Precapitalist Modes Of Production Research Articles

A Concept of Housing and Settlements based Sustainable Spatial Articulation for Indonesian Cities

This article aimed at introduce and offer a concept of 'spatial articulation' that sustainable in developing the ideal urban housings and settlements in Indonesia, 'Spatial Articulation' is a concept or a theory developed from the theory of 'Articulation of Mode of Production'—A theory in the realm of macro sociology that offers the assumption that social formations on the periphery (developing countries) are mastered, at least, by two modes of production, capitalist mode of production and pre-capitalist mode of production—where one of them dominated the other(s). In addition, Urban Critical theories and Henri Lefebrve's concept on Production of ​​Space also contributed to the birth of the Theory of Urban Spatial Articulation. The assumption is that when the capitalists sector reproduces the "abstract (that planned) spaces”, then sooner or later, the pre-capitalist sector will do the articulation by reproducing the "differential (that unplanned) space” in or around the "abstract spaces" that reproduced by the capitalist sector.

Marx’s Inquiry into the Birth of Capitalism: Why Does It Matter?

ABSTRACTDiffering approaches to the issue of the beginnings of capitalism imply different conceptualization of what capitalism is. This paper elaborates on the notion of original accumulation. It utilizes the Marxist notion of the mode of production to provide the concept of the historical figure which Marx describes as the pre-capitalist money-owner. Two notions are introduced: (1) The money-begetting slave mode of production, existing since antiquity and clearly distinguishing itself from the classical slave mode of production; (2) the contractual money-begetting mode of production that emerged in the middle ages in relation to financial schemes based on partnerships or associations. The taskmaster of each of these two pre-capitalist modes of production is a pre-capitalist money-owner. His later “confrontation and contact” with the labourer who has become a proletarian is finally discussed. Original accumulation is not primitive developed or humane capitalist accumulation, but the transformation of pre-capitalist social relations into capitalist social relations. No version of capitalism is the realm of democracy, freedom, or justice. Capitalism is a social system in which direct coercion guaranteeing economic exploitation of the ruled by the rulers is incorporated into the economic relation itself. “Freedom” is the form of appearance of a historically specific system of class domination and exploitation.

Acceptance Speech for World Marxian Economics Award (III)

June 17, 2016It is such an honor for me to receive the World Marxian Economics Award by highly valuing my contribution to the development of Marxist economics through my research activities and their results. I am sincerely grateful for that.Some days ago, my new book titled Marx's Theory of Interest-Bearing came out in Japanese. four-volume book consists of my various articles on Marx's theory of interest-bearing capital that I published over the last 30 years since 1982, though I improved and expanded them profiting from this opportunity.The book aims truly to reconstruct Marx's theory of interest-bearing capital through philological analyses of his own manuscripts and to convey it to readers because it is not able to see it when one reads the Engels's edition of volume III of Capital.After Marx's death, Engels found a number of manuscripts for Volume II and III of Capital, and he decided to edit the manuscript to publish them as Volume II and III, respectively. He was able to publish his own edition of Volume II shortly within a year and half. However, it took him 9 years to finish editing Volume III. main reason for consuming such a long period of time was the enormous difficulty in editing the fifth chapter of the manuscript that deals with interest-bearing capital. After a lot of hardships, Engels modified Marx's incomplete manuscript here and there and finally managed to publish his edition of Volume III that reasonably looks like a complete text. Without doubt, his skill of editing is astonishing. Nonetheless, Engels' own interpretation ended up creating Part V of his edition, which significantly differs from the characteristic and structure of the fifth chapter originally intended by Marx.In 1981/82 I conducted research on Marx's original manuscript for Volume III of in the International Institute for Social History in Amsterdam, and I was also able to read its deciphered text in the Institute for Marxism-Leninism in Moscow. I came to realize Engels's bias at the time. Since then over 30 years I have documented the difference between the fifth chapter of Marx's manuscript and the Part V of the Engels's edition in order to reveal what Marx analyzed in the fifth chapter of Volume III of Capital.In 1993, MEGA volume II/4.2 was published, and it became possible to read Marx's first manuscript of Volume III in a printed format. Before that I conducted my research based on my own notebooks that I made during my stay in Amsterdam and Moscow, but after the publication of the MEGA edition I can also use this edition while examining the content of Marx's manuscript.My new book marks the point where I reached after 30 years.In my book, I aimed at carefully examining how Engels edited the fifth chapter of Marx's own manuscript for Volume III, The Division of Profit into Interest and Profit of Enterprise. Interest-Bearing Capital and created Part V of the current Engels's edition, so that I can reveal Marx's original structure and content of the chapter, which has become invisible in the Engels's edition.The fifth chapter of Marx's manuscript consists of six sections divided by title numbers with or without head titles. Sections 1 to 5 deal with his theoretical analysis of interest-bearing capital under the capitalist mode of production, and Section 6 is a historical description of the process in which the capitalist mode of production subsumed usurer's capital in the precapitalist mode of production under itself, transforming it to the modern interest-bearing capital. With regard to the first five sections, sections 1 to 4 largely correspond to Chapters 21 to 24 in the Engels's edition, and they maintain their original figure. Section 6 also is almost identical with Chapter 36, the last chapter of the Engels's edition. Thus, the problem revolves around Section 5 titled by Marx Credit. Fictitious Capital. Engels edited this section and divided it into 11 chapters (Chapters 25 to 35). …

Introduction: Peasants, Pastoralists and Proletarians: Joining the Debates on Trajectories of Agrarian Change, Livelihoods and Land USE

Recent changes in the agrarian studies and geography literatures present differing views on the pace and trajectory of change in rural developing areas. In this special section of Human Geography, we contrast the theoretical and practice implications of these differing approaches, namely depeasantization, accumulation by dispossession and deproletarianization. Depeasantization refers to change in livelihood activities out of agriculture, long theorized as necessary for an area's transition into capitalism. Accumulation by dispossession is a process of on-going capital accumulation where a give resource is privatized, seized, or in some other manner alienated from common ownership in order to provide a basis for continued capital accumulation. Deproletarianization occurs when workers are no longer able to freely commodify and recommodify their only commodity, their own labour. In this section, we explore these three theses with case studies that draw upon empirical data. The papers in this collection all speak to one aspect or another of these debates. We do not intend to try to determine a “best approach”, rather we explore strengths and weaknesses of each argument. The production of nature, change in the mode of production and the political economy of nature are discussed in the first article by Brent McCusker. Phil O'Keefe and Geoff O'Brien examine the evolution of worked landscape under pre-capitalist modes of production in riverine ecologies. Through further case studies, Paul O'Keefe explores links between livelihoods and climate change in Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, while Franklin Graham explores the persistence of pastoralism in the Sahel. Finally, Naomi Shanguhyia and Brent McCusker examine the process of governance in dry land Kenya through the study of chronic food shortages.

Introduction: Sami Zubaida, modernity, politics and a social Middle East

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. Norbert Elias was published in the second number of E&S, in May 1972 (‘Theory of science and science of theory’, pp. 195–221). As Goudsblom & Mennell (1997 Goudsblom, J. and Mennell, S. 1997. The Norbert Elias reader, Blackwell: Oxford. [Google Scholar]) relate, his influence was eclipsed by the Marxist vocabulary of the period, only to be ‘re-discovered’ 30 years on. On Elias, Zubaida, Giddens et al see Goudsblom & Mennell, 1997 Goudsblom, J. and Mennell, S. 1997. The Norbert Elias reader, Blackwell: Oxford. [Google Scholar], p. 84. On the broader role of Elias and Leicester's Sociology Department, see Goodwin & Hughes (2011). llya Neustadt, Norbert Elias, and the Leicester Department: personal correspondence and the history of sociology in Britain, The British Journal of Sociology (2011), 62 (4), 677–95. 2. On overhearing the jibe “flat-footed empiricist” as a term of intellectual abuse, he mused with a smile, “I have no problem with empiricism, it's the ‘flat-footed’ I object to, the condition is damn inconvenient.” 3. Evident in Hindess & Hirst (1977 Hindess, B. and Hirst, P.Q. 1977. Pre-capitalist modes of production, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]) and Turner's (1978 Turner, B. S. 1978. Marx and the end of Orientalism, London: George Allen & Unwin. [Google Scholar]) Marx and the end of Orientalism. The contents of Bryan Turner's work predate and are unrelated to Said's Orientalism – the influence of which is discussed in Aziz Al-Azmeh's text here. 4. The metrics of amazon.com are far removed from the concerns of the scholars discussed here. Yet such twenty-first century rankings do serve to underscore the substantial impact that the Middle East activists and scholars discussed here continue to have on the understanding and study of the Middle East. To this day Sami's Islam, the people and the state, Roger Owen's State, power and politics in the making of the modern Middle East, as well as numerous works by Talal Assad and Fred Halliday – both also part of the informal study group on the Middle East mentioned in the tributes here – continue to be the books most bought by graduate students. 5. See Sami's review of John Hall's Ernest Gellner: An intellectual biography which was published in The British Journal of Sociology, (2011). 6. Jaber & Dawod (2003), Jaber (2002), Vali (2011), Paidar (1995). 7. Bayart (2009), The state in Africa: The politics of the belly (2nd ed.). 8. Zubaida & Tapper, 1994 Zubaida , S. & Tapper , R. 1994 . A taste of thyme: Culinary cultures of the Middle East . I.B.Tauris : London . [Google Scholar], p. ix. 9. Zubaida, S. (n.d.). ‘Our kitchen in 1940s Iraq’ [Turkish language newspaper]. The text unconsciously complements Tony Judt's (2009 Judt , T. 2009 , 25 November . Food . The New York Review of Books . Retrieved from: http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2009/nov/25/food/ [Google Scholar]) memories of Jewish cuisine in London's East End at an identical point in the mid-twentieth century. 10. Prominent among these in the UK are Nadje Al-Ali, Toby Dodge, Gareth Stansfield and Charles Tripp. Sami's impact on broader understandings of the region also stem from frequent commentary on the BBC World Service. He has also been a long-standing contributing editor to the US-based Middle East Report, whose radical origins also lie in the 1970s. 11. For the historical foundations of this analysis, see Zubaida, 2002 Zubaida , S. 2002 . The fragments imagine the nation: The case of Iraq . International Journal of Middle East Studies , 34 ( 2 ), 202 – 15 [Google Scholar]. Aspects of this were echoed in the conference meeting by Eugene Rogan, who presented on Iraqi history in the 1940s. 12. Volumes 1 (1975) and 2 (1976) of the Review of Middle East Studies consist largely of papers first presented at the conference; several present a pre-Said, materialist critique of Orientalism.

The Role of the Double-Entry Bookkeeping in the Emergence of Capitalism

The article describes the differences between the early capitalism and pre-capitalist modes of production. It also considers the thesis advanced by W. Sombart on the double-entry bookkeeping as a necessary prerequisite of the emergence of capitalism. The author suggests the definition of capitalism as a management system aimed at maximizing capital. He also develops a hypothesis that the double-entry bookkeeping and capitalism originated in the Roman Empire and were just resuscitated in the Middle-Ages Italy.

Prehistoric Modes of Textual Production, or, Books Begat by Other Books

It all happened a long time ago. In 1975 a very serious book arrived from London. It was entitled Precapitalist Modes of Production, and its authors were Barry Hindess and Paul Q Hirst. It was hard work, though we were steeled for it by long hours spent with Althusser and Reading Capital as well as by reading Capital. No sooner had we finished this book, and puddled sideways through the accompanying journal Theoretical Practice, than another book arrived. It was called Mode of Production and Social Formation, and it was an autocritique of the first-mentioned book. There were invisible arrows in all this, and they pointed to Foucault rather than to Althusser, even if one of our authors was to follow that turn via political theory (Hindess) and the other, something more recognizably historicist (Hirst). As texts begat more texts (as medieval mice grew from moist cheesecloth) there were soon two more texts, these called Marx’s “Capital” and Capitalism Today, and involving two more authors, Cutler and Hussain. In this article, I revisit this remarkable experience, hoping that our guest of honor might help throw light on this moment.

The Role of Non-Farm Sector in Indian Economy

There is a close relation ship between development and change in occupational structure from agriculture to industry and from industry to service sector. Based on such empirical premises many models were developed to make the 'Transition' of the Less Developed Countries (LDCs) from a pre-capitalist mode of production to an advanced capitalistic mode of production. Further expansion of non-farm sector was quite critical to many of these theories. Among the Asian countries, the most sited example is of East Asia's extra-ordinary growth performance after 1970's. However in India there was a predominance of agricultural employment till 1970. It was attributed to two factors. Firstly, the weak linkages between the agriculture and non-agriculture sector and secondly, the lack of resilience on the part of village industries to meet the demands of the more affluent sections of the peasantry. Surprisingly from the early 1970's there is a shift of rural workforce towards non-agriculture sector. It is largely agreed in literature that the 1980's non-farm growth was fostered by massive public investment in infrastructure and poverty reduction, where as in 1990's the growth could not be sustained due to massive cut in public expenditure under New Economic policy. Non-farm income in rural India contributed, on an average, about one third (34 per cent) of the total household income in 1993/4. Non-farm income shares are highest in the states of Himachal Pradesh, the Northeast, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu. In these states, non-farm income sources account for more than 45 per cent of total income (more than 50 per cent in Himachal Pradesh and the Northeast). Conversely, in the states of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka the share of income accruing from non-farm sources is below 25 per cent (and below 20 per cent in Maharashtra). It is further argued by various studies that sustainable irrigation facility along with equitable distribution of land, education and access to cheaper credit would not only ensure higher productivity in agriculture sector but also promote growth of non-farm employment in the long run. The sub agro-climatic regional analysis revealed that, though there can be growth of non-farm sector in the hitherto backward regions through ground water exploitation, mechanization of agriculture, use of improved seeds and fertilizers etc., there is a greater need to work towards other forms of sustainable irrigation facilities if those regions do not have regular rainfall and if the current levels of ground water exploitation are unsustainable. Coming to the relevance of non-farm sector in development debate, it is clear from the study that states like Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka which have very low share of income accruing from non-farm source (below 25 per cent and below 20 per cent in Maharashtra) are the ones which also experienced highest farmer's suicide in India. Therefore, the need for diversification from farm to non-farm sector in those states to enhance livelihood security in India is highly indispensable.

The vulnerable society

The Bali negotiations on global futures raise again questions about society and risk. Some 30 years ago, in addressing the nature of risk, O’Keefe and his colleagues (1975) argued that under capitalism those most vulnerable were the most marginal in terms of livelihood. It was a crude measure of social class based on per capita GDP. There are now much more salient analyses of vulnerabilities (http://www.vulnerability.net.org). It is, however, worth returning to the argument. The argument was essentially around what we shall call ‘Type 1’ disasters. While the dominant curve of Figure 1 shows a direct correlation between the number of disasters and poverty, thus leading to discussion about marginal people and marginal places, the extremes of the graph show a different tendency. Where more income is available there is a tendency for disasters to rise quite simply because there is more property that can be damaged. At the other extreme, poor people, as measured in monetary worth, tend to be in pre-capitalist modes of production where subsistence coping mechanisms enable them to enjoy a level of resilience, thus reducing risk to disaster.

Handelskapital und Handelskapitalismus

Towards a theory of early European capitalism The starting point of the paper is Marx's theory of merchant capital. In contrast to Fernand Brandei the author argues that the early European capitalism was distinctive from its later forms. Five elements of a theory of merchant capitalism are discussed: the hierarchy of the economic spheres, the relation to the sphere of production, merchant capital and precapitalist modes of production, merchant and financial capital, protection und protection costs.

Neoliberal globalisation and the triple crisis of 'modernisation' in Africa: Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and South Africa

Neoliberal globalisation has renewed and accelerated the triple crisis of capitalist modernisation in Africa. Primitive accumulation, nation-state formation and democratisation remain uncompleted tasks. Neoliberal globalisation simultaneously encourages these trends yet makes them difficult to resolve, given its anti-statism, its exclusionary version of democracy, and the violence inherent in the emergence of private property rights out of pre-capitalist modes of production that have been mediated by colonial and postcolonial institutions and the dynamics of the Cold War. The elements of the modernisation triad are inextricably intertwined, yet in varying social contexts take on unique patterns. To highlight each element in the triple crisis of 'modernisation', this article separates and 'applies' them to three 'southern' African countries. The notion of primitive accumulation is the theoretical lens through which the Zimbabwean crisis is viewed. The war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is analysed through the prism of nation-state construction. South Africa, the most 'developed' (albeit particularly unevenly 'developed') society under study here will be examined through the framework of 'democratisation'.

Pre-capitalist modes of production in Papua New Guinea

In the articulation-of-modes-of-production literature there is a tendency to treat conceptual structures as if they had lives of their own. Thus modes of production are sometimes portrayed as meeting, intertwining, and reproducing like giant organisms animated by ineluctable laws of motion. But these structures and categories are primarily the products of thought. As such, they cannotdo anything, and they possess no motivational capacity whatsoever. They are simply analytical tools, more-or-less useful in explaining how and why history unfolded in the way it did.

The Asiatic Mode of Production in History as Viewed by Political Economy in Its Broad Sense

Political economy exists in two senses: one is political economy in a narrow sense, or that which is specifically devoted to the capitalist mode of production; the other is political economy in a broad sense, that is, "as the science of the conditions and forms under which the various human societies have produced and exchanged and have always correspondingly distributed their products."1 Marx was the creator of political economy in the broad sense. To make an overall critique of bourgeois economics, "it was not enough to be acquainted with the capitalist form of production, exchange and distribution. The forms preceding it or still existing alongside it in less developed countries had also to be examined and compared, at least in their main features."2 This was why Marx, while examining the capitalist mode of production, also carefully examined the various precapitalist modes of production. In addition to writing the results of his examination of the different precapitalist modes of production into relevant chapters of his most important work—Capital—Marx mainly included them in his A Critique of Political Economy, in the section entitled "Precapitalist Economic Formations." This latter work has now been translated and published in China in part 1, volume 46, of the Chinese edition of The Complete Works of Marx and Engels. Of all Marx's works, this is one of utmost importance.

Formes de contradiction et rationalité d'un système économique. Remarques sur l'esclavage dans l'Antiquité

FORMS OF CONTRADICTION AND RATIONALITY IN AN ECONOMIC SYSTEM. NOTES ON SLAVERY IN ANTIQUITY. The precapitalist modes of production are not unaware of economic rationality; however they elude the categories of capitalist economy. To look for such rationality means to acknowledge their specificity, to give back its singularity to everyone, to break off with an ethnocentric approach shared for too long.

The Roots of Emerging Dual Class Structure in Nineteenth-Century Iran

The social formation of Iran in the nineteenth century was marked by the predominance of a precapitalist mode of production that had lasted for centuries. A semicolonial situation, superimposed upon Iranian society by the rival colonial powers in the latter half of the nineteenth century, however, set the stage for the beginnings of “modernization” along the lines of dependent capitalism. The result was an uneven and flawed development of capitalism, leading to the emergence and growth of a dual societal type in Iran.The dualistic character of any social formation in the transitional stage toward capitalism is attributed to the coexistence of several forms of precapitalist, as well as capitalist, modes of production.

Accumulation and the State in Venezuelan Industrialization

Venezuela is immediately associated with oil. Nevertheless, during the 1960s a relatively important industrialization process was initiated. From a materialist perspective this industrialization must be understood as an accumulation process, that is to say, a process where wage labor is continually absorbed in capitalist production from a reserve army of labor which was created by labor's expulsion from capitalist production itself or by its separation from precapitalist modes of production (i.e., from proletarianizing labor). Thus, accumulation is expressed by using surplus value to produce more means of production and more means of subsistence privately owned by capital and proletarian labor is' attached to the increased means of production. The surplus value is augmented by developing productive forces so that the labor time required to produce the subsistence commodities consumed by the workers is as small as possible (through production of relative surplus value) and by the very absorption of labor power itself, i.e., accumulation. We begin with a historical analysis of the emergence of the industrial branch in Venezuela, pointing out how it was conditioned by the existence of the oil enclave. This explains the specificity of the Venezuelan industrialization, in particular, that, although taking the form of an import-substitution process, has its own pecularities vis a vis other Latin American experiences. The second section focuses on the period 1958-1973, identifying the main elements of industrialization and emphasizing labor power absorption in the industrial branch. This analysis is complemented in the third section by taking into consideration state interventions. The fact that the state has been the main link between the oil enclave and the local economy, and given the importance of the oil branch in the world market, has meant that the state has played a crucial role in the industrialization process. We conclude by pointing out the main tendencies of the post-1973 period.

Marxist approaches in England

The object of the present essay is to exam? ine two quite different, if equally prominent, books published in recent years in England which address themselves to the problem of a marxist anthropology: Pre-CapitalistModes of Production (PCMP) by Barry Hindess and Paul Hirst, two sociologists linked with the journal Economy and Society; and Marxist Analyses and Social Anthropology (MASA) edited by Maurice Bloch of the London School of Economics, a collection of papers read at Oxford in 1973 at the Decennial Con? ference of the Association of Social Anthro? pologists of the Commonwealth. I shall not attempt to summarize but will focus on cer? tain common themes and problems in the books, including the construction and use of social theory, mode of production in primitive society, and history and transition.

Pre-Capitalist Modes of Production

Review of Pre-Capitalist Modes of Production by Barry Hindess and Paul Hirst.This article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Religion et mode de production tributaire

The religious issue in the tributary societies is to be found in the interior of the broad sphere of the place of religion within the precapitalist modes of production.

Marxist Theory and History: A Review Essay : Pre-Capitalist Modes of Production, [PCMP] by Barry Hindess and Paul Q. Hirst, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London and Boston, 1975, 354 pp. $6.95. Mode of Production and Social Formation, [MPSF] by Barry Hindess and Paul Q. Hirst, Macmillan Press, London, 1977, 82 pp., £2.20

Marxist Theory and History: A Review Essay : Pre-Capitalist Modes of Production, [PCMP] by Barry Hindess and Paul Q. Hirst, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London and Boston, 1975, 354 pp. $6.95. Mode of Production and Social Formation, [MPSF] by Barry Hindess and Paul Q. Hirst, Macmillan Press, London, 1977, 82 pp., £2.20