> June 1, 2005 > > > > Economics and Politics: The State and Revolution > by Lil Joe > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Introduction > > In this short essay, I will argue that the essence of the State flows from > or is a product of human sociology. In other words, what I here call the > State at the same time embodies and mediates the technological divisions > of labor, economies of exchange, the subsequent class formations with > mutually exclusive economic interests, and the resultant and mutually > opposed political factions representing classes. Every class struggle is a > political struggle, both relative and absolute. > > I. The Origins Of The State > > The divisions of labor with their corresponding property forms produce > conflicts of interests between the economic categories of proprietors. For > instance, pastoral tribes or classes conflict with agricultural tribes or > classes. The origins of the conflict in Southern Sudan exemplify the > conflicts among pastoral and agricultural classes regarding land usage. > These pastoral/agricultural class conflicts center on whether fertile > lands will be allowed to remain as natural grazing lands to provide > pastures for cattle, sheep, camels, etc., or will they be transformed by > human labor into farm lands to grow crop in subsistence agriculture and > commercial crops for sale. (Note: the conflict in Southern Sudan has grown > to be more complex, but its origins can be traced back to a conflict > between pastoral and agricultural classes, as well as conflicts between > individual proprietors of cattle, sheep, camels, etc. for exclusive sway > and ownership of grazing lands.) > > Within civil society, the State arises as a public power based in a > military capacity to mediate the conflicts between property formations, > and to regulate these conflicts through laws. Additionally, in civil > society the State is used by the propertied classes to press their will on > the property-less working classes and toiling masses. The political > factions in the State represent class interests. Within these divisions > and conflicts of interests arise further divisions and antagonisms. To > regulate these proprietary conflicts and class antagonisms, the State > arises to mediate conflict. > > Max Weber wrote, "Like the political institutions historically preceding > it, the state is a relation of men dominating men, a relation supported by > means of legitimate (i.e., considered to be legitimate) violence. If the > state is to exist, the dominated must obey the authority claimed by the > powers that be. ***** Today, however, we have to say that a state is a > human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate > use of physical force within a given territory. ***** Of course, force is > certainly not the normal or the only means of the state-nobody says > that-but force is a means specific to the state." > (Max weber's definition of the modern state 1918, > see http://www.mdx.ac.uk/www/study/xweb.htm.) > > Keeping with the earlier example of pastoral and agricultural classes, > conflicts between the various forms of property resulting from the > sub-divisions engenders conflicts. For instance, among farmers arose > antagonisms between farmers who want to, for example, raise fields of > vegetables for consumption and/or commerce, and, say, commercial farmers > that want to produce cash crops for local and/or distant markets. The > function of the state is to mediate conflicts between and among classes, > to establish rules of equation, property rights, and privileges, and to > legislate laws that are enforced by armed men. > > Read Article at: http://laborpartypraxis.org/Economics.html
_______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
