During the 80s, archaeological theory reacted against neopositivism which prevailed in the previous decade as "dominant paradigm", giving rise to the so-called "post-processual debate". It has been suggested that an important part of the competing proposals to this polemic, specifically those represented by I. Hodder and his school, are directly connected to the more conservative tendencies (in a political and social sense) of contemporary thought to such an extend that the context of the debate reproduces the ideological con- frontation between conservative traditions and radical traditions (headed by critical marxims). The idea of a pluralist post-processual archaeology, as opposed to the theoretical-methodological neo-positivism monism conceals, therefore, the ideological fight between "radical" archaeology, commited to the transformation of the capitalist social order, and "conservative" archaeology implicitly bound to recent social and political neo-conservative thought

Peer reviewed