MARX, HISTORICAL MATERIALISM AND THE ASIATIC WDE OF PRODUCTION BY Joseph Bensdict Huang Tan B.A. (Honors) Simon Fraser University 1994 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULLFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE SCHOOL OF COMMUN ICATION @Joseph B. Tan 2000 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY July 2000 Al1 rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. uisitions and Acguiiiet raphii Senrices senrices bibiiihiques The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Li'brary of Canada to BibIiothèque nationale du Canada de reproduceYloan, distriiute or sel1 reproduireyprêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microh, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous papa or electronic formats. la fome de micro fi ch el^ de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author tetains ownership of the L'auîeur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis*Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts iÏom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT Historical materialism (HM), the theory of history originally developed by Marx and Engels is most comrnonly interpreted as a unilinear model, which dictates that al1 societies must pass through definite and universally similar stages on the route to communism. This simplistic interpretation existed long before Stalin and has persisted long after the process of de-Stalinization and into the present. This interpretation has caused many theoretical and practical problems over the years for Marxism. Most notably, a teleological interpretation denigrates the importance of the active or conscious side of HM and leads to the widespread acceptance of a hisrarical fatalism in the field of theory and political quietism in place of conscious class struggle and revolutionary politics. The Asiatic mode of production (AMP) offers concrete evidence that Marx and Engels, as well as generations of Marxists proceeding them, understood hurnan history as a very different, and much more cornplex, rnultilinear totality. This thesis will prove that despite its controversial nature, the AMP consistently remained an integral aspect of Marx and Engels' model of HM throughout their lives, It will be argued that the two authorsr development of the AMP spanned many decades and was based on careful and considered analysis of how historical developments in other parts of the world both conformed and .. * lu diverged from the five stage mode1 of development they had extrapolated from the history of Europe. This thesis will also suggest that the two authors were undogrnatic and flexible in their treatment and understanding of historical phenomena, often willing to change or adapt their conception of HM, and the historical process in general, to accommodate new facts and empirical evidence as these arose or manifested themselves. It will be argued that it was precisely the 'abandonment' of the AMP by later Marxists which helped, in part, facilitate the widespread acceptance of unilinear interpretations of historical materialism. An acceptance of the AMPfs existence definitively demolishes any unilinear understanding of the historical process and hence, eliminates the notions of fatalism and historical inevitability from revolutionary Marxism. Thus, the thesis ends with a reaffirmation of the centrality of class struggle, not just in the thoughts of Marx and Engels, but also for the altered historical reality of a post-communist 21St century. It concludes by arguing that the choice, first offered to humanity by Rosa Luxemburg over 80 years ago, is more pertinent and urgent than ever before: "socialism or barbarism". Table of Contents Approval. .......................ii Abstrrct. ......................iii Table of Contents. ...................v Listof figures. ....................vi Prefrce ........................vii Introduction. ......................1 Chapter One: The Controversial Nature of the Asiatic Mode ofProduction. .....................0 Chapter Two: The Origins of the Asiatic Mode of Production in the Thought of Marx and Engels. .......43 Chapter Three: The Place of the Asiatic Mode of Production Within Historical Mat.rirlism. ............ .83 Conclusion. ......................124 Bibliography. .....................129 List of Figures Figure 1: Melottirs multilinaar mo&l of historical blstsrialirm. 118 Pref ace 1 originally intended to launch into a big anti-capitalist rant in this preface. 1 was going ta point out how capitalism is an obscene, exploitative, destructive and irrational form of social organization that must be attacked, destroyed and thoroughly abolished by humanity before it soon kills the world. 1 was also going to point out how, in the unrelenting long scale of historical time, it is capitalismCs own ruthlessly efficient destructiveness which is destined to make it the most transient, fleeting and, ultimately, short-lived mode of production in al1 of human history. But 1 realized that there is nothing 1 could Say that has not been said far more elegantly, forcefully and eloquently by generations of revolutionaries before me. Instead, the following quote by the most brilliant mind in human history succinctly summarizes my thoughts and feelings about the need for humanity to finally transcend this most glorious-and nightmarish-phase in our existence: From the standpoint of a higher economic form of society, private ownership of the globe by single individuals will appear quite as absurd as private ownership of one man (sic) by anather. Even a whole society, a nation, or even al1 simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the globe. They are only its possessors, its usufructuaries, and, like boni patres familias, they must hand it dom ta succeeding generations in ar? improved condition. ' ' Karl Marx, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 3. Edited by Frederick Engels. (Moscow: Progreçs Publishers, 1977), p. 776 Introduction The Asiatic mode of production (NP) has had a strange and insecure existence within Marxist theory. It has had an even stranger, star-crossed relationship with the theory of history which it nominally rernains a part of, historical materialism. More than any other concept, the theoretical status of the AMP has never been fully secure or finalized within a theory of history that was, and is, forever in the process of being altered, revised and revitalized in order to comprehend a historical movement that is itself forever in flux. To some Marxists, the AMP was nothing more than an embarrassing display of Eurocentric arrogance on the part of Marx and Engels, a theoretical mistake which was founded upon a misinterpretation of the historical situation in Asia and which was soon forgotten and abandoned by both authors. To others, the AMP is not only a central component of historical materialism, but also forms the foundation upon which Marx's entire analysis of capitalist political economy was built upon. Over the years, a great number of Marxists have attempted, for a variety of reasons (including sheer ignorance of its importance and relevance to historical materialism) to remove the AMP from the arsenal of Marxism and deny its well documented existence in the writings of Marx and Engels. Many of the reasons for this denial (theoretical expediency, the immediate requirements of polemical debate and political strategy- including the defense of the building of Socialism in One Country in the USSR, etc.) are discussed in detail in this thesis. To varying degrees, these reasons al1 contributed to the eventual 'official abolition1 of the AMP in a 1931 Communist Party conference in Leningrad and its subsequent elimination from official Marxist 'orthodoxy'. However, it will be argued that the single, most overriding reason for both the desire to deny and abandon the AMP, as well as the obstinate refusal to resume research into this social formation, has been the long-standing hegemony of unilinear interpretations of historical materialism. Contxary to conventional belief, these unilinear interpretations of history predated the Marxism of the Second International and linger to the present-long after de-Stalinization and the collapse of 'actually existing Commwiismi. More than any other concept in Marxist theory, the AMP provides concrete evidence that Marx, and Engels meant their theory of history to be interpreted in a multilinear fashion, in a manner that helped shed light on the vast differences and diversities in the histories of the cultures, nations and social formations of which historical materialism sought to assist in both analyzing and changing. Brendan OrLeary observed that "historical materialisrn is damned if it retains the Asiatic Mode of Production, and damned if it doesn' t ."' By this he meant that an acceptance of the theoretical validity of the AMP destroys any unilinear interpretation of historical materialism, just as the attempt to retain a unilinear understanding of the theory raust also necessarily require abandoning the AMP yet again. However, the evidence presented in this thesis will corroborate the informed belief that historical materialism will be far better off with the AMP than without it. In his influential Marxism and ~hilosophy~,Karl