sign in sign up
<<
Home , Class society, Economic determinism, Gerhard Lenski, Means of production, Mode of production, Primitive communism

DjalectiCalAflthropologY 1(1975) 7 — 2 3 © Elsevier Scientific Publishing , Amsterdam — Printed in The Netherlands

MODE OF AND MODE OF EXPLOITATION: THE MECHANICAL AND THE DIALECTICAL'

Eugene E. Ruyle

In the production of their life, men enter into definite relations that are indispensable and independent of their will, which correspond to a definite stage of development of their material produc- tive forces. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of , the real foundation, on which rises a legal and political superstruc- ture and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The of material life conditions the social, political and intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of men that deter- mines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness.2 The specific economic form, in which unpaid surplus labor is pumped out of the direct producers, determines the relation of rulers and ruled, as it grows immediately out of production itself and in turn reacts upon it as a determining agent. . .. It is always the direct relation of the owners of the to the direct producers which reveals the innermost secret, the hidden foundation of the entire .3

In the first of these two passages, Marx in crypto-Marxist bourgeois social , and appears to be arguing for the sort of techno- then by exploring the possibilities of supple- economic which has become menting the "mode of production" approach increasingly fashionable in bourgeois social with a "mode of exploitation" analysis. science. The second, however, suggests that this is not enough, and points to a dialectical interplay between the mode of production and, THE MODE OF PRODUCTION CONCEPT IN MARXIST as Marx says elsewhere, "the mode . . . in which surplus-labor is. . . extracted from the A literal interpretation of the first Marx actual producer, the laborer,"4 in short, the passage quoted has lead to a causal schema in mode of exploitation. The purpose of this which the progressive development of man- paper is to explore more fully the implications kind's social is the moving of the second approach, first by critically dis- force behind the of new social cussing the "mode of production" concept as formations: the forces of production change it has developed in Marxist social science and and the rest of the is brought into Eugene Ruyle is Assistant Professor of at the line with them. As Marx notes, "In broad out- University of Virginia. lines Asiatic, ancient, feudal, and modern 8 bourgeois modes of production can be desig- structures" that are the real actors in history, nated as progressive epochs in the economic but men and women — real, live human beings. formation of society."5 As Marx and Engels noted in a different con- Such an interpretation is illustrated by the text, following passage from a recent Soviet text- book: History does nothing, it "possesses no immense ," it "wages no battles." It is man, real living man, that does all that, that possesses and fights; "history" is not a The nature of production relations determines the person apart, using man as a means for its own particular of a given society. This economic aims; history is nothing but the activity of man pursuing system is the basis on which the various social relations, his alms.8 ideas and arise, for the mode of production eventually determines all aspects of life in a given society. Since the basis determines the superstructure, it follows Much the same can be said for the "mode that every change of basis entails a change in superstructure, of production." i.e., in the existing political institutions and . How- ever, the superstructure, though dependent upon the basis, 3. In 1848, Marx and Engels wrote that: can in turn influence production relations and can either accelerate or delay their replacement. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history Every society is thus an integral organism, a socio- of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, economic formation, a definite historical type of society lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, with its own distinctive mode of production, basis and oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to superstructure.6 one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the This conceptual schema is open to a variety common ruin of the contending classes.9 of criticisms, among the most important of which are the following: To my knowledge, neither Marx nor Engels 1. Perhaps the most prevalent criticism of nor any subsequent Marxist has ever declared the Marxist model by bourgeois social scientists this statement "inoperative." Yet the class is that it is mechanistic in that it makes little struggle as an independent generator of histor- allowance for a reciprocal causation from the ical change is simply ignored in this interpreta- superstructure or from consciousness to the tion of the mode of production concept. If it economic foundation, and fails to specify the is incorporated by stating that class struggles mechanism through which change in one part are generated by the relations of production, of the social structure is translated into change so that each mode of production has distinc- in the other parts. This is clearly the case in tive forms of class struggle associated with it, some variants of , but it equally clear- this simply reduces the class struggle to ly was not Marx's intention, as anyone who derivative and epiphenomenal status. The has bothered to read the relevant Marxist texts, transition from one mode of production to such as Engels' 1 890 letter to Joseph Bloch, another is seen in the narrow interpretation as will know.7 resulting from the development of the produc- 2. It fails to take into account human volition tive forces, not from the class struggle. This, as an active agent in sociocultural causation of course, directly contradicts the Communist and historical change. It is essential to realize Manifesto, which sees the class struggle as that it is not the "mode of production" that resulting in "a revolutionary reconstitution of determines anything. It is an abstraction that society at large, or in the common ruin of the social scientists make in trying to understand contending classes."10 the real world. It is not the "mode of produc- 4. Finally, the evolutionary typology tion," "productive forces," "relations of espoused by this Soviet brand of "Marxism" production," and "legal and political super- is clearly inadequate. The unilineal, Eurocentric 9 model (primitive clan society — slave-owning the Lineage Mode of Production. Although society — feudal society — capitalist society) they appear to put greater stress on the role simply forces Asian, African, and aboriginal of ideological features in the maintenance and American into preconceived slots operation of a particular mode of production, with little regard for their characteristics and the basic conception of sociocultural causation development potential. What are we to make, is the same as in the more mechanistic inter- for example, of a "slave system" which lumps pretations, and the criticisms offered above together ancient Sumer, Egypt, and China still apply, although in somewhat muted terms. with the Aztecs, Incas, and the Roman ? Or a that includes the T'ang dynasty THE MODE OF PRODUCTION CONCEPT IN in China, the Islamic caliphates, pre-Taika BOURGEOIS SOCIAL SCIENCE: CULTURAL Japan, and medieval Europe?11 How are we to understand East Asiatic history without under- standing the major social changes that occurred Most schools of bourgeois social science during the late T'ang and early Sung dynasties, continue to be idealist or eclectic, but there is both "feudal" societies?'2 Surely concepts emerging a "cultural materialist" school with- that can be applied to such diverse societies in anthropology which draws heavily on the have lost their specific usefulness for under- mode of production model given above.'5 The standing the societies themselves. The addition terminology differs, but the basic idea is the of an Asiatic mode of production as a parallel same: "Social systems are . . . determined by evolutionary trajectory may improve the technological systems, and and typology, but it too is overly general. Perhaps the arts express experience as it is defined by the incorporation of Trotsky's "law of uneven technology and refracted by social systems."6 and combined development" would transform Although the aims of cultural materialism the typology into a more dialectical and use- reflect bourgeois values, its practitioners are ful one, but it has as yet had no systematic usually viewed by other bourgeois social scien- and comprehensive treatment.13 tists as crypto-Marxists, or worse." For in- There is another, broader interpretation of stance, when Betty Meggers attempted to the mode of production concept, found apply this approach to the analysis of some primarily in the writings of French Marxists. American Indian material, she was castigated According to Terray, "a mode of production by Morris Opler as attempting to peddle "a is a three-part system: an economic base, a somewhat shopworn hammer and sickle."8 juridico-political superstructure, and an Perhaps the most systematic and compre- ideological superstructure. In the final analysis hensive work to be written from the cultural the economic base is the determining factor materialist perspective is a recent textbook by within this system."14 Here the legal, political, Gerhard Lenski entitled Human Societies.'9 and ideological superstructures are included Because it illustrates both the strengths and within the mode of production (rather than the weaknesses of the mode of production standing outside of and being determined by approach, I will use it as the basis of my it), which becomes a more holistic concept criticism. referring to a in its totality. Although it is more sophisticated, Lenski's The French Marxists have not proposed any basic model differs little from those cited new universal evolutionary typologies, but above: have directed their work to the intensive analysis of particular modes of production, From an evolutionary perspective, the relationship between such as the Asiatic Mode of Production and technology, social , and ideology resembles 10

the movement of traffic on a two-way street where the industrializing advanced ; the flow is heavier in one direction than the other. .. the African nations are industrializing advanced dominant flow of influence is from technology to social organization and ideology; the flow in the opposite horticultural societies; etc. direction is not only less frequent, it is also less important.2° After establishing this typology, Lenski assigns various archeological, historical, and Lenski's two-way flow adds a probabilistic, ethnographic societies to their appropriate perhaps even dialectical, component,21 but it categories and examines, both statistically and is merely dialectical frosting on an essentially in particular cases, the extent to which other mechanistic cake. The criticisms offered above aspects of are related to technological apply equally well here. Further, the triadic type. of sociocultural phenomena makes Lenski's work is important in that it com- this model, like the others, idealist as well as bines material from the entire range of societies, mechanistic.22 It may be true that, on an every- from hunting and gathering to industrial, day level, it is easy to distinguish between within a unified conceptual framework and technology, social relations, and ideology, systematically demonstrates how the progres- but the distinction very quickly breaks down. sive development of mankind's social produc- Take, for example, an idea about the best way tive forces (technology) is accompanied by to cooperate in hunting. Is this technological, changes in other aspects of culture. His weak- social organizational, or ideological? ness lies in his failure to consider that as pro- Lenski proposes an evolutionary typology ductive systems develop and become capable in which each type is characterized-by a single of supporting large sedentary populations and technological criterion: of producing a social surplus, ruling classes 1. Simple hunting and gathering societies develop which live by appropriating this sur- are those which lack the bow and arrow and plus, and that the mode of appropriating the the spear thrower. social surplus then becomes a primary deter- 2. Advanced hunting and gathering societies minant in the sociocultural configuration of a are those which possess the bow and arrow or complex society. the spear thrower. By way of summary, the mode of produc- 3. Simple horticultural societies are those tion concept, taken by itself, has two major which lack metallurgy and the plow. shortcomings. First, it neglects the role of the 4. Advanced horticultural societies are those individual as an active agent in history, and which possess metallurgy but lack the plow. second, it neglects the role of class struggle in 5. Simple agrarian societies are those which historical change. possess plow but lack iron metal- The concepts of history as human activity, lurgy. of class struggle, and of the primacy of the 6. Advanced agrarian societies are those techno-economic sphere in sociocultural which possess both plow agriculture and iron causation form the foundations of historical metallurgy. materialism. If we are to develop a materialist 7. Industrial societies are those which are anthropology, we must incorporate them into based upon the harnessing of inanimate energy our thinking. Elsewhere, I have proposed a resources such as coal and oil. model of sociocultural causation which In addition, there are several important attempts to show how the individual, in environmentally specialized types: fishing, seeking to satisfy his or her own needs, maritime, simple herding, and advanced generates cultural stability and change in a herding societies. Finally, there are transitional process akin to natural selection.23 In the and hybrid types: India, for example, is an remainder of this paper, I shall elaborate on 11 the mode of exploitation concept and attempt labor power, are nevertheless abundantly to demonstrate its utility for a proletarian provided with the good things of life. In all anthropology.24 class-structured societies, we know that those classes (slaves, serfs, peasants, workers) that contribute the greatest amount of labor to the THE MODE OF EXPLOITATION productive system receive the least, while those It is undeniable that all human beings are (slavemasters, nobles, landlords, capitalists) totally dependent upon systems of production that contribute the least amount of labor and it is precisely this dependence which receive the most. How do we account for this distinguishes them from other animals. As Marx peculiar situation? and Engels put it, "Man can be distinguished Nearly the entire corpus of contemporary from animals by consciousness, by religion or bourgeois social thought on this point would anything else you like. They themselves begin have us believe that "society" rewards certain to distinguish themselves from animals as soon people because of their invaluable contributions, as they begin to produce their means of sub- especially in maintaining law and order and in sistence."25 Direct and individual appropria- providing meaning to social life.2 S Yet we are tion of naturally occurring use-values among not told how "society" does this. "Society," nonhuman primate populations differs from of course, is merely a concept whose real the social production of use-values through referent is an ensemble of individuals and rela- the expenditure of human labor energy among tions between individuals. To endow this con- human populations. As recent paleontological cept with independent needs, an independent discoveries have shown, certain pongid popula- power of action, and an independent life is to tions, perhaps as early as Ramapithecus in the create anew the sort of supernatural being from Miocene, began to produce their own means of whose grip science has sought so valiantly to subsistence and thereby placed themselves on escape. an evolutionary trajectory leading directly to From a historical materialist standpoint, homo sapiens.26 then, it is essential that we regard the wealth Given this human dependence upon produc- and privileges of certain classes as resulting tion, it does not require deep intuition to from the activity of individuals, most logically comprehend "that man's ideas, views and those who enjoy them. When we observe that conceptions, in one word, man's consciousness, the emergence of classes that do not directly changes with every change in the conditions participate in production is simultaneous with of his material existence, in his social relations the emergence of special instruments of violence and in his social life. . . . that intellectual pro- and thought control that are staffed and/or duction changes in character in proportion as controlled by those who enjoy the newly material production is changed."27 Yet even emerging special privileges and wealth, we are as we realize that the manner in which human inescapably led to the conclusion that the beings make their living exerts a tremendous differentials in wealth and privileges of certain influence on the rest of their lives, we must classes are a result of the efforts of those classes. also realize that although all human beings are These efforts take the form of expenditures of dependent upon production, not all human energy in exploitative systems that pump beings produce. The last five thousand years out of the direct producers of human evolution have been characterized and into the exploiting classes and that protect by the existence of classes which, although their resulting wealth and privileges. they do not directly participate iri a productive An exploitative system has three sets of system through the expenditure of their own components. There are, first, the exploitative 12 techniques, the precise instrumentalities oping in both the sphere of production through which economic surplus is pumped (between agricultural workers and workers in out of the direct producers: , plunder, the industrial arts, metallurgy, textiles, pottery, tribute, rent, taxation, usury, and various forms and so forth) and in the sphere of exploitation of unequal exchange. Second, there is the , (warriors, priests, scribes, etc.). The result is an organization which monopolizes violence an elaboration of occupations and statuses and is thereby able to physically coerce the among different kinds of producers, exploiters, exploited population. Third, there is the parasitic groups, and so on. This predatory church, an organization which controls access relationship generates a division of the popula- to the sacred and supernatural and is thereby tion into classes, which are defined by their able to control the minds of the exploited relationship to the underlying flow of labor population.29 These elements of the exploita- energy through the population. tive system may be institutionalized separately, An economic class is simply an aggregate as in industrial societies such as the United of individuals who stand in a similar relation- States and the , or they may be ship to this underlying energy flow, that is, integrated into a single unitary , as who obtain the labor energy they consume in in the early Bronze Age. The precise ensemble a similar manner. Economic classes may be of exploitative techniques, together with the defined broadly or narrowly, depending upon manner in which state-church elements are the purposes of the study. in a narrow sense, institutionalized, constitutes a historical mode men and women, for example, may be seen as of exploitation.30 separate classes, since they typically obtain the The existence of a mode of exploitation is labor energy they consume in different manners. both necessary and sufficient to explain the Economic classes may or may not be organized existence of differential wealth and privilege and may or may not share a common world in class-structured societies. This being the case, view or consciousness which sets them apart scientific principles of parsimony may be in- from other classes; however, the fact that they voked to reject "functionalist" interpretations share a certain relationship to the flow of social of . Further, this model is, labor energy is likely to subject their for devotees of Karl Popper, falsifiable: its to similar selective pressures. opponents need only point to any historical To the extent this relationship leads to a society which has gross differentials in access similarity in life-style, a tendency to regard to the social product and is not also character- each other as equals, and a tendency to inter- ized by a definite mode of exploitation. marry, economic classes are likely to congeal The exploitative system is the instrumental- into social classes, which may be defined as ity through which a predator-prey relationship groups of intermarrying families that stand in is established within the human species, only a roughly similar relationship to the flow of here the stakes are human labor energy rather social productive energy and that transmit than energy locked up in animal flesh. The this relationship to their offspring. Thus, social differentials of wealth and prestige which classes are also populations in the biological emerge from this predatory relationship sense. To be sure, they exhibit varying degrees simultaneously reflect and legitimize the dif- of interclass mobility (migration between ferential consumption of labor energy by biological populations), of intermarriage predator and prey. Once the predatory relation- between classes, and of extramarital reproduc- ship is established, the system of exploitation tion (gene flow between populations), but this supporting it becomes larger and more com- in no way negates the reality of . plex, with a complex division of labor devel- In situations where interclass mobility and 13

• marriage are extremely low, we may speak of Thus, although the ultimate logico-physical ; in situations where they are high, we priority of production in any sociocultural may speak of "open" social classes. Naturally, system is undeniable, from the standpoint of each situation generates its own ideology. the determination of the precise form of any It may be difficult or impossible to draw specific sociocultural complex, the mode of sharp lines between all the classes in any exploitation not only can but must predominate. particular society; nevertheless, the diagnostic If the is unable t manipulate the feature of any is the existence of mode of exploitation to overcome or deflect a predacious ruling class that is based upon a any countervailing tendencies from anywhere definite mode of exploitation. This mode of else in the system, it will be replaced by exploitation is, in a very real sense, the "mode another class — as, indeed, has occurred again of production" of the ruling class and is to the and again in history. ruling class what the mode of production is to It must be emphasized, then, that the mode any "primitive" (that is, unstratified) popula- of exploitation model has a dialectical aspect tion. Thus, just as any "primitive" population lacking in the mode of production model dis- has a variety of productive techniques that it cussed above.32 Each mode of exploitation consciously manipulates for its own ends, and generates its own characteristic forms of class just as we customarily categorize these "prim- struggle, and hence its own of social itive" populations according to the dominant change. This is so because exploitation acts on productive strategy, so any ruling class has a people, not on nature. By its very nature, ex- variety of exploitative strategies that it con- ploitation generates resistance, and the resulting sciously manipulates for its own ends, and we class struggle between exploiter and exploited may characterize ruling populations and hence in turn leads to the transformation of class entire - or class-structured societies by structures. Thus the model for social change the dominant exploitative strategy. Many of in bourgeois society has, as its mainspring, the the social formations usually characterized as struggle between and .33 modes of production may equally well be This model, in which the struggle between ex- characterized as modes of exploitation — for ploiter and exploited leads to the destruction example, the agro-managerial bureaucratic of the old social order and the establishment

Asiatic mode, the decentralized feudal mode, - of a new, is not necessarily the model which the slave mode, and the capitalist mode. Just fits all forms of class struggle in all societies. as the mode of production exerts a tremendous The struggles between the feudal and influence on the rest of social life, so the mode the rising bourgeoisie, for example, were not of exploitation exerts a tremendous influence struggles between exploiter and producer, but on the ideas of the ruling class, and, since the were rather competitive struggles between two "ruling ideas of each age have ever been the exploiting classes for control of the social ideas of its ruling class,"3' on the entire surplus. The victory of the bourgeoisie was ideological structure of society. the victory of the capitalist mode of exploita- There is more to it than this, however. In tion over the feudal mode. Again, in the so- production, human beings act upon natural called Asiatic mode, the struggles of the ex- forces that do not consciously and intelligently ploited classes (arising as much from the decay resist human control, but ruling classes must of the established mode of exploitation as from deal with beings who are intelligent, conscious, the fact of exploitation itself) against the and who actively resist exploitation. One of decaying social order did not lead to the the primary functional requisites of any ex- establishment of a new social order, but to the ploitative system is to overcome this resistence. rejuvenation of the old, in what Wittfogel has 14 called "cathartic ."34 create a hierarchy between producers and organizers of production, this hierarchy will require a political and/ir The mode of production model discussed ideological sanction, the nature of which will be deter- earlier, by contrast, is essentially mechanical. mined by the nature of the relations of production which Production acts upon nature, and the forces gave rise to it. In certain circumstances political or ideological manifestations may play a part in the actual of nature do not enter in any active way into establishment of the relations of production, as can be sociocultural causation. Attempts to make the seen in the case of the feudal mode of production.38 model dialectical by introducing conflict and antagonism between the "forces of production" However, to the extent that managerial and and the "relations of production" (as Marx supervisory functions are necessary, the time does in the Preface) merely transforms a spent in such activity is necessary labor and mechanical materialism into a poetic .35 can be measured in the same terms as any It might be argued that what I am calling other necessary labor, and no special sanctions the mode of exploitation could and should be are required to-enforce it or to provide an included in the relations of production. My equivalent return on this category of labor. entire argument would then become, in essence, The special sanctions become necessary only a terminological quibble.36 But there are good when managerial labor demands a greater than reasons, I believe, for separating out the sphere proportional return. In other words, managerial of exploitation as distinct from the sphere of and supervisory workers may (and, of course, production. may not) fulfill a socially necessary function, 1. In the first place, it is not a matter of but they turn this social function to their own what is correct, but of emphasis. Both the private benefit, and it is this exploitative aspect, mode of production concept and the combined not the productive aspect, which requires mode of production/mode of exploitation con- special sanctions. cepts can be used to describe and analyze the Elsewhere, Bukharin argues that productive phenomena in question — Terray's discussion relations include "all kinds of relations between of exploitation within the lineage mode of persons" that play a part in the of production is a case in point,37 although I the social product. Therefore, "A broker in would suggest that a mode of exploitation Paris, who buys shares of a New York trust, is perspective might have suggested additional thus assuming a certain productive relation to avenues of inquiry — but to subsume the sphere the workers and owners, the superintendents of exploitation, and by extension the class and engineers, of the factories belonging to struggle, under the rubric of relations of pro- this trust."39 If we are to include brokerage duction is essentially to give it derivative and and banking in productive relations, we must epiphenomenal status and to place it in a also include bank robbing, along with every secondary position. Further, not only is ex- other kind of thievery, brigandage, and plunder, ploitation and class struggle minimized but, for these too play a role in determining the by being included within the necessary relations final distribution of the social product. The of production, it is legitimized. Witness, for form of economic transaction in the two cases example, the following passage in Terray: is the same: both invest (the broker in stock , the bank robber in guns and Forms of cooperation are necessarily allied to managerial a get-away car), both take a risk, both provide and supervisory structures which arise from the technical constraints of the process and of the relations of pro- a service (the broker-owner does not fire his duction within which the process is carried out. worker, the bank robber does not kill his Particular superstructural relations are, in fact, a necessary victim), both realize a profit, a form of surplus condition for the operation of particular relations of . The difference between the two is production. . . . to the extent that the social division of labor acts on the level of the economic to simply this: banking is a form of exploitation I 15 j practiced by members of a ruling class which is of several sorts. There is ownership for use, is able to control the content of ideology and such as the ownership of consumers' articles — is therefore legitimate; bank robbing, by con- houses, cars, food, clothing, etc. There is the trast, is a form of exploitation practiced by ownership of the means of production by disaffected members of the nonruling classes those who operate them, such as lan downer- and is therefore illegitimate (movies like ship by the farmer and the ownership of Bonnie and Clyde notwithstanding). by the artisan. The second sort of ownership Significantly, Bukharin, in the rest of his does indeed contribute to production since discussion, arrives at precisely this kind of production is facilitated if the producers own distinction. He asks, "What is the species of their own means of production and product, production relations in which a conflict and ownership in this sense may properly be would lead to ?" And, after quoting called a relation of production. But there is the very passage from Capital with which I another form of ownership, exploitative owner- opened this essay, he answers: ship or exploitative — for example, absentee landownership or stock ownership — Among all the varied production relations, one type stands which does not contribute to or facilitate foremost, namely, the type that is expressive of the rela- tions between the classes which hold the principal means production, and should therefore not be of production in their hands, and the other classes which regarded as a relation of production. Just hold either subsidiary means or no such means at all. The bcause kinds of social relationships are given class which is dominant in will also be dominant in politics and will politically fortify the specific type of the same name, ownership, does not mean production relations which will give security to the that they fulfill the same function in society. process of exploitation operating in favor of this class.40 The fact that a specific social relationship between concrete individuals may simultaneous- But if these relations are to be singled out as ly be a relation of production and a relation of those leading to revolution (and, presumably, exploitation in no way diminishes the force of to class struggle), it seems to make good these arguments. Production and exploitation heuristic sense to schematically separate them are analytically distinct, however much they from the others, for two reasons: first, because may be intertwined and intermeshed in reality. there are forms of exploitation which do not This intertwining helps conceal the reality of involve differential access to the means of exploitation and is therefore of considerable production, such as plunder, slavery, and con- benefit to the exploiting class, so that those re- trol over redistribution; and second, because lations which are both productive and exploi- ownership and the differential access to the tative will tend to endure longer and therefore means of production is not, in and ofitself, preponderate over those that are purely ex- productive, however much of it may be en- ploitative. meshed in actual production relations. 2. A second reason for distinguishing the ,roduction benefits the entire society and sphere of production from the sphere of therefore production relations are essential exploitation is that the progressive development to society. Exploitation merely transfers part of social productive forces does not necessarily of the social product from producer to lead to the emergence of class-structured exploiter and therefore benefits only the societies; it merely provides the conditions exploiting class. Social relations, such as owner- under which such societies may emerge. This ship pure and simple — as, for example, in is seen, for example, in Robert Carneiro's absentee landownership or stock ownership — comparative study of aboriginal agricultural do not add to the social product and are there- systems in lowland and highland South fore not productive. Ownership, in other words, America.41 The more productive lowland 16 system was associated with an unstratified civilization; African feudalism, with a different population, while the less productive highland kind of horticultural base; and "nomadic" system was associated with a stratified popula- feudalism, based on pastoral nomadism.43 In tion. The difference in social stratification, in short, there is no direct and necessary causal other words, was not associated with differen- relationship between the mode of production tials in productivity but rather with the dif- and the mode of exploitation; either may ferential immobility of the two populations. "cause" the other, and differing forms of one The more immobile population of the environ- may be found in association with the same form mentally circumscribed highland valleys per- of the other. mitted the emergence of a predatory ruling 5. Finally, the development of the forces class, whereas the formation of such a class in of production is not an independent variable, the lowland regions was inhibited by the fact but instead is conditioned by forces emanating that the exploited segment of the population from the mode of exploitation. V. Gordon could simply move away from any kind of Chide has noted a slowdown in the to equally productive, but unin- technological innovation after the urban rev- habited, elsewhere. olution and the emergence of the earliest true 3. Again, Robert Adams's study of state ruling classes. This resulted from the fact that formation in Mesopotamia and Mesoamerica the exploited producers had no incentive to has shown that state structures, and by ex- innovate.44 By contrast, the rapid development tension class structures, preceeded certain of technology in capitalist society results from important transformations in the productive the exploitative nature of the system. As Marx sphere, namely those associated with irrigation noted, "The aim of the capitalistic application agriculture.42 Thus, in contradistinction to of machinery [like] every other increase in the hydraulic theory, the emergence of class the productiveness of labour . . . is a means for society and the state preceeded and led to the producing surplus-value."45 emergence of the Asiatic mode of production It may be asked why Marx did not give by building large-scale works of water control. greater emphasis to the mode of exploitation 4. Further, although there is obviously a in his theoretical expressions. The answer, I relationship between particular modes of pro- think, lies in the fact that he was primarily duction and particular modes of exploitation, concerned with the analysis of , and the relationship is neither direct, nor strictly his interest in precapitalist societies was at best speaking determinant. Take, for example, the secondary. In capitalism, the mode of produc- feudal mode of production. As Bukharin, tion and the mode of exploitation are virtually among others, has noted, political factors the same. Capitalist production is both the (that is, factors in what I would call the mode production of use values and the production of exploitation) played a predominant role in of ; in fact, it is the latter exploi- determining the emergence of this social tative aspect that predominates. Nothing is formation. Further, if we regard the distinctive produced in the bourgeois mode of production feature of feudalism as the lord/vassal tie, a unless it is profitable, that is, unless it is also social relationship existing primarily between a means of pumping surplus value out of the members of the ruling class, we see that this direct producers. Indeed, the Marxian analysis distinctive feature is associated with a wide of such cultural phenomena as capitalist crises variety of productive systems: medieval Europe, and depressions shows that these are not crises with plow agriculture based on rainfall; of production but are rather crises of the medieval Japan, with plow agriculture based on realization of surplus value, of exploitation. wet-rice irrigation; Chou China, a Bronze Age Capitalists will not produce unless they can 17

exploit. The productive aspects of capitalism nology.46 Bronze Age feudalism, in other are therefore subordinate to the exploitative words, is a phase in the evolutionary trajectory aspects. leading to a more centralized social formation. Clearly, the many criticisms I have made of 3. Agro-managerial bureaucratic . the mode of production concept and the These are the classic "hydraulic" societies, in evolutionary typologies derived from it will which a central authority controls the key not be corrected by mechanically adding a economic resource, the irrigation system, and, mode of exploitation concept, although this through a , controls and exploits is what the sociologists would call a "necessary the underlying population. Such bureaucratic but not sufficient" step. Nonetheless, since I empires exhibited a cyclical pattern of rise and have criticized the evolutionary typologies of fall, but also exhibited a progressive develop- others, I feel I should offer an alternative, ment of the productive and exploitative sys- one that incorporates the mode of exploitation tems, resulting in improved agriculture, larger concept and Trotsky's law of uneven and populations, improved bureaucratic techniques, combined development. I would include the etc. The historic civilizations of the Near East, following types: China, and India fall into this category. 1. Primitive . This is the original 4. Nomadic feudalism. On the periphery of social order of mankind, appearing simulta- the hydraulic world, where agriculture is im- neously with social production. It was in this possible, pastoral nomadism develops. Such primitive communal social order that mankind nomads, because of their mobility and warlike evolved its present physical and mental nature. character, are periodically able to conquer is characterized by the the bureaucratic empires. absence of social classes and the related in- 5. American civilizations. The New World, stitutions of coercion and thought control, peopled by primitive communal hunters and by equal access to the social product and to gatherers by 1 5,000 B.C., underwent a parallel the means of violence, and by the equal evolutionary development to that seen in the obligation of all to participate in social pro- Old World, but somewhat later and with certain duction. Primitive communism survives in distinctive characteristics. most hunting and gathering societies, but it 6. Maritime slave capitalism. In the Mediter- began to dissolve about ten thousand years ranean, maritime trading nations emerged ago whenever populations became large and which traded with the advanced empires. sedentary. Slavery became economically important as 2. Bronze Age feudalism. As civilizations these nations began to engage in precapitalistic began to emerge in the "nuclear areas" of production for trading purposes. Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, and the Indus 7. Feudalism. In Europe, a decentralized Valley, the earliest fully class-structured feudal system developed in which competition societies were organized into relatively weakly between feudal rulers conditioned an extreme- integrated "feudal" structures. Unlike the later ly rapid development of the forces of produc- Iron Age feudalism of Europe, these Bronze tion and of trade and warfare (in large part Age feudalisms evolved into centralized empires borrowed from the more advanced Asiatic following the development of irrigation, iron empires). technology, and improved techniques of state- 8. Capitalism. The decentralized social craft. A good example is the transition from structure of European feudalism permitted• the feudalism of Chou China to the centralized the rise of the bourgeoisie, which performed Han dynasty following the introduction of the task of integrating the entire world into a iron and the development of hydraulic tech- single economic system. 18

9. Pro tosocialist states. As the international with certain distinctive characteristics, until attained state power on the these were cut short by being incorporated into periphery of the advanced capitalist nations, the emerging world capitalist system (8). The it attempted to establish . The devel- Iron Age feudalism (7) of Europe also devel- opment of socialism was deformed by the oped on the periphery of the agrarian empires material conditions under which the working- and benefited from the diffusion of technology class revolution was undertaken: the under- from these more advanced societies. At the developed character of the productive plant same time, the decentralized feudal structure and the threat of capitalist reconquest. The permitted the rise of an independent, class- result was what Trotsky called "degenerated conscious bourgeoisie. Significantly, although workers' states,"47 characterized on the one the agrarian empires might not have made the hand by the re-emergence of a ruling class, and transition to industrial capitalism by themselves, on the other hand by the ideology of a new neither would European feudal societies, for society. the Asiatic empires played an important role 10. World sodalist . When in this transition. The diffusion of technology the working class completes its revolution and and organizational techniques in the areas of becomes a world ruling class, it will abolish bureaucracy and banking helped lay the base class antagonisms and exploitation and estab- for industrial capitalism, while the plunder of lish a world socialist order. As Morgan foresaw these Asiatic empires, together with the plunder it, this will be a "revival, in a higher form, of of the American civilizations, provided the the liberty, equality and fraternity" of capital for the Industrial Revolution. Finally, primitive communism.48 the protosocialist states (9), harbingers of the More important than the listing of types, coming world socialist industrial society (10), however, are the spatial, temporal, and causal are developing within the womb of world relationships between them, for this is neither capitalist society and exhibit consequent de- a "unilineal" nor a "multilineal" typology, formations. but rather a dialectical one, based on the law It should be emphasized that this evolutionary of uneven and combined development. There typology is a tentative one which will be mod- are a variety of different evolutionary trajec- ified with further research. It takes account, tories, but these are not independent: they however, of the progressive development of combine and otherwise influence each other. mankind's productive forces and of the rise Thus, out of a base of primitive communism and transformations of class structures, as well (1), Bronze Age feudalism (2), the earliest as their eventual disappearance. system of class rule, emerged in the Near East The mode of exploitation concept does and elsewhere, beginning an evolutionary more than provide a basis for an evolutionary trajectory continued by the agro-managerial typology: it also sheds light on the nature of bureaucratic empires (3) of Asia, which the contemporary world, and is therefore of formed the vanguard of cultural evolution practical political significance. It directs our until a few hundred years ago. Nomadic attention to the fact that the problem socialists feudalism (4) formed on the periphery of these face is not simply a disembodied capitalist empires and was able to periodically conquer "system" which operates according to myste- and dominate them, and much the same is true rious laws, but rather a self-conscious bourgeoi- of the maritime slave capitalism (6) of the sie, a social class of intelligent, capable human classical world. The American civilizations (5) beings who are determined to manipulate the developed in evolutionary trajectories in many system as required and to use the vast resources ways parallel to those of the Old World, but at their disposal to preserve their own wealth 19 and privilege. The political task of socialists is which industrial workers attained their "afflu- not simply to overthrow a "system" but to ence" was their own struggle; strikes, sit-downs, overthrow a class, and to devise organizational the general strike, and political action. Even techniques to prevent the re-emergence of a though the bourgeoisie bitterly resisted this "" of exploiters based upon new struggle, they at the same time took steps to "post-capitalist" exploitative techniques. In ensure that it remained within the system rather this connection I would like to make three than being turned against it. Here we may note interconnected points concerning the nature the role of the National Civil Federation and of the advanced capitalist nations, the nature the in turning the AFL away of Soviet society, and the nature of the new from class struggle and socialism and toward society which is struggling to be born. class collaboration and "trade unionism, pure 1. There is a widespread tendency to view and simple."52 In short, the ruling class has the alleged affluence and apparent political intervened in the revolutionary process in order quietism of the contemporary working class as to keep the struggle of the working class wit h- inevitable concomitants of a mature system of in acceptable limits. This may have prolonged industrial capitalism, that is, as essentially the struggle, but cannot change its outcome. flowing from the functional requisites of pro- If we adopt this class-struggle approach, the duction and from the tremendous productivity very features that are seen as sources of stabil- of the industrial mode of production. Thus, ity in the mode of production approach become , in dismissing as an merely the surface manifestations of an armed "Hegelian monkey," writes: truce in the deeper conflict between irreconcil- able class forces, a conflict which must contin- If we grant the relevance of Marx's analysis of the "inne ually re-emerge and can only result "either contradictions" of nineteenth-century capitalism, there in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at remains considerable doubt concerning the relevance of the same analysis with respect to the modified capitalism large, or in the common ruin of the contending of the modern industrially advanced Euro-American classes." nations. In some cases at least — as in the mixed 2. There is also a widespread tendency to of the Scandinavian democracies — capitalism's "internal contradictions" seem to have been solved by multiple view the imperfections of socialism in the compromises, by the dreaded "," rather than Soviet Union as resulting from the functional by the "negation of the negation."49 requisites of industrial production. Thus, for example, a noted sociologist writes: "In a In a similar vein, Lenski argues that the age- somewhat paradoxical way, the Marxian old trend toward increasing differentials of theory that the forms of production determine wealth and privilege has been reversed in the other elements of a social system is partly mature industrial societies.5° The reasons for confirmed by the persistence of political, this reversal, he believes, lie in the increasing bureaucratic, and moral problems in industrial productivity and functional requisites of societies without capitalists."54 A related theme industrial production, although "more impor- underlies the view that Soviet society is retro- tant than these has been the rise and spread gressing from socialism by re-introducing of the new democratic ideology" with its capitalism. Take, for example, the recent origin in the political, religious, and philosoph- debate between and Charles ical developments of the seventeenth century.51 Bettelheim concerning the transition to Such a view simply ignores the ,55 which has centered on such issues class struggle in the advanced industrial nations. as the restoration of material incentives, "mar- This history, in the as elsewhere, ket socialism," production for a world , clearly reveals that the instrumentality through etc. However, to call the Soviet a "bour- 20

geoisie" seeking to "restore capitalism" is to the religious church in other stratified societies miss the point. Once it is recognized that there is the , which monopolizes are modes of exploitation other than capitalism, access to ultimate Truth in the form of a new and that there are ruling classes other than the dogma, Marxism-. The infamous purge bourgeoisie, one begins to ask different kinds trials of the I 930s are simply the functional of questions. Are there marked differentials equivalents of the Spanish Inquisition, designed of wealth and privilege? Do the beneficiaries to ensure a Stalinist monopoly on the inter- of the system tend to intermingle and inter- pretation of Marxism-Leninism (there are of marry? Are these privileges passed on cross- course a wide variety of more subtle forms of generationally? If the answers are yes — and thought control practiced by the Party, too few deny this for the Soviet Union — then familiar td point out here). we must acknowledge that there is a ruling As a mode of exploitation, this is far less class and look for the components of an efficient than the capitalist mode of exploita- exploitative system: definite exploitative tion, whatever its advantages in promoting techniques, the state, the church. and whatever its real advan- The distinctive mode of exploitation in the tages for the people in the USSR. After all, if self-styled "socialist" nations is comprised of workers are guaranteed , health the following elements: services, education, and security, it becomes Exploitative techniques. The dominant rather difficult to pump the last drop of surplus exploitative techniques in the "socialist" bloc labor out of them. And this is the real signifi- are differential pay and privilege. The statutory cance of the postwar reforms in the socialist minimum annual wage in the Soviet Union is camp. As noted a $360; a state-farm worker makes $586, an hundred years ago, "Capitalism compels all office typist $588, a textile worker $679, a nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the machine- operator $746, but a factory bourgeois mode of production; it compels director makes $6,240 and a cabinet minister them to introduce what it calls civilization of a republic makes $9, 125 (these into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois figures do not include bonuses).56 -If we assume themselves. In a word, it creates a world after that factory directors and cabinet ministers its own image."58 While the fact that the perform socially necessary tasks, the time they Soviet ruling class is adopting bourgeois tech- spend performing these counts as abstract niques of exploitation is a matter of consider- labor, the same as any other socially necessary able interest, it is secondary to the already labor.57 Their energy contribution to the sys- existing exploitative system perfected by the tem, in other words, is the same as that of any predatory rulers of the USSR. other worker, in spite of the fact that they 3. If the struggle for a socialist society is to withdraw energy at a rate ten to twenty times be successful, it is essential to have a sharper that of some other categories of workers. Since vision of that future society. In this connection, these differential energy flows are enforced by I would argue that the features usually pro- political power, this is exploitation. It is per- claimed as indicating socialism, such as plan- haps a subtle form of exploitation, veiled, as ning and of the means of are other forms of exploitation, by ideological production, are inadequate, for, as the Soviet justifications, but it is nevertheless exploitation. example indicates, exploitation can re-emerge The state. The Soviet Union, of course, has even in such a system. Rather, the diagnostic the full panoply of organized violence: police, feature is the elimination of exploitation, in both open and secret, prisons, labor camps, etc. any form. When this basis of class society is The church. The functional equivalent of removed, the attendant evils will also be I 21

removed, and not until. It is essential that 12 See Edwin 0. Reischauer and John K. Fairbank, East Marxists remain aware of this problem and Asia: The Great Tradition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, create ways and means to block the re- 1958), Chapter 6. 13 For a discussion of this law, see William F. Warde [George emergence of exploitation during revolutionary Novack], Uneven and Combined Development in History periods, and following them.59 (New York: Pioneer Publishers, 1963). Also, see Marshall D. Sahlins and Elman R. Service, Evolution and Culture (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1960), especially Chapter 5, where the law L reformulated as the "law of evolutionary potential." 14 Emmanual Terray, Marxism and "Primitive" Societies (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1972), pp. 97—98. See also p. 179, where Terray quotes an unpublished paper by to the same effect. Elsewhere, however, Aithusser describes the mode of production in NOTES quite different terms; see Louis Althusser and Etienne Balibar, (New York: Pantheon, 1970),

1 I would like to thank the University of Virginia for a small p. 317. grant to cover the costs of manuscript preparation. I would 15 For a discussion of the roots of "cultural materialism" also like to thank Professor Gerhard Lenski, who made a in anthropology, see Marvin Harris, The Rise of Anthro- number of helpful comments on the original draft; any pological Theory (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1968). errors of fact or opinion, however, remain entirely my own. 16 , The Science of Culture (New York: Grove a small grant to cover the costs of manuscript preparation. Press, 1949), p. 391. I would also like to thank Professor Gerhard Lenski, who 17 Harris in particular is viewed as a Marxist, even though his made a number of helpful comments on the original draft; Introduction clearly states that "one of the central pur- any errors of fact or opinion, however, remain entirely poses of the present volume is to decontaminate, so to my own. speak, the materialist approach to history" by separating 2 , "Preface" to A Contribution to the Critique the mode of production concept from the "dialectical of (1859), in Howard Selsam, David and revolutionary components of Marxism." See Harris, Goldway, and Harry Martel, eds., Dynamics of Social Rise ofAnthropological Theory, pp. 4—5. Change: A Reader in Marxist Social Science (New York: 18 Morris Opler, "Cultural Evolution, Southern Athabaskans, International Publishers, 1970), pp. 52—53. and Chronology in Theory," Southwestern Journal of 3 Karl Marx, Capital, vol. III (Moscow: Progress Publishers, Anthropology (1961), p. 13, quoted in Harris, ibid., p.637. 1966), p. 791; quoted and retranslated by Paul A. Baran, 19 Gerhard Lenski, Human Societies (New York: McGraw-Hill, The Political Economy of Growth (New York: Monthly 1970). Review Press, 1957), p. 44. 20 Ibid., p. 102. Lenski adds in a footnote, "From a more 4 Marx, Capital, vol. I, p. 217. limited perspective, the picture would not necessarily be 5 Marx, "Preface," p. 53. the same. For a single nation at a certain point in history, 6 D.K. Mitropolsky, Y.A. Zubritsky, and V.L. Kerov, An or even for a group of nations over a rather extended Outline of Social Development, vol. I (Moscow: Progress period, the impact of organizational and ideological change Publishers, n.d.), pp. 65—66. on technology might be greater than the reverse." 7 Frederick Engels, "Letter to Joseph Bloch," in Selsam et. 21 Ibid., pp. 139—142. al, Dynamics of Social Change, pp. 76—79. 22 It should be emphasized again that these criticisms are 8 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, The Holy Family, quoted on a theoretical level. As it is actually applied in the in Selsam, et. a!, Dynamics of Social Change, p. 25; analysis of specific sociocultural phenomena, the model emphasis in the original. has considerable explanatory strength. 9 Karl Marx and , The Communist Manifesto 23 Eugene E. Ruyle, "Genetic and Cultural Pools: Some (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1968), p. 2. Suggestions for a Unified Theory of Biocultural Evolution," 10 It has been suggested that Marx himself eliminated the Human Ecology (March 1973), pp. 201—215. more radical and revolutionary aspects of his ideas in the 24 I have discussed these concepts in different contexts else- "Preface" in order to get the book past the Prussian where. See "Slavery, Surplus, and Stratification on the censors. See Arthur M. Prinz, "Background and Ulterior Northwest Coast: The Ethnoenergetics of an Incipient Motive of Marx's Preface of 1859," Journal of the History Stratification System," CurrentAnthropology (December of Ideas (July-September 1969), pp. 437—45 1. This 1973), pp. 603—631; "Energy and Culture," World emasculation of the materialist conception of history Anthropology, Proceedings of the IXth International may have been comforting to the Prussian censors, but Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological , has had unfortunate consequences for the development Chicago, September 1—8, 1973; "Capitalism and Caste in of Marxist theory. Japan," paper presented at the symposium, "Marx I: 11 Mitropolsky, et. al, An Outline of Social Development. Critiques of Theory," 71st Annual Meeting of the 22

American Anthropological Association, Toronto, 33 "The Marxist model of capitalist society is normally a two- December 2, 1972. class model; the two classes represent the two sides of a 25 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, fundamental contradiction which is assumed to be the (New York: International Publishers, 1957), P. 7. source of conflicts sufficiently important to produce 26 See Ruyle, "Energy and Culture"; Evelyn Reed, "New significant structural change. In short, the assumption of Light on the Origins of Man," International Socialist two classes — a superordinate class and a subordinate Review, vol. 24, no. 3 pp. 81—83; Bruce G. Trigger, class — defined in dialectical opposition to each other is "Engels on the Part Played by Labour in the Transition the starting point for Marx's theory of social change and from Ape to Man: An Anticipation of Contemporary revolution." Ibid., p. 38. It is to be emphasized that this Anthropological Theory," Canadian Review of fundamental contradiction in capitalist society is generated and Anthropology (1965), pp. 168—176; James C. Fans, by a particular mode of exploitation. "Social Evolution, Population, and Production," World 34 Karl Wittfogel, Oriental Despotism (New Haven: Yale Anthropology, Proceedings of the IXth International University Press, 1957), pp. 171—172. Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, 35 See "The Mode of Production Concept in Marxist Social Chicago, September 1973. Science," above, and fn. 10. 27 Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto, p. 37. 36 This is the reaction of Yu.I. Semonov in his "Comment" 28 This is the thrust of the so-called functional theory of on my "Slavery, Surplus, and Stratification," Current social stratification. See the articles by Kingsley Davis Anthropology (in press, 1974) and of Gerald Berthoud's and Wilbert E. Moore, and by Melvin M. Tumin, in comments on my "Capitalism and Caste in Japan" paper. Reinhard Bendix and Seymour Martin Lipset, eds., 37 Terray,Marxism and "Primitive"Society, pp. 166—176. Class, Status, and Power: Social Stratification in Com- 38 Ibid., p. 102. parative Perspective (New York: The Free Press, 1966). 39 , (Ann Arbor: 29 On the role of the church, see Leslie White, The Evolution University of Michigan Press, 1969), p. 245. of Culture (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959), pp. 303—328. 40 Ibid., pp. 245—246. White provides (p. 325) the following illuminating quote 41 Robert L. Carneiro, "Slash-and-Burn Cultivation among from Pope Benedict XV: "Only too well does experience the Kuikuru and Its Implications for Cultural Development show that when religion is banished, human authority in the Amazon Basin," in Johannes Wilbert, ed., The toters to its fall . . . when the rulers of the people disdain Evolution of Horticultural Systems in Native South the authority of God, the people in turn despise the America: Causes and Consequences, (Caracas: Anthro- authority of men. There remains, it is true, the usual pologica Supplement Publication, no. 2, 1961); "A Theory expedient of supressing rebellion by force but to what of the Origin of the State," Science, vol. 169 (1970), pp. 733— effect? Force subdues the bodies of men, not their souls." 738. White provides abundant documentation of the role 42 Robert McC. Adams, The Evolution of Urban Society of the church in subduing the souls of humans, and in (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1966). serving the ruling class by supporting the state in 43 See Rushton Coulburn, ed., Feudalism in History (Prince- offensive-defensive actions against adjacent polities and ton: Princeton University Press, 1956); Jack Goody, by "keeping the subordinate class at home obedient and "Feudalism in Africa?" in George Dalton, ed., Economic docile." Development and Cultural Change (New York: Natural 30 This, of course, is a very abstract analysis. But exploitative History Press, 1971), pp. 148—168; Owen Lattimore, systems do not exist in the abstract, only in reality and Studies in Frontier History (London: Oxford University only as conditioned by a particular set of material, Press, 1962), pp. 542—551. Neither Goody nor Latlimore, historical, and social circumstances. In advanced bourgeois it should be noted, favors the term "feudalism" in reference , for example, many of the thought-control to these societies. functions of the church are taken over by other institu- 44 V. Gordon Childe, Man Makes Himself (New York, Mentor tions, such as the education system and the mass media. Books, 1951), Chapter 9, cited by Lenski, Human Further, individuals are socialized for particular places Societies, pp. 248—250. within the class structure so that the family, as well as the 45 Marx, Capital, vol. I, p. 371. schools, constitute a powerful support of the exploitative 46 Chi Ch'ao-ting, Key Economic Areas in Chinese History system (this, of course, is why moralists are concerned (London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1936). with the stability of the family, etc.). However, I would 47 Leon Trosky, The Revolution Betrayed (New York: Path- only include in the mode of exploitation those institutions finder Press, 1972). which are under the direct control of the ruling class. The 48 Lewis Henry Morgan,Ancient Society (Cambridge: state and the church (and in America, the educational Harvard University Press, 1964), p. 467. system) are clearly in this category, but 49 Harris, Rise ofAnthropological Theory, p. 230. within the family is not, although the ruling class does 50 Lenski, Human Societies, p. 408. The statistics upon attempt to influence it. which Lenski bases this argument, however, may be 31 Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto, p. 37. faulted since they compare the share of the total social 32 I am indebted to an article by Isaac Balbus, "Ruling Class product of agrarian civilization received as income by the Theory vs. Marxist Class Analysis," Monthly Review (May top 2 percent of the population with the share of the 1971), pp. 36—46, for emphasizing this point to me. social product of advanced capitalist nations received by 23

the top 2 percent of the population of these nations. But 57 Nettl (ibid., p. 255) tells us that "the deliberate inequality the advanced capitalist nations are only a part of world of rewards. . . is a built-in condition of every modern capitalist civilization. If Lenski included the per capita industrial society," which is true but is very incompletely income of the peasant masses of Asia, Africa, and Latin stating the case. There is simply no good reason to believe America, his conclusions might have been different. that inequality of reward is in any way necessary for 51 Ibid., pp. 355—356, 409; see also Lenski's Power and production or efficiency. To take an example, M.D.'s in Privilege (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), pp. 313—318. the Soviet Union earn $1260, only slightly more than the 52 Philip S. Foner, History of the Labor Movement in the $1092 earned by coal miners. Does this make the Soviet United States, vol. III, (New York: International Publishers, doctor inferior in his medical practice to his $100,000 1964), pp. 6 1—135. Two quotes, from a spokesman from American counterpart? Before considering an affirmative the NCF and from an Archbishop, will illustrate the views answer, read Milton Friedman's analysis of the reasons of these toward the labor movement: "Our American doctors are so highly paid, in Capitalism and experience has convinced us that the best way to control Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. labor organizations is to lead and not to force them. We 149—160, and Joshua Horn's discussion of medicine in are also convinced that the conservative element in all China in A way With All Pests (New York: Monthly Review unions will control when properly led and officered." Press, 1969). "A man cannot be a Catholic and a Socialist Con- 58 Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto, p. 9. sequently, the fight is on and will be continued as long as 59 I have made an effort to specify some of these elsewhere. the Church is a power in the history of the future." See "A Socialist Alternative for the Future," 53 Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto, p. 2. paper for symposium on "Cultural Alternatives," 72nd Annual 54 Theodore Caplow, Elementary Sociology (Englewood Meeting of the American Anthropological Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971), p. 170. Association, New Orleans, November 28—December 2, 1973 (to be 55 Paul M. Sweezy and Charles Bettelheim, On the Transit (on published in the Symposium on Cultural Alternatives to Socialism (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1971). volume and in Fl'orldAnthropology, Proceedings of the 56 J.P. Netti, The SovietAchievement (Harcourt, Brace and IXth International Congress of Anthropological and World, 1967), p. 254. Ethnological Sciences, Chicago, September 1—8, 1973).