History is discontinuous hegemonic succession, not teleological advance.

Evidence

History cannot be conceived therefore as an infinite advance towards an ultimate aim. History is rather a discontinuous succession of hegemonic formations that cannot be ordered by a script transcending their contingent historicity. ‘Peoples’ are real social formations, but they resist inscription into any kind of Hegelian teleology. That is why Copjec is absolutely right to insist on the Lacanian distinction between desire and drive: while the first has no object and cannot be satisfied, the second involves a radical investment in a partial object and brings about satisfaction. — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 446

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Dissolving certainty may usher a fully political era rather than politics’ end — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 441; History’s unity is a developing process, not a presupposition. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 812; Intellectual history advances through uneven breaks, not traditions or clean ruptures — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 180 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Intellectual history advances through uneven breaks, not traditions or clean ruptures #corroborates (0.85) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 180
• History’s unity is a developing process, not a presupposition. #corroborates (0.82) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 812
• Historical inevitability claims overreach; the past never dictates the future #corroborates (0.78)
• Hegemony is not equivalent to ideological domination. #corroborates (0.75)