Different struggles

There are many different historical struggles, between the sacral and the profane for example, between the producers and their competitors for an other instance. There is also a marked lack of true struggle between the less educated and the intelligentsia. There is on the other hand struggle between those who have social status and those who do not. There is struggle between humans and illnesses. Between races. Between ethnicities. Between ages. Between those with technologies and the respective have-nots.
Therefore the historical dynamics are not at its core just the struggles between the classes. Or there are perhaps several facets to the differences of class. If we introduce several axes then we could keep many of the features of class struggle.

Marx and development

Personal Mastery
Marx does not see things like personal mastery - development of the self. Yet it appears on a personal level and at a larger scale also at the level of a society. There is development as the education transforms people, as a result development of intellectual property and the economy develops with the technological progress. Revolution is not the only midwife of historical change.
In fact the opposite was what he observes: the horrors of soul-grinding effects of the division of labour and deskilling was visible all around. Development occurred mostly in the upper classes and there was no way to get a complete critique of capitalism that would include their dynamics of power.
On bbc.com 3rd of  April 2013, commenting on The Great British Class Survey :" The sociologists said these two groups[the precariat and the elite] at the extremes of the class system had been missed in conventional approaches to class analysis, which have focused on the middle and working classes. "It claims that it is too simplistic to look at class as containing just education and income, "... suggesting that class has three dimensions - economic, social and cultural."
The structure and functions of the upper class evade the eye of scrutiny. Although its many facets were hidden they are kept so by the interests of the elite themselves.
Any such analysis seems to me to be completely missing. Does Marx really shut his eyes at this aspect because his wife was a noble?

Through the summation of peoples personal mastery it is possible to see how the capitalist society becomes leaner and meaner. It never becomes a system where everyone lives the life of a billionaire. Because those who are left without much education have their progress measured at a different rate (a very slow one) than the owners class.


Personal Degeneration
So the opposite would be the drive of humans to take easier routes, to cut corners. What if such reduction of abilities in a willful manner provides a constant grind on the process of achieving hidden
aims of the owners class? Does this effect suddenly disappear after the workers come to power? In fact it worsened!
On the bright side, the advantage of this drive is presented as the development of society and technology. Yet some time into this progress, this drive puts people into their misery, drudgery, monotony and stress. These problems are solved in yet another technology - the application of computers in creating Augmented Reality, and the gamification of everything that was so far boring.

Production of narratives

One of the motives for playing social, Berneian games, and not all games but many, nonetheless, is to form narratives and stories, that form the main content of talks that repeat the past in speak. Those macrologies form also a later frame of reality and a component of the psychosocial space of Alzheimer's disease. These narrations also form the material for another game. A complete cycle appears. A circle of life appears as this metagame that is repeated in the next generation that listens to this cycle in its complete form.