Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of theories of formation. It is proved that the universal theory of the above-mentioned phenomenon does not exist, since politogenesis is influenced by various factors. The issue of politogenesis should be addressed given the variety of reasons for its generation. The author first analyzes the social contract theory of Т. Gobbs, J. Lock and J.-J. Rousseau, according to which the arose as a result of the will of a people that agreed on the creation of a complex hierarchical organization that protects private property. In the 19th century. L Gumplowicz and F. Oppenheimer created the theory of open violence, according to which the main factor of politogenesis was the conquest of one society by another. At the turn of the 20th century К. Marx and F. Engels created a theory where the main factor of politogenesis was to improve the economic basis of society, which resulted in wealth inequality, and then in the emergence of classes. The ruling classes that took over the society, invented the state, originally slave-owning, later feudal and capitalist. In the 1950s, K. Wittfogel developed a theory according to which the emerged in arid areas, where the only source of society survival could be water used in irrigation works. To organize hydraulic works, it was necessary to organize society by increasing authoritarianism that led to the emergence of Oriental despotism. In the 1970s-1980s, M. Webb, K. Ekholm, R.S Kipp and E.M Shortman advanced the trading model of the emergence, according to which longdistance trade was an important institution to increase the power of the rulers by giving them luxury goods distributed among the subjects to increase the prestige of the giver. In the 1960s-1970s, researchers discovered chiefdom as an intermediary between the state, a form of organization of power which allowed M. Sahlins and E. Service to create a typology of societies in the order of complexity on the way to the state: band tribe chiefdom state. R. Carneiro developed an original theory, proving that the constraint (limit) factor was the main reason of politogenesis. The constraint is of two types: environmental, when society is pressed to natural barriers (mountains, ocean, forests), and public, when society is surrounded by other militant neighbors, limiting their spread. In the end, one society is subjected to another with the help of a military conflict, then there is a transformation into the chiefdom, and then into state. The article notes the contribution of H.J. Claessen and P. Skalnik who distinguished the stage of an early state in polito-genesis; it is characterized by the presence of: 1) specific officials; b) an apparatus of judges; c) a written code of laws. After analyzing existing politogenesis theories it was proved that politogenesis was influenced by a variety of factors in aggregate: 1) an increase in the surplus product; 2) improvement of technologies; 3) population growth; 4) the environment; 5) war and conquest; 6) external influence and trade; 7) the ideological factor.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call