Despotism and irrigation

Abstract

In 1957 an important study on totalitarian state structures entitled Oriental Despotism a Comparative Study of Total Power was published by Karl A. Wittfogel.1 In it he analyses the types of society in which the power is wielded by despotic rulers and not by independent owners or entrepreneurs (1963, p. 4). This is the type of state designated in Marxistic terminology as the "Asiatic mode of production". Wittfogel established a link between both this mode of production and the occur rence of despotic structures on the one hand, and the presence of major water works on the other. This Asiatic mode of production and Marx's views thereon have in recent years been the subject of much deep-going study by the French Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Marxistes, with Wittfogel's views, among others, coming under fierce attack.2 The present article is restricted to one particular aspect of the argument, namely to the link established by Wittfogel between the presence of water works and the rise of "Orientally despotic states". Wittfogel uses the terms "Hydraulic Society", "Asiatic Society", "Agro managerial Society" and "Oriental Society" synonymously in order thus to stress the close relationship between these phenomena (1963, p. 8). He observes with some emphasis that the presence of water works need not necessarily lead to government control, nor government interference to despotism (1963, p. 12). He illustrates the first point by referring to the Mormon irrigation works in the vicinity of Salt Lake City and the second with the government control of water works in the Netherlands. Only under certain specific conditions will hydraulic communities develop into despotically ruled societies of the Oriental type. Wittfogel