Slave society.
Feudalism.
Capitalism.
Socialism.
What is it that separates these different stages of history?
Is it purely technological development?
Is it just the great ideas of individual members of the respective ruling classes building
and structuring society according to their grand visions?
Marxists argue “No”.
Instead, we understand societies, and their respective modes of production, as being the
products of particular material conditions – in other words, we base our understanding
on the materialist conception of history, or “historical materialism”.
“The materialist conception of history starts from the proposition that the production and,
next to production, the exchange, of things produced, is the basis of all social structure;
that in every society that has appeared in history, the manner in which wealth is distributed
and society divided into classes or estates is dependent upon what is produced, how it
is produced, and how the products are exchanged.”
So, what are the main differences between the various stages of history?
Production and exchange.
Under capitalism, we produce and exchange very different kinds of products in very different
ways to what was seen under slave society or feudalism.
For example, imagine trying to explain purchasing a Netflix subscription on your smartphone
using online payment methods to someone from Ancient Greece.
It’s not just a problem of explaining technological development, but nature of the product itself,
how it was produced, and how it’s being exchanged would all seem completely alien
to someone existing within the confines of Ancient Greek slave society.
The material conditions required to make this purchase possible are so vastly qualitatively
different to that which existed within slave society that it would be impossible to even
comprehend such an exchange.
So how did we get from there to here?
How does society move from one stage of historical development with a particular mode of production
to another?
Today we’re going to apply the philosophy of Marxism – dialectical materialism – to
historical development to find out.
And, in doing so, we’re going to dive into the science of Marxism – historical materialism.
Make sure you’ve watched the second episode of this series to understand the terminology
that’ll be used here, and the eight to understand the methodology.
Welcome to Socialism 101, a series designed to help educate people with no prior knowledge
on the basics of socialism and communism from an ML and MLM perspective with short and (hopefully)
easily-digestible videos.
If this sounds interesting to you, then hit subscribe and turn on the notification bell
below.
We’re often presented a narrative about societal progression and development that
centres around Great Men with lofty ideals who, through their bravery and boldness, push
the wheel of history forward to its next stage.
However, Marxists posit that “the final causes of all social changes and political
revolutions are to be sought, not in men's brains, not in man's better insight into eternal
truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production and exchange.
They are to be sought, not in the philosophy, but in the economics of each particular epoch.”
Marxists recognise that we didn’t progress from slave society to feudalism, nor from
feudalism to capitalism, as a result solely of impressive individuals with big ideas.
Rather, these historical progressions were the result of contradictions within each historical
epoch being resolved.
Specifically, through the development of the society’s productive forces and the transformation
of the relations of production through class struggle.
This key concept uncovered by historical materialism - that society progresses from one stage of
historical development to another (from one mode of production to another) through the
struggles of classes that exist in contradiction with each other - is why Marx wrote that “The
history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle”
Within each mode of production, there are exploiting and exploited classes that come
into contradiction with, and struggle against, each other – slave owners and slaves; landlords
and serfs; capitalists and workers.
How do we identify these opposing forces?
Through historical materialist analysis.
Let's take the modern example of the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
To identify this, we use the dialectical materialist philosophical approach of studying the contradictory
aspects within an object, here the capitalist mode of production’s relations of production.
From our understanding of dialectics, we know that the two aspects of a contradiction exist
in both unity and opposition with one another.
We know that the bourgeoisie and proletariat rely on each other for their existence, but
have opposing interests and so will struggle against one another towards the resolution
of the contradiction, and in so doing will drive social-historical change.
We know that this struggle, the class struggle between the two, will entail incremental quantitative
changes which will give rise to a revolutionary qualitative transformation - that the negation
will be negated with the realisation of the abolition of class society in communism.
When we apply dialectical materialism to society and historical development, like this analysis
of capitalism’s contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, and what
the resolution of this contradiction entails, we’re engaging in historical materialist
analysis.
By understanding how opposing forces drive change in general with dialectical materialism,
we understand that social-historical development is no exception.
The science of historical materialism posits this general law of motion; that the struggle
between opposing classes in society is the propelling force for transitioning from one
mode of production to another.
That is to say, history moves according to class struggle.
Now, importantly, history isn’t nearly as linear as it might seem from this discussion
so far.
Societies may skip certain stages, OR they may advance to one stage, only to regress
later - as we saw with the defeat of 20th century socialism and the re-establishment
of capitalism.
But, in saying that, even with these regressions, capitalism once again creates the conditions
necessary for socialism through its class contradictions, through the contradiction
of its social character of production and its private form of appropriation, and so
on - which continue to push society forward to its next historical stage: socialism.
Today we’ve taken a look at the application of dialectical materialism to social-historical
development in order to understand the science of Marxism; historical materialism.
Through this, we understand that the various stages of historical development are the result
of particular material conditions which give rise to different methods of production and
exchange.
We’ve learnt that history moves according to class struggle, not according to the ideas
of Great Men.
And we’ve looked at the principal contradiction of the capitalist mode of production which
necessitates resolution in the form of revolution, thus progressing society on to the next stage
of social-historical development: socialism.
Next up, we’re going to deepen our understanding of dialectics by diving further into contradiction.
Thank you to all the supporters on Patreon, I couldn’t do this without yous.
Thank you Ian McShea, Yugopnik, Mattias Högnäs, Anix Magnus, Boricua Guerilla, Ryan Hodgson,
soup, Evan Crossland, Madeleine, sonic232, Sagan, Michaela Schmid, Christian Nipales,
Cormac O’Broin, Brian Ruiz, Alfonso Dingo Torres, Mecholova, keytothefields, Rotgardist,
Todd Sprang, NikedeSade, TrainHXIII, Meowcifur, Hunter Johnson, Rare Hero, Donal O Coisdealbha,
Six Ní Bhaoighealláin, lepanneän, Kale Marx, Roja, Blair Dawn, Rich Vert, MLMinPractice,
Eric Lindahl, Zekay Goodie, Laverna Wintermore, kyle rapp, Vučko, Michael stone, Doctoma,
Ayob Farah, bekey, Pastor Joubert, Romuald Beddiar, A Mouthwash Bottle, MrMiyamoto, Kyle
King, Jack M, Wonderbad, Moelohim, JT Chapman, José, Joseph Sheppard, Jack Shneidman, Comrade
Amara, WealthForThe99Percent, Sp00p, and Trailer Park Communist.
Cheers everyone, agus slán go fóill.