I argue that while the deployment of a Marxist historical–sociological ‘conjunctural analysis’ provides an innovative critical purchase for challenging liberal globalization theory (LGT), nevertheless, Rosenberg's analysis of capitalism itself can be critically subjected to an (Eastern) conjunctural analysis. Having revealed the Eurocentrism of Karl Marx's work, I point to its limits by showing how the rise of Western capitalism was, to a significant extent, reliant on prior Eastern forces and Oriental globalization between 500 and 1800. Nevertheless, while Trotsky's approach was also Eurocentric, Rosenberg's creative application of Trotsky to the pre-1800 world — as discussed elsewhere — provides a potential anti-Eurocentric approach. But developing an anti-Eurocentric approach to global history in turn opens up several condundrums. Failure to deliver on this leads him back into the Marxist Eurocentric cul-de-sac. Conversely, succeeding in this respect means, firstly, that he must accept the robustness of global forces to an even greater extent than does LGT, and, secondly, that he necessarily breaks with some of the fundamentals of Karl Marx's theory of history.