|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == Definition == | | == Definition == |
|
| |
|
| http://Marxists.org/glossary/terms/m/o.htm | | Not sure yet, see http://Marxists.org/glossary/terms/m/o.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production |
|
| |
|
| == Examples == | | == Examples == |
| Line 9: |
Line 9: |
| * Classic | | * Classic |
| * Communist | | * Communist |
| | * "Commons-based peer-production" [[Commons-based Political Production]] http://Benkler.org/CoasesPenguin.html |
| * [[Copyfarleft]] | | * [[Copyfarleft]] |
| * [[Copyleft]] (not a full mode, as it does not account for [[Material Inputs]]) | | * [[Copyleft]] (not a full mode, as it does not account for [[Material Inputs]]) |
| * Foraging | | * Foraging |
| | * Feudal |
| * [[Open Enterprise]] | | * [[Open Enterprise]] |
| * [[Open Source Ecology]] [[Open Farm Tech]] | | * [[Open Source Ecology]] [[Open Farm Tech]] |
| * [[Peer Trust Network Project]] | | * [[Peer Trust Network Project]] |
| * [[Peerconomy]] [[From Exchange to Contributions]] | | * [[Peerconomy]] [[From Exchange to Contributions]] |
| * "Commons-based peer-production" -- http://Benkler.org/CoasesPenguin.html | | * Slavery |
| * [[User Owned]] | | * [[User Owned]] |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ----
| |
|
| |
| The following is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production and might be used for ideas to begin this page.
| |
|
| |
| Note that Wikipedia is under the GNU GFDL which is not compatible with the "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5" used by the P2P Foundation
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production
| |
|
| |
| "
| |
| In the writings of [[Karl Marx]] and the [[Marxism|Marxist]] theory of [[historical materialism]], a '''mode of production''' (in German: ''Produktionsweise'', meaning 'the way of producing') is a specific combination of:
| |
|
| |
| *[[productive forces]]: these include human [[labour power]] and the [[means of production]] (eg. tools, equipment, buildings and technologies, materials, and improved land) and desire.
| |
| *social and technical [[relations of production]]: these include the property, power and control relations governing society's productive assets, often codified in law, cooperative work relations and forms of association, relations between people and the objects of their work, and the relations between social classes.
| |
|
| |
| Marx regarded productive ability and participation in [[social relations]] as two essential characteristics of human beings. Thus he writes, for example, that "Productive forces and social relations - both of which are different sides of the development of the social individual - appear to capital only as a means, and only means to produce on its limited basis. In fact, however, these are the material conditions to blow this basis sky-high." (Marx, Grundrisse. Frankfurt: EVA, p. 593)
| |
|
| |
| ==Significance of concept==
| |
| According to Marx, the ''combination'' of forces and relations of production means that the way people relate to the physical world and the way people relate to each other socially are bound up together in specific and necessary ways. People must consume to survive, but to consume they must produce, and in producing they necessarily enter into relations which exist independently of their will.
| |
|
| |
| For Marx, the whole 'secret' of why/how a social order exists and the causes of social change must be discovered in the specific mode of production that a society has. He further argued that the mode of production substantively shaped the nature of the mode of distribution, the mode of circulation and the mode of consumption, all of which ''together'' constitute the economic sphere. To understand the way wealth was distributed and consumed, it was necessary to understand the conditions under which it was produced.
| |
|
| |
| A mode of production is historically distinctive for Marx, because it constitutes an 'organic totality' (or self-reproducing whole) which is capable of constantly re-creating its own initial conditions, and thus perpetuate itself in a more or less stable ways for centuries, or even millennia. By performing social [[surplus labour]] in a specific system of property relations, the labouring classes constantly [[reproduction (economics)|reproduce]] the foundations of the social order.
| |
|
| |
| When however new productive forces or new social relations develop that conflict with the existing mode of production, this mode of production will either evolve without losing its basic structure, or else begin to break down. This then gives rise to a transitional era of social instability and social conflict, until a new social order is finally consolidated, with a new mode of production.
| |
|
| |
| ==The modes of production in history==
| |
| {{weasel}}
| |
| In a broad outline, Marx recognized seven distinct epochs of human history, each corresponding to a particular mode of production:
| |
|
| |
| #The Foraging Mode of Production. Marx himself called this mode "primitive communism". Human society is seen as organized in traditional [[tribe]] structures, typified by shared production and consumption of the entire [[social product]]. As no permanent [[surplus product]] is produced, there is also no possibility of a [[ruling class]] coming into existence. As this mode of production lacks differentiation into classes, it is said to be classless. Palaeolithic and Neolithic tools, pre- and early-agricultural production, and rigorous ritualized social control have often been said to be the typifying productive forces of this mode of production. This has also been called [[primitive communism]]. However, the foraging mode of production still exists, and often typified in contemporary [[hunter-gatherer]] societies. Past theories of the foraging mode of production have focused on lack of control over food production (Meillassoux, 1973). More recent scholarship has argued that hunter-gatherers use the foraging mode of production to maintain a specific set of social relations that, perhaps controversially, are said to emphasize egalitarianism and the collective appropriation of resources (Tim Ingold, 1987, 1988; Robert Kelly, 1995).
| |
| #The [[Asiatic mode of production]]. This is a controversial contribution to Marxist theory, initially used to explain pre-slave and pre-feudal large earthwork constructions in China, India, the Euphrates and Nile river valleys (and named on this basis of the primary evidence coming from greater "Asia"). The Asiatic mode of production is said to be the initial form of class society, where a small group extracts social surplus through violence aimed at settled or unsettled band communities within a domain. Exploited labour is extracted as forced [[corvee]] labour during a [[slack period]] of the year (allowing for monumental construction such as the [[pyramid]]s, [[ziggurat]]s, ancient Indian communal baths or the Chinese [[Great Wall]]). Exploited labour is also extracted in the form of goods directly seized from the exploited communities. The primary property form of this mode is the direct religious possession of communities (villages, bands, hamlets) and all those within them. The ruling class of this society is generally a semi-theocratic aristocracy which claims to be the incarnation of gods on earth. The forces of production associated with this society include basic agricultural techniques, massive construction and storage of goods for social benefit (granaries).
| |
| # The classical mode of production. It is similar to the Asiatic mode, but differentiated in that the form of property is the direct possession of '''individual''' human beings. Additionally, the ruling class usually avoids the more outlandish claims of being the direct incarnation of a god, and prefers to be the descendants of gods, or seeks other justifications for its rule. Ancient Greek and Roman societies are the most typical examples of this mode. The forces of production associated with this mode include advanced (two field) agriculture, the extensive use of animals in agriculture, and advanced trade networks.
| |
| #The [[feudal]] mode of production. It is usually typified by high feudalism in Western Europe. The primary form of property is the possession of land in reciprocal contract relations: the possession of human beings as peasants or serfs is dependent upon their being entailed upon the land. Exploitation occurs through reciprocated contract (though ultimately resting on the threat of forced extractions). The ruling class is usually a [[nobility]] or [[aristocracy]]. The primary forces of production include highly complex agriculture (two, three field, lucerne fallowing and manuring) with the addition of non-human and non-animal power devices (clockwork, wind-mills) and the intensification of specialisation in the crafts--craftsmen exclusively producing one specialised class of product.
| |
| #The [[capitalist mode of production]]. It is usually associated with modern industrial societies. The primary form of property is the possession of objects and services through state guaranteed contract. The primary form of exploitation is [[wage labour]] (see [[Das Kapital]], [[wage slavery]] and [[exploitation]]). The ruling class is the [[bourgeoisie]], which exploits the [[proletariat]]. Capitalism may produce one class (bourgeoisie) who possess the means of production for the whole of society and another class who possess only their own labour power, which they must sell in order to survive. The key forces of production include the factory system, mechanised powered production, [[Taylorism]], robotisation, [[bureaucracy]] and the [[modern state]].
| |
| #The [[socialism|socialist]] mode of production. Since this mode of production has not yet come into effect, its exact nature and whether it will exist remains debatable. Some theorists argue that [[prefiguring form]]s of socialism can be seen in voluntary workers' cooperatives, strike committees, [[labour unions]], [[soviet (council)|soviets]] and revolutions. The socialist mode of production is meant to be a society based on [[workers' control]] of all production, with a property form equating consumption with productive labour. The key forces of production are similar to those in capitalism, but changed in their nature due to workers' control and collective management. Additionally, the merging of mental and manual labour is meant to increase the level of productivity and quality of the productive forces. The primary ruling class of this mode is meant to be the [[working class]]. The primary form of exploitation is meant to be self-exploitation - in other words, the exploitation of some people by others (the "exploitation of man by man") is meant to be abolished.
| |
| #The [[communism|communist]] mode of production. Since it refers to the far future, it is a highly debated theoretical construct. Some theorists argue that [[prefiguring forms]] of communism can be seen in [[commune (intentional community)|communes]] and other collective living experiments. Communism is meant to be a [[classlessness|classless]] society, with the management of things replacing the management of people. Particular productive forces are not described, but are assumed to be more or less within the reach of any contemporary capitalist society. Despite the imminent potential of communism, some{{Who|date=July 2007}} economic theorists have hypothesised that communism is more than a thousand years away from full implementation while others{{Who|date=July 2007}} argue that it will never be realized at all.
| |
|
| |
| An example of a mode of production which is lying dormant alongside capitalism, is the [[prefiguring form]] of socialism indicated by the [[free software movement]]. The enhanced productivity of the [[productive force]] of the [[internet]] for [[software programming]] and [[white collar]] work is combined with the [[relation of production]] indicated in the property form of the GNU GPL or GNU FDL, to produce a highly valuable form of economic production outside of the direct control of capitalism.
| |
|
| |
| ==Articulation of modes of production==
| |
| In any specific society or country, ''different'' modes of production might emerge and exist alongside each other, linked together economically. To these different modes correspond different [[social classes]] and strata in the population. So, for example, urban capitalist industry might co-exist with rural peasant production for subsistence and simple exchange and tribal hunting and gathering.
| |
| Old and new modes of production might combine to form a hybrid economy.
| |
|
| |
| However, Marx's view was that the expansion of capitalist markets tended to dissolve and displace older ways of producing over time. A capitalist society was a society in which the [[capitalist mode of production]] had become the dominant one. The culture, laws and customs of that society might however preserve - for better or worse - many traditions of the preceding modes of production.
| |
| Thus, although two countries might both be capitalist, being economically based mainly on private enterprise for profit and wage labour, these capitalisms might be very different in social character and functioning, reflecting very different cultures, religions, social rules and histories.
| |
|
| |
| Elaborating on this idea, [[Leon Trotsky]] famously described the economic development of the world as a process of ''uneven and combined development'' of different co-existing societies and modes of production which all influence each other. This means that historical changes which took centuries to occur in one country might be truncated, abbreviated or telescoped in another. Thus, for example, Trotsky observes in the opening chapter of his history of the [[Russian Revolution of 1917]] that "Savages throw away their bows and arrows for rifles all at once, without travelling the road which lay between these two weapons in the past. The European colonists in America did not begin history all over again from the beginning", etc. Thus, old and new techniques and cultures might combine in novel and unique admixtures, which cannot be understood other than by tracing out the history of their emergence.
| |
|
| |
| == See also ==
| |
| * [[capitalist mode of production]]
| |
|
| |
| == References ==
| |
| *George Novack, Understanding History: Marxist Essays
| |
| *Charles Woolfson, The Labour Theory of Culture.
| |
| *Ernest Mandel, Marxist Economic Theory.
| |
| *G.E.M. De Ste Croix, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World: From the Archaic Age to the Arab Conquests.
| |
| *Chris Harman, A People's History of the World
| |
| *Perry Anderson, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism
| |
| *Perry Anderson, Lineages of the Absolutist State
| |
| *Ellen Meiksins Wood, The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View.
| |
| *Barry Hindess & Paul Q. Hirst, Pre-capitalist modes of production. London: Routledge, 1975.
| |
| *Fritjof Tichelman, The Social Evolution of Indonesia: The Asiatic Mode of Production and its Legacy.
| |
| *Lawrence Krader, The Asiatic Mode of Production; Sources, Development and Critique in the Writings of Karl Marx.
| |
| *W.M.J. van Binsbergen & P.L. Geschiere, ed., Old Modes of Production and Capitalist Encroachment.
| |
| *Harold Wolpe, ed. The articulation of modes of production.
| |
| *Michael Perelman, Steal This Idea: Intellectual Property Rights and the Corporate Confiscation of Creativity.
| |
|
| |
| " -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production
| |