Класичний античний поліс: владна державна група і особливості обміну та привласнення об’єктів

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The article continues the series of publications about the universum evolution of the Ancient Greek sub civilization of the Antique civilization and is devoted to the characteristics of the structure of the power-holding group, the exchange of its essential forces for those of the polis civil community, as well as the struggle of its actors for the appropriation of the centralized excess, surplus and necessary product and the corresponding contradictions. The rise and development of polis democracy allowed the inclusion of representatives of various social clusters and actors of various forms of appropriation in the permanent composition of the power-holding group, and a significant complication of the latter’s composition and structure. The power-holding group becomes an aggregated actor of the mixed social-individual appropriation, and the interaction of the corresponding forms of object appropriation mainly corresponds to the complex network interconnections between this group’s traditional, socio-economic and functional sub-actors. The role of primary driving force in the evolution of the power-holding group is performed by the contradictions between its socio-economic sub-actors, whose transformed form are the contradictions between functional sub-actors. The use of the potential of the labor theory of value and the general theory of value makes it possible to define the conditions and contents of the equivalent and non-equivalent exchange of humanized and objectified essential forces between the power-holding group and the civil community in the polis, as well as the general public, synergistic public, power-proprietary and exploitative components of the centralized excess, surplus and necessary product. Despite the obvious progress, the power-holding group failed to achieve a level of complexity and self-organization adequate to the existing civil community of the polis, since the effectiveness of the mechanisms of realization of general public and synergistic public interests was inferior to that of the realization of private, clan and corporate interests.