If 'modern' is just a fancy word for contemporary, then "academically", postmodern means nothing more profound than 'the future'

Rome in 30 BC was thought of as 'modern' to its contemporary residents, who felt they knew it quite well, but they if they thought at all of post modern Rome, say circa 313 AD, it  remained simply as something unknown and existing 'in the future'.

So those much use terms 'modern' and 'post modern' really tells us nothing about what might be potentially very different about these two Romes, simply that one existed earlier and the other later.


But when we say that New York City in 1940 existed in an era that exalted a universal and eternal monoculture while NYC in 2016  now exalted something completely the opposite : a diverse universe of many many different cultures (an era of polyculture), we have now revealed a huge difference between those two dates.

My book is all about global culture flipping 180 degrees, beginning in the period 1940-1946, as its ruling conceit,  MO-noculturalism, decidedly goes PO-lyculturalist.

The idea of Monoculturalism ("survival of only the fit") as a way to control the world, not the Axis armies, was what was truly defeated in WWII .

75 years on, its time we finally admitted it ...