DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Ancient World
*****************************************************
#Post#: 11696--------------------------------------------------
Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 9:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Stemming from previous threads, I outlined 3 major aims in our
study of socialism:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftist-ideological-camps-in-the-big-picture-socialism-marxism-true-leftism-etc/msg11336/#msg11336
Aim 1 is to explore candidates for socialism that existed prior
to Marx and prior to the "Enlightenment". Since this is mostly a
matter of historic and archaeological discussion, I have made a
separate thread for this aim.
----
Our definition of socialism is: "the belief that state
intervention is essential to realistically combatting social
injustice, and that it is the moral duty of the state to so
intervene."
With possible rare exceptions, the existence of the state itself
only became possible after the Neolithic Revolution. I think we
may be able to say the earliest examples of socialist-like
practices could be seen in some basic practices that began in
ancient state societies:
* Public building projects (e.g. irrigation canals, city walls,
cities with planned layouts to facilitate transportation, other
planned and maintained infrastructure like roads or sewage
systems (which existed in the Harappan Civilization)). These
would have been coordinated/organized by the state, generally
funded by the state, and would obviously improve the welfare of
society as a whole. I suppose that after a certain point in
history, this was no longer an exclusively socialist-like
practice, and something utilized by all sorts of governments to
strengthen their economies.
* Redistribution of wealth to non-elite citizens. For example,
Rome gave grain rations to the citizens of the city (Cura
Annonae) and Julius Caesar ordered for a massive amount of his
wealth to be distributed to Roman citizens upon his death. The
concept of taxes paid in products (e.g. grain) could perhaps be
included in this, as hording these items without redistributing
them would not be very useful. It is probably too much of a
stretch to try to claim all forms of taxes paid in currency are
"socialist" (especially since currency can be horded, resulting
in an increase in social injustice).
* Promotion of anti-tribalist social consciousness through state
propaganda. For example, at some point spiritual practices
shifted from general ancestor and nature worship of Paleolithic
hunter-gatherers to "organized religion" as we now think of it.
Certainly, many "organized religions" merely codified ancestor
worship and many religions and spiritual traditions were very
tribalist, but state cults centered around the lifestyle of a
noble ruler and "universalist religions" (e.g. Christianity,
Mohammedanism, Buddhism) were able to enact a standard of social
consciousness that pre-state societies likely would not have
been able to do. As another example, the existence of a state
itself would allow individuals to find meaning in a higher
purpose than clan or ethnic identities--individuals of different
clans, ethnicities, religions, etc. could all unite together in
a single nation/state, allowing for the first time the
development of a folk.
* Certain industries and resources being controlled or highly
regulated by the state, to ensure they would be utilized for the
public welfare, rather than merely enriching a handful of
elites. However, state monopolies could also be used in an
anti-populist manner to enrich the elites as well, so the mere
existence of a state monopoly is not a socialist policy in and
of itself.
Can you think of any other general practices like this? Perhaps
we can say that, on their own, these traits are components or
precursors to socialism, and ancient candidates for socialism
would have to display most of these traits?
#Post#: 11697--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 9:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
When talking about "primitive communism", the aspects Marx and
Engels seemed to care most about were (1) possessing the most
important forms of material property in common and (2)
individuals did not have significantly different levels of
material possessions (suggesting there were no rich and poor
"classes").
That seems more like anarchism than socialism as we have defined
it. Indeed, it would make more sense to think of it as ancient
examples of "communalism", rather than "communism" (with the
statist connotations that word has today). ...Have statist
interpretations of communism already diverged so far from
orthodox Marxism that they've become distinct ideologies,
considering Marx's vision of communist society was completely
stateless? We'll have to come back to that thought later.
I think it would be too much of an academic tangent to get into
the details of what Marx and Engels wrote about "primitive
communism", but you can read more about it here. Apparently they
didn't coin the term explicitly, but just talked about ancient
economics.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_the_Family,_Private_Property_and_the_State
----
Later anthropologists and historians who became interested in
the idea of ancient "pre-Marx socialism" have often used
criteria like the ones I outlined at the beginning. By using
these criteria, they are, in general, using criteria completely
different than Marx/Engels. We can once again see the absurdity
of trying lump these societies into "early Marxist-style
communism" instead of simply categorizing them generally as
socialism or something else entirely.
--- Quote ---
> There was little development in the research of "primitive
communism" among Marxist scholars beyond Engels' study until the
20th and 21st centuries when Ernest Mandel, Rosa Luxemburg,[18]
Ian Hodder, Marija Gimbutas and others took up and developed
upon the theses.[19][20][21] Non-Marxist scholars of prehistory
and early history did not take the term seriously, although it
was occasionally engaged with and often dismissed.[22][23] The
term primitive communism first appeared in Russian scholarship
in the late 19th century, with references to primitive communism
existing in ancient Crete.[24]
> [...]
> The belief of primitive communism as based on Morgan's work is
flawed[8] due to Morgan's misunderstandings of Haudenosaunee
society and his, since proven wrong, theory of social
evolution.[26] Subsequent more accurate research has focused on
hunter-gatherer societies and aspects of such societies in
relation to land ownership, communal ownership and criminality
and justice.[27]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism
Ok, since what late-20th-century and 21-century anthropologists
have been calling "primitive communism" isn't actually
"communism", and the phrase doesn't even mean the same thing as
Marx/Engels originally used it to mean, that makes our work
easier.
I guess the first step is making a list of the societies listed
on various Wikipedia articles, and we can explore them in more
depth. Some of these may not be worth calling ancient candidates
for socialism, but I will list them here for the sake of
discussion.
#Post#: 11698--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 10:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> The term primitive communism first appeared in Russian
scholarship in the late 19th century, with references to
primitive communism existing in ancient Crete.[24]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Development_of_the_idea
--- Quote ---
> However, it was not researched in any depth until the 20th
century, with work such as that of the ethnographer Dmitry
Konstantinovich Zelenin who looked at non-hunter-gatherer
societies within Soviet Union to identify remnants of primitive
communism within their societies.[25]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Development_of_the_idea
If I recall correctly, Çatalhöyük is sort of considered a
transition stage in sedentary living--possibly spanning from
sedentary hunting to the beginnings of Neolithic
agriculturalism?
--- Quote ---
> Due to the strong evidence of an egalitarian society, lack of
hierarchy and lack of economic inequality historian Murray
Bookchin has argued that Çatalhöyük was an early example of
anarcho-communism, and so an example of primitive communism in a
proto-city.[73] Though others use Çatalhöyük as an example that
refutes the concept of primitive communism.[74]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Example_societies
The Indus Valley Civilization can still be considered a
candidate for socialism even if the communist assertion that
they were "classless" is incorrect.
--- Quote ---
> Similarly it has been argued that the Indus Valley
Civilisation is an example of a primitive communist society due
to its perceived lack of conflict and social hierarchies.[75]
Daniel Miller and others argue that such an assessment of the
Indus Valley civilisation is not correct.[76][77]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Example_societies
--- Quote ---
> The Marxist archaeologist V. Gordon Childe carried out
excavations in Scotland from the 1920s and concluded that there
was a neolithic classless society that reached as far as the
Orkney Islands.[78][79] This has been supported by Perry
Anderson, who has argued that primitive communism was prevalent
in pre-Roman western Europe.[80] Descriptions of such societies
can also be gained through the works of classical
authors.[81][44]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Example_societies
--- Quote ---
> The Indian communist politician Shripad Amrit Dange considered
ancient Indian society to be of a primitive communist
nature.[85] Other communists within India have also labelled
current indigenous groups, such as the Adivasi, as examples of
primitive communism.[86]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Example_societies
Adivasi are considered to be pre-Vedic and pre-Dravidian peoples
(the spread of the Dravidian languages may have coincided with
the spread of the Indus Valley culture's influence), some of
whom lived as subsistence farmers.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adivasi
--- Quote ---
> James Connolly believed that "Gaelic primitive communism"
existed in remnants in Irish society after much of western
Europe "had almost entirely disappeared".[95] The agrarian
communes of the rundale system in Ireland have subsequently been
assessed using a framework of primitive communism where the
system fits Marx and Engels' definition.[96]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism#Example_societies
--- Quote ---
> According to Harry W. Laidler, one of the first writers to
espouse a belief in the primitive communism of the past was the
Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca who stated, "How happy was the
primitive age when the bounties of nature lay in common...They
held all nature in common which gave them secure possession of
the public wealth."[9] Because of this he believed that such
primitive societies were the richest as there was no poverty.[9]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Pre-history
Here we go, early statist socialism:
--- Quote ---
> There are scholars who have traced communist ideas back to
ancient times, particularly in the work of Pythagoras and
Plato.[15] Followers of Pythagoras, for instance, lived in one
building and held their property in common because the
philosopher taught the absolute equality of property with all
worldly possessions being brought into a common store.[16]
>
> It is argued that Plato's Republic described in great detail a
communist-dominated society wherein power is delegated in the
hands of intelligent philosopher or military guardian class and
rejected the concept of family and private property.[17][18] In
a social order divided into warrior-kings and the Homeric demos
of craftsmen and peasants, Plato conceived an ideal Greek
city-state without any form of capitalism and commercialism with
business enterprise, political plurality, and working-class
unrest considered as evils that must be abolished.[19] While
Plato's vision cannot be considered a precursor of communist
thinking, his utopian speculations are shared by other utopian
thinkers later on.[20] An important feature that distinguishes
Plato's ideal society in the Republic is that the ban on private
property applies only to the superior classes (rulers and
warriors), not to the general public.[21]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Classical_antiquity
Communists themselves acknowledging Jesus was a socialist?
--- Quote ---
> The early Church Fathers, like their non-Abrahamic
predecessors, maintained that human society had declined to its
current state from a now lost egalitarian social order.[24]
There are those who view that the early Christian Church, such
as that one described in the Acts of the Apostles (specifically
Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-45)[25][24][26] was an early form of
communism.[27][28][29] The view is that communism was just
Christianity in practice and Jesus Christ was himself a
communist.[30] This link was highlighted in one of Marx's early
writings which stated: "As Christ is the intermediary unto whom
man unburdens all his divinity, all his religious bonds, so the
state is the mediator unto which he transfers all his
Godlessness, all his human liberty".[30] Furthermore, the
Marxist ethos that aims for unity reflects the Christian
universalist teaching that humankind is one and that there is
only one god who does not discriminate among people.[31] Later
historians have supported the reading of early church
communities as communistic in structure.[32][33][34]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Religious_communism_(Roman_imperial_period_to_late_antiquity)
--- Quote ---
> Peter Kropotkin argued that the elements of mutual aid and
mutual defense expressed in the medieval commune of the middle
ages and its guild system were the same sentiments of collective
self-defense apparent in modern anarchism, communism and
socialism.[39]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Europe
--- Quote ---
> From the High Middle Ages in Europe, various groups supporting
Christian communist and communalist ideas were occasionally
adopted by reformist Christian sects. An early 12th century
proto-protestant group originating in Lyon known as the
Waldensians held their property in common in accordance with the
Book of Acts, but were persecuted by the Catholic Church and
retreated to Piedmont.[40] Around 1300 the Apostolic Brethren in
northern Italy were taken over by Fra Dolcino who formed a sect
known as the Dulcinians which advocated ending feudalism,
dissolving hierarchies in the church, and holding all property
in common.[40]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Europe
--- Quote ---
> The Peasants' Revolt in England has been an inspiration for
"the medieval ideal of primitive communism", with the priest
John Ball of the revolt being an inspirational figure to later
revolutionaries[41] and having allegedly declared, "things
cannot go well in England, nor ever will, until all goods are
held in common."[42]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Europe
Getting further into the state era, it seems like many of these
things are not necessarily "communalist" in the strict communist
sense, but are authentically populist. Lack of evidence of an
"elite" class of rulers does not mean no rulers existed. It
could simply mean they were populists who did not live in a
higher state of luxury than non-rulers.
--- Quote ---
> The Chachapoya culture indicated an egalitarian
non-hierarchical society through a lack of archaeological
evidence and a lack of power expressing architecture that would
be expected for societal leaders such as royalty or
aristocracy.[43]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#South_America
--- Quote ---
> Researchers have commented on the communistic nature of the
society built by the Qarmatians[44] around Al-Ahsa from the 9th
to 10th centuries.[45][46][47]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Asia
--- Quote ---
> In the 16th century, English writer Sir Thomas More portrayed
a society based on common ownership of property in his treatise
Utopia, whose leaders administered it through the application of
reason.[52] Several groupings in the English Civil War supported
this idea, but especially the Diggers[53] who espoused
communistic and agrarian ideals.[54][55][56][57] ... Engels
considered the Levellers of the English Civil War as a group
representing the proletariat fighting for a utopian socialist
society.[59] Though later commentators have viewed the Levellers
as a bourgeois group that did not seek a socialist
society.[60][61]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Europe_2
--- Quote ---
> Lewis Henry Morgan's descriptions of "communism in living" as
practiced by the Haudenosaunee of North America, through
research enabled by and coauthored with Ely S. Parker, were
viewed as a form of pre-marxist communism.[69] Morgan's works
were a primary inspiration for Marx and Engel's description of
primitive communism ... Though the belief of primitive communism
as based on Morgan's work is flawed[71] due to Morgan's
misunderstandings of Haudenosaunee society and his, since proven
wrong, theory of social evolution.[72][73][74][75][76][77] This,
and subsequent more accurate research, has led to the society of
the Haudenosaunee to be of interest in communist and anarchist
analysis.[78][77]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#North_America
--- Quote ---
> Historian Barry Pritzker lists the Acoma, Cochiti and Isleta
Puebloans as living in socialist-like societies.[84] It is
assumed modern egalitarianism seen in Pueblo communities stems
from this historic socio-economic structure.[4]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#North_America
--- Quote ---
> The Shakers of the 18th century under Joseph Meacham developed
and practiced their own form of communalism, as a sort of
religious communism, where property had been made a "consecrated
whole" in each Shaker community.[86]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marxist_communism#Age_of_Revolution
--- Quote ---
> In Ancient Greece, while private property was an acknowledged
part of society with the basic element of Greek economic and
social life being the privately owned estate or oikos, it was
still understood that the needs of the city or polis always came
before those of the individual property owner and his family.[9]
Ancient Greeks were also encouraged by their custom of koinonia
to voluntarily share their wealth and property with other
citizens, forgive the debts of debtors, serve in roles as public
servants without pay, and participate in other pro-social
actions.[9] This idea of koinonia could express itself it
different ways throughout Ancient Greece from the communal
oligarchy of Sparta[10] to Tarentum where the poor could access
any property held in common.[9] Another Ancient Greek custom,
the leitourgia resulted in the richest members of the community
directly financing the state. By the late fifth century BC, more
radical concepts of communal ownership became expounded in
Greece.[11] Possibly in reply to this, Aristophanes wrote his
early 4th-century play, Ecclesiazusae, which parodies communist,
egalitarian, and gynocratic concepts that were already familiar
in Classical Athens.[12] In the play, Athenian women are
depicted as seizing control of the Athenian government and
banning all private property. As the character Praxagora puts it
"I shall begin by making land, money, everything that is private
property, common to all."[13]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism#In_antiquity
--- Quote ---
> In Iran, Mazdak (died c. 524 or 528 CE), a priest and
political refomer, preached and instituted a religiously based
socialist or proto-socialist system in the Zoroastrian context
of Sassanian Persia.[16]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism#In_antiquity
--- Quote ---
> According to Richard Pipes,[54] the idea of a classless,
egalitarian society first emerged in Ancient Greece; since the
20th century, Ancient Rome has also been discussed, among them
thinkers such as Aristotele, Cicero, Demosthenes, Plato, and
Tacitus, with Plato in particular being discussed as a possible
communist or socialist theorist,[55] or as the first author to
give communism a serious consideration.[56] The 5th-century
Mazdak movement in Persia (modern-day Iran) has been described
as communistic for challenging the enormous privileges of the
noble classes and the clergy, criticizing the institution of
private property, and striving to create an egalitarian
society.[57][58] At one time or another, various small communist
communities existed, generally under the inspiration of
Scripture.[59] In the Medieval Christian Church, some monastic
communities and religious orders shared their land and their
other property.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism#Early_communism
#Post#: 11699--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 10:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Based off of the information from these Wikipedia articles
(which are probably not exhaustive, of course), it seems Plato's
Republic was the first compelling ideology which could be
classified as socialist, and the reign of Emperor Chandragupta
of the Mauryan Empire could be called the first truly socialist
state.
--- Quote ---
> The economy of the 3rd century BCE Mauryan Empire of India,
under the rulership of its first emperor Chandragupta, who was
assisted by his economic and political advisor Kautilya, has
been described as," a socialized monarchy", "a sort of state
socialism", and the world's first welfare state.[15] Under the
Mauryan system there was no private ownership of land as all
land was owned by the king to whom tribute was paid by the
Shudras, or laboring class. In return the emperor supplied the
laborers with agricultural products, animals, seeds, tools,
public infrastructure, and stored food in reserve for times of
crisis.[15]
>
> [15] Roger Boesche (2003). The First Great Political Realist:
Kautilya and His Arthashastra. Lexington Books. pp. 67–70. ISBN
978-0-7391-0607-5.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism#In_antiquity
I'm sure we can find something older than that. The Wikipedia
articles and communist archaeologists/historians seem to mostly
have focused on the "communalist" aspects in their research,
rather than the statist welfare aspects.
The description of generic "ancient Egyptian" society is
similar:
--- Quote ---
> Ideas and political traditions that are conceptually related
to modern socialism have their origins in antiquity and the
Middle Ages.[6] Ancient Egypt had a strong, unified, theocratic
state which, along with its temple system employed peasants in
massive labor projects and owned key parts of the economy, such
as the granaries which dispensed grain to the public in hard
times.[7] This system of government is sometimes referred to as
'theocratic socialism".[8]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism#In_antiquity
----
There are also various articles about types of religious
socialism, but they seem to mostly be about "unorthodox"
Marxists who have re-embraced religion, rather than examination
of historic practices.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_socialism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_communism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_socialism
#Post#: 11702--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 10:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Communists and anthropologists influenced by Marxism claim that
farming and state societies which developed after the Neolithic
marked the beginning of mass inequality and an end to ancient
"communalism".
In reality, early Neolithic societies were the first to enact
real socialistic policies. The surplus economic goods produced
(e.g. grain) could be managed and _redistributed_ by the state
to ensure a fair distribution and to ensure those who needed
more resources would be alloted them.
I also wrote about how hunter-gatherer societies were _so_
stratified by "class" (specifically, gender), that the results
of that unjust hierarchy has been written into our DNA...
Communists are so obsessed with economics, that they have
ignored much more important forms of oppression and tribalism.
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/how-the-extinction-of-ice-age-mammals-may-have-forced-us-to-invent-civilization-/msg9708/#msg9708
----
I only skimmed this publication, but it describes the
"redistribution economy" that existed in the Susa cultural
sphere from ~7200 BC to ~2000s BC.
--- Quote ---
> A farming redistribution economy was an extraordinary
accomplishment in human cooperation. It was nothing less than
the second greatest economic event in the evolution of mankind.
The first was when our ancestors, the hunters, broke rank from
the other primates by sharing their catches with the band
(Wilson 2014: 22–23; Hayden 2014: 36).
> [...]
> 7th Millennium BC – Initial Village Period – Neolithic
Administrative Technologies
>
> Farming and the corollary redistribution economy prospered in
the entire Near East in the 7th millennium BC.
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> The temple, and the terrace decorated with clay cones it stood
upon (Canal 1978b: 173), demonstrated a quantum jump in the
amount of resources collected from the community. It brings the
evidence that, after 2,000 years, the redistribution system had
reached a new level of magnitude. The Susa I temple had enough
wealth to afford large expenditures for building and decorating
monumental structures as well as supporting a large work force
of architects, masons, carpenters and ceramicists (Wright and
Johnson 1985: 25).
> [...]
> One would expect that the transformation of the redistribution
economy would lead to major administrative changes, but the
people of Susa I still reckoned measures of cereals with exactly
the same plain tokens, in the same shapes and sizes as in
previous millennia.
> [...]
> The indigenous Susa I redistribution economy, managed with
plain tokens, was based on an agricultural society. That of Uruk
and Susa II vastly expanded to draw upon both agrarian and urban
populations.
> [...]
> Among the innumerable scenes carved on cylinder seals appears
the “En,” the awesome priest- king of Uruk (Amiet 1986: 61), who
was certainly heading the redistribution economy, since the sign
for his title appears on the Uruk tablets (Green and Nissen
1987: 197).
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> Sharing resources did not stop with the agriculture
revolution. On the contrary, it further advanced when the first
farmers initiated a redistribution economy mostly based on
cereals and small cattle. The operation was complex because
multiple households contributed and consumption was deferred
over weeks or months. The new economy required a new leadership
of managers able to administer the communal wealth by 1.
Establishing the amounts of goods to be contributed by the
community; 2. Controlling the deliveries; 3. Protecting the
reserves from weather, rodents, raids and thieves; 4. Overseeing
the redistribution. The leaders adopted tokens to count and
control the communal resources at each step of the process.
>
> The sites of Susiana and Deh Luran illustrate with surprising
clarity the evolution of administrative technologies to
implement the redistribution economy in Greater Susiana. Tokens
were adopted at the same time as agriculture in the first levels
of occupation of Ali Kosh and Chogha Bonut, ca. 7200 BC. Two
millennia passed until the management of goods with plain tokens
was complemented by stamp seals to communicate oficial
information from an office or a person. The establishment of a
temple at Susa, ca 4000 BC, did not cause any change in the
plain tokens or stamp seals because it still relied on an
agrarian economy. The next groundbreaking steps in
administrative technologies – complex tokens and cylinder seals
– came together to Greater Susiana from the neighboring
Mesopotamian metropolis of Uruk. The new technologies were
adapted to an urban economy.
--- End Quote ---
Denise Schmandt-Besserat. (2018). Prehistoric Administrative
Technologies and the Ancient Near Eastern Redistribution Economy
– The case of greater Susiana. Published in Javier Alvarez-Mon,
Gian Pietro Basello, and Yasmina Wicks, The Elamite World.
Routledge, London.
HTML https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/prehistoric-administrative-technologies-and-the-ancient-near-eastern-redistribution-economy-the-case-of-greater-susiana/
Susa and the Uruk culture:
[img]
HTML https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yiPgiiPjBto/YT0PmWk1J-I/AAAAAAAAC1E/q-9V_Y1WZnkTl2aaOdRUtVSLnYTkj636wCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Susa%2BI%252C%2BLouvre%2BSB%2B3153%2B1.JPG[/img]
[img]
HTML https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x4TnpCLja5I/YT0QYdWcsoI/AAAAAAAAC1Q/eGdBuoYzXiQCT85yV3dRwuK5wNMlN8eOgCLcBGAsYHQ/s440/Tepe%2BGiyan%2BAO%2B16323.JPG[/img]
HTML https://aryan-anthropology.blogspot.com/p/worlds-oldest-swastikas.html#Susa
----
The same archaeologist has a few other papers on this topic. She
notes that similar tokens were found across the world,
coinciding with the emergence of farming in those regions as
well.
--- Quote ---
> The Chinese, European, and African tokens from Khartoum share
material, forms and size with their Near Eastern prototypes.
Most importantly, they were based on the same symbolism, and
served a similar economic function.
> [...]
> From the origin, the Near Eastern tokens served to keep track
of amounts of goods in the early agricultural communities. For
instance, the earliest examples of 7500 BC were recovered in
level III of the site of Mureybet in Syria, which marked the
transition to agriculture. Tokens occur in the sixth millennium
BC in China and in the fifth and fourth millennium in Europe and
Africa, where they also coincided with the beginning of
agriculture. The need for counting and record keeping therefore
may be attributed to farming, and in particular to the economy
of redistribution typical of the early agricultural settlements.
>
> It is important to understand that counting – the ability to
determine the number of items in a collection – changed the
economy. Counting and counters gave power to impose
contributions and enforce their delivery. In other words, they
gave control over the production and exchange of real goods. As
I have discussed elsewhere (Schmandt-Besserat 2001), it is
likely that the Near Eastern prehistoric tokens served for the
administration of goods collected from communities on the
occasion of seasonal festivals. The created surplus of staple
goods, such as grain and animal on the hoof, was the fulcrum of
the redistribution economy and tokens played a key role in its
administration.
--- End Quote ---
Denise Schmandt-Besserat. (2012). Tokens in China, Europe and
Africa – The Significance. Scripta, 4: 1-12.
HTML https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/tokens-in-china-europe-and-africa-the-significance/
Aryan farmers used counting to ensure fairness and a just
distribution of resources in society. When Turanian herders
gained literacy and numeracy, they used more complex forms of
counting to gain an unfair advantage in society...
--- Quote ---
> Sharing food in the Neolithic Period
>
> When cereal agriculture spread in the Fertile Crescent, people
became increasingly sedentary, and by doing so, they became
vulnerable to famine during the harsh Near Eastern winter months
or the unpredictable lean years.20 The early farmers had the
wisdom to join forces to amass the amount of food necessary for
every individual in the group, the strong and the weak, to
survive dire times.21
>
> The farmers were not the first to altruistically partake of
food communally. Already thousands of years earlier,
Palaeolithic hunters broke rank with the other primates by
dividing their game catches between the members of their band.22
In both instances, sharing resources increased the chances of
survival of the group.
>
> The practices of sharing, however, were very different. During
the Palaeolithic, the distribution of meat took place as the
hunter came back to camp. It was an immediate and direct
operation because tradition assigned a specific morsel to each
individual according to his or her kinship rank. But during the
Neolithic, the lengthy and complex process of accumulating,
protecting and redistributing communal reserves fairly
necessitated formal management. And, as communities grew and
resources multiplied, the administration required the mastery of
counting and accounting.23
> [...]
> For example, with the help of tokens, a leader could compute
the yields of the forthcoming harvest, request contributions in
correspondence with the estimated surplus and control the actual
delivery of the goods. Once the collected grain was stored in
communal granaries and the quantity of the reserves calculated,
a leader could allocate amounts for: a) seeds; b) a reserve for
subsistence in dire times; c) ritual offerings to the gods; d)
the preparation of festivals.26
>
> There was no hiatus between the Neolithic and the Early Bronze
Age accounting procedures in the ancient Near East. From 9000 to
2700 BC, tokens and written tablets formed a straight
trajectory: both served exclusively to register the same goods
in similar quantities and both acted in tandem with the same
system of seals.
--- End Quote ---
Denise Schmandt-Besserat. (2019). The Invention of Tokens.
Published in Antonino Crisà, Mairi Gkikaki and Clare Rowan,
eds., TOKENS, CULTURE, CONNECTIONS, COMMUNITIES. Royal
Numismatic Society, Special Publication No 51, 2019.
HTML https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/the-invention-of-tokens/
----
The leftist Jewish economic historian Karl Polanyi argued in the
early/mid 1900s that the ancient Mesopotamian economy was solely
based on the redistribution system and did not even have a
market economy. (Which is basically as close as you can get to a
communist centrally-planned economy in the pre-industrial era,
although I don't know if Polanyi ever tried to draw that
parallel). Apparently Polanyi is the one who coined the term
"redistributive economy" as well.
The following economic paper argues that the assertion that
there was no market economy in ancient Mesopotamia is
unreasonable, but concedes that the redistribution economy was
certainly an important aspect of society. A more interesting
question to think of is whether the economy was in part
_centrally directed_ in addition to being directly managed via
redistribution.
--- Quote ---
> In 2005 the Assyriologists Johannes Renger and Michael Jursa
published papers offering a reconsideration of Polanyi's theory
in the light of new written evidence and new analytical
techniques. This present paper summarizes and evaluates their
contributions.
>
> With respect to the fourth and third millennia, Renger's main
revision is that reciprocal exchange was less important than
Polanyi had assumed. However, Renger fully agrees with Polanyi
on the unimportance of market and on the supreme importance of
redistribution.
>
> [quote]“Most obvious is the redistributive nature of
Mesopotamian society and economy in the fourth and third
millennia B.C. … [P]ractically the entire populace was taken
care of for their living within the redistributional system.
Thus, there was neither demand nor supply to create a
functioning market”
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
Morris Silver. (2007). Redistribution and Markets in the Economy
of Ancient Mesopotamia: Updating Polanyi. Antiguo Oriente, 5:
89-112.
academia.edu/2360528/Redistribution_and_Markets_in_the_Economy_of_Ancient_Mesopotamia_Updating_Polanyi
#Post#: 11704--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 4, 2022, 10:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The "redistribution economy", "palace economy", or "temple
economy" describes an ancient state welfare system.
--- Quote ---
> A palace economy or redistribution economy[1] is a system of
economic organization in which a substantial share of the wealth
flows into the control of a centralized administration, the
palace, and out from there to the general population. In turn
the population may be allowed its own sources of income but
relies heavily on the wealth distributed by the palace. It was
traditionally justified on the principle that the palace was
most capable of distributing wealth efficiently for the benefit
of society.[2][3]
> [...]
> The concept of economic distribution is at least as old as the
advent of the pharaohs. Anthropologists have noted many such
systems, from those of tribesmen engaged in common subsistence
economies of various sorts to complex civilizations, such as
that of the Inca Empire, which assigned segments of the economy
to specific villages. The essence of the idea is that a central
administration plans production, assigns elements of the
population to carry it out, collects the goods and services thus
created, and redistributes them to the producers.[citation
needed]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_economy
...And communists want to claim they invented economic
redistribution and economic planning?
(As a disclaimer, as the introduction to the Wikipedia article
points out, technically a "palace economy" does not have to be
populist--some societies used it to enrich the elite class and
used slaves.)
----
Let's look at some more examples of ancient societies.
Earlier I quoted the claim on Wikipedia that Vasily Vodovozov
was the first to write about "primitive communism", referring to
ancient Crete. The "palace economy" there is probably what he
was referring to, but the Wikipedia source mentioning Vodovozov
doesn't even mention any of his writings on "primitive
communism" or ancient Crete.
--- Quote ---
> The thread leading to the current use of the terms came from
the study of the palaces of the Minoan and Mycenaean
civilizations, which flourished in the Late Bronze Age on Crete
and mainland Greece respectively. The term palace economy began
as a label for the economic activities of individual palaces,
which contained very large areas for the storage of agricultural
produce.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_economy#Etymology
--- Quote ---
> As early as the Middle Bronze Age, roughly the first half of
the 2nd millennium BC, the eastern Mediterranean was dominated
by a civilization named Minoan by its discoverer, Sir Arthur
Evans, excavating the Palace of Knossos, which he termed the
Palace of Minos.
> [...]
> The economy of the Minoan civilization depended on the
cultivation of wheat, olives, grapes and other products and also
supported several industries such as the textile, pottery and
metalwork industries. Some of the manufacturing industries were
based in the palaces. Produce from surrounding farmland was
collected, recorded, and stored in the palaces as seen from the
large number of storerooms and pithoi (storage jars) recovered.
The palaces appear to have had an extent of control over
overseas trade.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_economy#Cretan_civilization
--- Quote ---
> The mandala model for describing the patterns of diffuse
political power in early Southeast Asian history, originated by
O. W. Wolters 1982, does not address economic issues. Following
British agent John Crawfurd's Siam mission in 1822, his journal
describes a "palace economy" that he attributes to rapacity. ...
This situation began the change to a market economy with the
Bowring Treaty, negotiated by free-trade advocate Sir John
Bowring with Siam's modernizing King Mongkut, signed on April
18, 1855.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_economy#Asia
Here, again, we have an example of a state consciously following
socialist policies:
--- Quote ---
> Emperor Ashoka of India put forward his idea of a welfare
state in the 3rd century BCE. He envisioned his dharma (religion
or path) as not just a collection of high-sounding phrases. He
consciously tried to adopt it as a matter of state policy; he
declared that "all men are my children"[12] and "whatever
exertion I make, I strive only to discharge debt that I owe to
all living creatures." It was a totally new ideal of
kingship.[13] Ashoka renounced war and conquest by violence and
forbade the killing of many animals.[14] Since he wanted to
conquer the world through love and faith, he sent many missions
to propagate Dharma. Such missions were sent to places like
Egypt, Greece, and Sri Lanka. The propagation of Dharma included
many measures of people's welfare. Centers of the treatment of
men and beasts founded inside and outside of the empire. Shady
groves, wells, orchards and rest houses were laid out.[15]
Ashoka also prohibited useless sacrifices and certain forms of
gatherings which led to waste, indiscipline and
superstition.[14] To implement these policies he recruited a new
cadre of officers called Dharmamahamattas. Part of this group's
duties was to see that people of various sects were treated
fairly. They were especially asked to look after the welfare of
prisoners.[16][17]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#India
--- Quote ---
> The Emperor Wen (203 – 157 BCE) of Han Dynasty instituted a
variety of measures with resemblances to modern welfare
policies. These included pensions, in the form of food and wine,
to all over 80 years of age, as well as monetary support, in the
form of loans or tax breaks, to widows, orphans, and elderly
without children to support them. Emperor Wen was also known for
a concern over wasteful spending of tax-payer money. Unlike
other Han emperors, he wore simple silk garments. In order to
make the state serve the common people better, cruel criminal
punishments were lessened and the state bureaucracy was made
more meritocratic. This led to officials being selected by
examinations for the first time in Chinese history. [23] [24]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#China
--- Quote ---
> The Roman Republic intervened sporadically to distribute free
or subsidized grain to its population, through the program known
as Cura Annonae. The city of Rome grew rapidly during the Roman
Republic and Empire, reaching a population approaching one
million in the second century AD. The population of the city
grew beyond the capacity of the nearby rural areas to meet the
food needs of the city.[25]
>
> Regular grain distribution began in 123 BC with a grain law
proposed by Gaius Gracchus and approved by the Roman Plebeian
Council (popular assembly). The numbers of those receiving free
or subsidized grain expanded to a high of an estimated 320,000
people at one point.[26][27]
> [...]
> The doles of bread, olive oil, wine, and pork apparently
continued until near the end of the Western Roman Empire in 476
AD.[29] The dole in the early Roman Empire is estimated to
account for 15 to 33 percent of the total grain imported and
consumed in Rome.[30]
>
> In addition to food, the Roman Republic also supplied free
entertainment, through ludi (public games). Public money was
allocated for the staging of ludi, but the presiding official
increasingly came to augment the splendor of his games from
personal funds as a form of public relations.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Rome
--- Quote ---
> The concept of states taxing for the welfare budget was
introduced in early 7th century Islamic law.[32] Zakat is one of
the five pillars of Islam and is a mandatory form of 2.5% income
tax to be paid by all individuals earning above a basic
threshold to provide for the needy. Umar (584–644), leader of
the Rashidun Caliphate (empire), established a welfare state
through the Bayt al-mal (treasury), which for instance was used
to stockpile food in every region of the Islamic Empire for
disasters and emergencies.[33]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Middle_East
--- Quote ---
> The emergence of Zakat (charity), one of the Five Pillars of
Islam as alms collected by the government, was the world's first
instance of a codified universal social security tax,[23] in the
time of the Rashidun caliph Umar in the 7th century (634 CE),
and used to provide income for the needy, including the poor,
elderly, orphans, widows, and the disabled. According to the
Islamic jurist Al-Ghazali (Algazel, 1058–111), the government
was also expected to store up food supplies in every region in
case a disaster or famine occurred.[24][25] (See Bayt al-mal for
further information.)
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare#History
--- Quote ---
> Otto von Bismarck established the first welfare state in a
modern industrial society, with social-welfare legislation, in
1880s Imperial Germany.[34][35] Bismarck extended the privileges
of the Junker social class to ordinary Germans.[34] His 17
November 1881 Imperial Message to the Reichstag used the term
"practical Christianity" to describe his program.[36] German
laws from this era also insured workers against industrial risks
inherent in the workplace.[37]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Modern
--- Quote ---
> The Song dynasty government (960 CE) supported multiple
programs which could be classified as social welfare, including
the establishment of retirement homes, public clinics, and
paupers' graveyards.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare#History
--- Quote ---
> Early welfare programs in Europe included the English Poor Law
of 1601, which gave parishes the responsibility for providing
welfare payments to the poor.[26] This system was substantially
modified by the 19th-century Poor Law Amendment Act, which
introduced the system of workhouses.
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare#History
#Post#: 11706--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: March 4, 2022, 10:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"irrigation canals"
Recall:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/aryan-hydraulic-empire/msg1096/#msg1096
--- Quote ---
> As gatherers became farmers, they recognized that more
consistent supplies of water resulted in better crop yields and
healthier animals. The creation of water control systems, such
as wells, cisterns, runoff diversion systems, and, eventually,
irrigation, allowed populations to provide water for crops
without relying solely on local rainfall. Water control was part
of the Neolithic Revolution, as V. Gordon Childe called it, and,
along with plant and animal domestication, it allowed people to
consolidate and create denser population areas.
>
> The development of these water control systems, though,
created a concomitant need to control access to the water. In
the late 1940s and early 1950s, anthropologists Karl Wittfogel
and Julian Steward proposed that this control was a major factor
in the development of early civilizations. Increased food
production, they argued, led to increased population; increased
population led to a need for increased food production to feed
the larger population; increased food production required more
water; increased demand for water required that it be
apportioned in some way; and increased need for apportionment
led to a need for greater control in order to prevent tension
over conflicting demands for water.
>
> Ultimately, whoever controlled the water had to maintain that
control in one (or some combination) of three ways: through
force, by having permission from those who needed the water, or
by being able to negotiate with all the parties involved. People
accepted the decisions of the water administrator to withhold or
provide water, but they also came together under the
administrator’s direction to construct or maintain water control
structures. This centralized control led to greater integration
of various family groups as they united for a common cause under
an acknowledged leader
--- End Quote ---
In contrast to the Marxist notion that primitive communism was
stateless, our conception of early socialism should be presented
as categorically statist, and specifically monarchist (imagine
the chaos that would ensue if there were two or more water
administrators instead of just one!).
"Lack of evidence of an "elite" class of rulers does not mean no
rulers existed. It could simply mean they were populists who did
not live in a higher state of luxury than non-rulers."
Good point. Along similar lines, absence of luxurious living
conditions for a few is not a indicator of ideological
egalitarianism. To assume that it is presumes that everyone
would prefer to live as luxuriously as possible, which is a
hedonistic presumption, in response to which Marxism merely
insists that no one should live more luxuriously than anyone
else (but is not opposed to increase in luxury so long as it
occurs strictly uniformly).
In fact, egalitarianism is the belief that no one is
qualitatively better than anyone else. It is perfectly possible
to believe that someone is better without believing that the
better person should have more stuff! If anything, we would
expect that the better someone is, the less stuff they would
want! In saner eras, ascetics were widely regarded as the
qualitatively best people in a society precisely from others
observing their austere lifestyles and reflecting that they
themselves probably could not live like that.
I think we can construct an archetypical model citizen for
different types of socialist society. The model communist
citizen would be one who is unselfishly hedonistic: they will
spend their energy trying to increase luxury as much as possible
while rigorously avoiding uneven distribution of luxury. In
contrast, the model True Left socialist citizen would be one who
is anti-hedonistic: they will spend their energy trying to
remove desire for luxury (which if successful consequently
removes the problem of uneven distribution also, but in a far
more radical way).
#Post#: 12011--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: March 14, 2022, 2:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> In contrast to the Marxist notion that primitive communism was
stateless, our conception of early socialism should be presented
as categorically statist, and specifically monarchist (imagine
the chaos that would ensue if there were two or more water
administrators instead of just one!).
--- End Quote ---
So, we can say that in pre-modern socialism: statism* is
embodied by monarchism, and the "social idea" is embodied by a
religious philosophy, a non-religious philosophy, or just
general populist attitudes. In practice, this results in the
various policies I outlined in the first post being put into
practice.
* Or, we can word it more strongly, and call this the "national
idea", like Hitler did. Especially considering--as Hitler
pointed out--because a truly sovereign monarch is basically the
state itself, a noble monarch has no higher interest than to
serve the nation as a whole.
On this basis, Hitler claimed Frederick the Great was the first
socialist ruler. However, perhaps it is more accurate to say
Frederick the Great was the last in a long line of pre-modern
socialist monarchs.
Wikipedia says Frederick the Great was an "enlightened
absolutist", and Wikipedia claims this philosophy was influenced
by the "Enlightenment". However, since the "Enlightenment" is
most widely known for its democratic principles, it seems the
"enlightened absolutists" were in fact the predecessors to the
Romanticist movement instead. (The phrase itself was coined
during the Romanticist era as well).
It seems the only real "Enlightenment" idea is that the
enlightened absolutists did not base their claim to rule on
divine right (i.e. traditionalism), but on the "social
contract". (Ironically, the social contract theory originated
with Thomas Hobbes prior to the main part of the
"Enlightenment", and Hobbes himself arrived at the conclusion
that monarchy/autocracy was the best form of government to
uphold the social contract. ...Then John Locke had to come
around and make social contract theory synonymous with
democracy.)
--- Quote ---
> Enlightened absolutism (also called enlightened despotism)
refers to the conduct and policies of European absolute monarchs
during the 18th and early 19th centuries who were influenced by
the ideas of the Enlightenment, espousing them to enhance their
power.[1]
> [...]
> The enlightened despotism of Emperor Joseph II of the Holy
Roman Empire is summarized as, "Everything for the people,
nothing by the people".[4]
>
> Enlightened absolutism is the theme of an essay by Frederick
the Great, who ruled Prussia from 1740 to 1786, defending this
system of government.[5]
> [...]
> Enlightened absolutists held that royal power emanated not
from divine right but from a social contract whereby a despot
was entrusted with the power to govern through a social contract
in lieu of any other governments. The monarchs of enlightened
absolutism strengthened their authority by improving the lives
of their subjects. The monarch’s taking responsibility for his
subjects precluded their political participation.
> [...]
> The concept of enlightened absolutism was formally described
by the German historian Wilhelm Roscher in 1847[8] and remains
controversial among scholars.[9]
> [...]
> Frederick explained, "My principal occupation is to combat
ignorance and prejudice ... to enlighten minds, cultivate
morality, and to make people as happy as it suits human nature,
and as the means at my disposal permit".[12] He wrote an essay
on "Benevolent Despotism" defending this system of
government.[13]
> [...]
> For a brief period in Denmark Johann Friedrich Struensee
attempted to govern in terms of Enlightenment principles. After
issuing 1,069 decrees in 13 months covering many major reforms,
his enemies overthrew him and he was executed and quartered.[19]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_absolutism
Socialist absolutist vs traditionalist dynasts:
--- Quote ---
> Johann Friedrich Struensee (5 August 1737 – 28 April 1772) was
a German physician, philosopher and statesman. He became royal
physician to the mentally ill King Christian VII of Denmark and
a minister in the Danish government. He rose in power to a
position of "de facto" regent of the country, where he tried to
carry out widespread reforms.
> [...]
> At first, Struensee kept a low profile as he began to control
the political machine. However, in December 1770 he grew
impatient, and on the 10th of that month he abolished the
council of state. A week later he appointed himself maître des
requêtes. It became his official duty to present reports from
the various departments of state to the king. Because King
Christian was scarcely responsible for his actions, Struensee
dictated whatever answers he pleased. Next, he dismissed all
department heads, and abolished the Norwegian viceroyship.
Henceforth the cabinet, with himself as its motive power, became
the one supreme authority in the state. Struensee held absolute
sway for almost thirteen months, between 18 December 1770 and 16
January 1772. During this time he issued no fewer than 1069
cabinet orders, or more than three a day.[5]
>
> Reforms initiated by Struensee included:[6]
>
> abolition of torture
> abolition of unfree labor (corvée)
> abolition of the censorship of the press
> abolition of the practice of preferring nobles for state
offices
> abolition of noble privileges
> abolition of "undeserved" revenues for nobles
> abolition of the etiquette rules at the Royal Court
> abolition of the Royal Court's aristocracy
> abolition of state funding of unproductive manufacturers
> abolition of several holidays
> introduction of a tax on gambling and luxury horses to fund
nursing of foundlings
> ban of slave trade in the Danish colonies
> rewarding only actual achievements with feudal titles and
decorations
> criminalization and punishment of bribery
> re-organization of the judicial institutions to minimize
corruption
> introduction of state-owned grain storages to balance out the
grain price
> assignment of farmland to peasants
> re-organization and reduction of the army
> university reforms
> reform of the state-owned medical institutions
> [...]
> Critics of Struensee thought that he did not respect native
Danish and Norwegian customs, seeing them as prejudices and
wanting to eliminate them in favor of abstract principles.
> [...]
> While initially the Danish people favored his reforms, they
began to turn against him. When Struensee abolished all
censorship of the press, it mostly resulted in a flood of
anti-Struensee pamphlets.[7]
>
> During the initial months of his rule, middle class opinion
was in his favor.[8]" What incensed the people most against him
was the way in which he put the king completely on one side; and
this feeling was all the stronger as, outside a very narrow
court circle, nobody seems to have believed that Christian VII
was really mad, but only that his will had been weakened by
habitual ill usage;
> [...]
> A palace coup took place in the early morning of 17 January
1772 ... The chief charge against Struensee was that he had
usurped the royal authority in contravention of the Royal Law
(Kongelov).
> [...]
> On 27 April/28 April Struensee and Brandt were condemned first
to lose their right hands and then to be beheaded; their bodies
were afterwards to be drawn and quartered. The Kongelov had no
provisions for a mentally ill ruler who was unfit to govern.
However, as a commoner who had imposed himself in the circles of
nobility, Struensee was condemned as being guilty of lèse
majesté and usurpation of the royal authority, both capital
offences according to paragraphs 2 and 26 of the Kongelov.
> [...]
> The King himself considered Struensee a great man, even after
his death. Written in German on a drawing the king made in 1775,
three years after Struensee’s execution, was the following: "Ich
hätte gern beide gerettet" ("I would have liked to have saved
them both"), referring to Struensee and Brandt.[9]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Friedrich_Struensee
--- Quote ---
> It is perfectly possible to believe that someone is better
without believing that the better person should have more stuff!
If anything, we would expect that the better someone is, the
less stuff they would want!
--- End Quote ---
Plato even found this concept important enough to put into law
in his ideal state:
--- Quote ---
> An important feature that distinguishes Plato's ideal society
in the Republic is that the ban on private property applies only
to the superior classes (rulers and warriors), not to the
general public.
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> The ideal communist citizen would be one who is unselfishly
hedonistic: they will spend their energy trying to increase
luxury as much as possible while rigorously avoiding uneven
distribution of luxury.
--- End Quote ---
That seems like a reasonable definition. I don't have anything
more to add to this, but I do think that definition captures
what communists in Western societies imagine. E.g. this is a
meme, but I haven't seen any serious communist arguments against
such an 'ideal'*:
HTML https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cultures/fully-automated-luxury-gay-space-communism
* (Other than Communists pointing out the practical matter that
there are not yet enough "productive forces" for the "third
world" to share that standard of luxury, and therefore such a
meme is Eurocentric bougie escapism--but only for
now--eventually production may reach high enough levels, and
they are therefore not opposed to it in principle.)
#Post#: 12016--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: March 14, 2022, 2:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
"social contract theory"
The main ethical problem with social contract theory is that
those incapable of understanding and/or formulating contractual
language are considered unworthy of ethical concern. Thus in
effect, only beings possessing structured language are
considered part of the in-group by social contract theory, while
everyone else is placed into the outgroup. Social contract
theory becomes another form of tribalism.
Our vision of an enlightened absolutist, in contrast, is someone
so sensitive that their empathy does not require the mediation
of language and hence will be expected to rule with the welfare
of beings without structured language in mind also.
"it seems the "enlightened absolutists" were in fact the
predecessors to the Romanticist movement instead."
You are correct, and again we return to Christianity as the true
inspiration for both socialism and Romanticism, the latter as
described here:
HTML https://www.gutenberg.org/files/921/921-h/921-h.htm
--- Quote ---
> To the artist, expression is the only mode under which he can
conceive life at all. To him what is dumb is dead. But to
Christ it was not so. With a width and wonder of imagination
that fills one almost with awe, he took the entire world of the
inarticulate, the voiceless world of pain, as his kingdom, and
made of himself its eternal mouthpiece. Those of whom I have
spoken, who are dumb under oppression, and ‘whose silence is
heard only of God,’ he chose as his brothers. He sought to
become eyes to the blind, ears to the deaf, and a cry in the
lips of those whose tongues had been tied. His desire was to be
to the myriads who had found no utterance a very trumpet through
which they might call to heaven. And feeling, with the artistic
nature of one to whom suffering and sorrow were modes through
which he could realise his conception of the beautiful, that an
idea is of no value till it becomes incarnate and is made an
image, he made of himself the image of the Man of Sorrows, and
as such has fascinated and dominated art as no Greek god ever
succeeded in doing.
--- End Quote ---
(You probably remember this as part of the extract I posted
here:
HTML http://aryanism.net/wp-content/uploads/De-Profundis.jpg
)
"Hobbes himself arrived at the conclusion that
monarchy/autocracy was the best form of government to uphold the
social contract. ...Then John Locke had to come around and make
social contract theory synonymous with democracy.)"
Yes, but Hobbes was still a humanist. His vision of an ideal
monarch is unlikely to be anything like the Romantic one as
described above, but at best merely a ruler seeking a
sustainably balanced collective self-interest of humans only
(and probably only adult humans at that!), which to us is
nothing but successful sustainable evil.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbes%27s_moral_and_political_philosophy
--- Quote ---
> Hobbes’s concept of moral obligation stems from the assumption
that humans have a fundamental obligation to follow the laws of
nature and all obligations stem from nature.[8]
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> Ratiocination leads individuals to uncover the Laws of Nature,
which Hobbes deems “the true moral philosophy”.[2]
--- End Quote ---
By no coincidence, Hobbes worships Yahweh:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(Hobbes_book)
--- Quote ---
> He discusses the Ten Commandments, and asks "who it was that
gave to these written tables the obligatory force of laws. There
is no doubt but they were made laws by God Himself: but because
a law obliges not, nor is law to any but to them that
acknowledge it to be the act of the sovereign, how could the
people of Israel, that were forbidden to approach the mountain
to hear what God said to Moses, be obliged to obedience to all
those laws which Moses propounded to them?" and concludes, as
before, that "making of the Scripture law, belonged to the civil
sovereign."
--- End Quote ---
So my point is that Hobbes and Locke really have the same
(inferior) objective, but differ only in what governmental form
they believe is optimal for achieving it.
#Post#: 12558--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ancient candidates for socialism
DIR By: Zea_mays
Date: April 6, 2022, 9:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
That makes sense. So if the social contract is not an acceptable
basis for a leader to justify their "mandate" to rule, then
what? I suppose we can say it's the Führerprinzip/Leader
Principle that the leader is the embodiment of the nation's
aspirations and that, consequentially, citizens have a duty to
support their leadership (and the leadership has a corresponding
duty to ensure the welfare of the nation as a whole)?
The Leader Principle seems like it would encompass the
non-traditionalist interpretation of "divine right". Many
historic leaders claimed to be the living embodiment of a god or
that they alone possessed the capabilities to fulfill the
ethical goals set forth by a religious/philosophical creed. They
justified their rule on the basis that they were individuals of
uniquely high quality who alone could fulfill the duties of
leadership.
(Come to think of it, Jesus being referred to as "king of kings"
could be portrayed as an example of the Leader Principle, and an
example of how socialist attitudes can be traced back to him).
This is in contrast to the traditionalist interpretation of
"divine right"--that certain dynasties have a "right" to rule
simply because their ancestors ruled, and that this hierarchy is
"divine" and should not be questioned (even if the ruler is of
low ethical quality and poor administrative talent).
The willingness to test the social contract theory, democracy,
and other 'Enlightenment' ideas was a reaction to this ignoble
traditionalist form of divine right, but merely as a way to keep
Western Civilization progressing after progress had become
stagnant.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page