Mode of production
In the Marxist theory of historical materialism, a mode of production is a specific combination of the:
- Productive forces: these include human labour power and means of production.
- Social and technical relations of production: these include the property, power and control relations governing the means of production of society, cooperative work associations, relations between people and the objects of their work, and the relations among the social classes.
Significance of concept
Building on the four-stage theory of human development of the Scottish Enlightenment – Hunting/Pastoral/Agricultural/Commercial Societies, each with its own socio-cultural characteristics – Marx articulated the concept of mode of production: "The mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social, political, and spiritual processes of life."Marx considered that the way people relate to the physical world and the way people relate to each other socially are bound up together in specific and necessary ways: "men produce cloth, linen, silk...also produce the social relations amid which they prepare cloth and linen." People must consume to survive, but to consume they must produce and in producing they necessarily enter into relations which exist independently of their will.
For Marx, the whole secret of why/how a social order exists and the causes of social change must be discovered in the specific mode of production that a society has. He further argued that the mode of production substantively shaped the nature of the mode of distribution, the mode of circulation and the mode of consumption, all of which together constitute the economic sphere. To understand the way wealth was distributed and consumed, it was necessary to understand the conditions under which it was produced.
A mode of production is historically distinctive for Marx because it constitutes part of an organic totality which is capable of constantly re-creating its own initial conditions and thus perpetuate itself in a more or less stable ways for centuries, or even millennia. By performing social surplus labour in a specific system of property relations, the labouring classes constantly reproduce the foundations of the social order. A mode of production normally shapes the mode of distribution, circulation and consumption and is regulated by the state. As Marx wrote to Annenkov, "Assume particular stages of development in production, commerce and consumption and you will have a corresponding social order, a corresponding organization of the family and of the ranks and classes, in a word, a corresponding civil society."
However any given mode of production will also contain within it relics of earlier modes, as well as seeds of new ones. The emergence of new productive forces will cause conflict in the current mode of production. When conflict arises, the modes of production can evolve within the current structure or cause a complete breakdown.
Process of socioeconomic change
The process by which social and economic systems evolve is based on the premise of improving technology. Specifically, as the level of technology improves, existing forms of social relations become increasingly insufficient for fully exploiting technology. This generates internal inefficiencies within the broader socioeconomic system, most notably in the form of class conflict. The obsolete social arrangements prevent further social progress while generating increasingly severe contradictions between the level of technology and social structure which develop to a point where the system can no longer sustain itself and is overthrown through internal social revolution that allows for the emergence of new forms of social relations that are compatible with the current level of technology.The fundamental driving force behind structural changes in the socioeconomic organization of civilization are underlying material concerns—specifically, the level of technology and extent of human knowledge and the forms of social organization they make possible. This comprises what Marx termed the materialist conception of history and is in contrast to an idealist analysis,, which states that the fundamental driving force behind socioeconomic change are the ideas of enlightened individuals.
Modes of production
The main modes of production that Marx identified include primitive communism, slave society, feudalism, capitalism and communism. In each of these stages of production, people interact with nature and production in different ways. Any surplus from that production was distributed differently. Marx propounded that humanity first began living in primitive communist societies, then came the ancient societies such as Rome and Greece which were based on a ruling class of citizens and a class of slaves, then feudalism which was based on nobles and serfs, and then capitalism which is based on the capitalist class and the working class. In his idea of a future communist society, Marx explains that classes would no longer exist, and therefore the exploitation of one class by another is abolished.Primitive communism
Marx and Engels often referred to the "first" mode of production as primitive communism. In classical Marxism, the two earliest modes of production were those of the tribal band or horde, and of the Neolithic kinship group. Tribal bands of hunter gatherers represented for most of human history the only form of possible existence. Technological progress in the Stone Age was very slow; social stratification was very limited ; and myth, ritual and magic are seen as the main cultural forms. Due to their limited means of production each individual was only able to produce enough to sustain themselves, thus without any surplus there is nothing to exploit. This inherently makes them communist in social relations although primitive in productive forces.Asiatic and tributary modes of production
The Asiatic mode of production is a controversial contribution to Marxist theory, first used to explain pre-slave and pre-feudal large earthwork constructions in India, the Euphrates and Nile river valleys. The Asiatic mode of production is said to be the initial form of class society, where a small group extracts social surplus through violence aimed at settled or unsettled band and village communities within a domain. It was made possible by a technological advance in data-processing – writing, cataloguing and archiving – as well as by associated advances in standardisation of weights and measures, mathematics, calendar-making and irrigation.Exploited labour is extracted as forced corvee labour during a slack period of the year. Exploited labour is also extracted in the form of goods directly seized from the exploited communities. The primary property form of this mode is the direct religious possession of communities by the gods: in a typical example, three-quarters of the property would be allotted to individual families, while the remaining quarter would be worked for the theocracy. The ruling class of this society is generally a semi-theocratic aristocracy which claims to be the incarnation of gods on earth. The forces of production associated with this society include basic agricultural techniques, massive construction, irrigation, and storage of goods for social benefit. Because of the unproductive use of the creamed-off surplus, such Asiatic empires tended to be doomed to fall into decay.
Marxist historians such as John Haldon and Chris Wickham have argued that societies interpreted by Marx as examples of the AMP are better understood as Tributary Modes of Production. The TMP is characterized as having a "state class" as its specific form of ruling class, which has exclusive or almost exclusive rights to extract surplus from peasants over whom, however, it does not exercise tenurial control.
Ancient mode of production
The agricultural revolution led to the development of the first civilizations. With the adoption of agriculture at the outset of the Neolithic Revolution, and accompanying technological advances in pottery, brewing, baking, and weaving, there came a modest increase in social stratification, and the birth of class with private property held in hierarchical kinship groups or clans. Animism was replaced by a new emphasis on gods of fertility; and a move from matriarchy to patriarchy took place at the same time. Technological advances in the form of cheap iron tools, coinage, and the alphabet, and the division of labour between industry, trade and farming, enabled new and larger units to develop in the form of the polis, which called in turn for new forms of social aggregation. A host of urban associations – formal and informal – took over from earlier familial and tribal groupings. Constitutionally agreed law replaced the vendetta - an advance celebrated in such new urban cultural forms as Greek tragedy: thus, as Robert Fagles put it, "The Oresteia is our rite of passage from savagery to civilization...from the blood vendetta to the social justice."Ancient Greece and Rome are the most typical examples of this antique mode of production. The forces of production associated with this mode include advanced agriculture, the extensive use of animals in agriculture, industry, and advanced trade networks. It is differentiated from the Asiatic mode in that property forms included the direct possession of individual human beings : thus for example Plato in his ideal city-state of Magnesia envisaged for the leisured ruling class of citizens that "their farms have been entrusted to slaves, who provide them with sufficient produce of the land to keep them in modest comfort." The ancient mode of production is also distinguished by the way the ruling class usually avoids the more outlandish claims of being the direct incarnation of a god and prefers to be the descendants of gods, or seeks other justifications for its rule, including varying degrees of popular participation in politics.
It was not so much democracy, but rather the universalising of its citizenship, that eventually enabled Rome to set up a Mediterranean-wide urbanised empire, knit together by roads, harbours, lighthouses, aqueducts, and bridges, and with engineers, architects, traders and industrialists fostering interprovincial trade between a growing set of urban centres.