by the Anon above matter, but I would still say it is class struggle that is the ultimate motor of history.
>>2889023Where do you put twitterposting on this axis?
These dieases exist because of class society doe…. and without it the spread at this pace would not hold.
And when diseases do spread on mass usually it is afterhand when there is a crisis in capital.
>>2889127OP already addresses the natural occurance of disease:
>>2889057