Asiatic mode of production: Difference between revisions
Created/expanded by automated agent (ComradeBanana task) |
Created/expanded by automated agent (ComradeBanana task) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
"'''"The Asiatic mode of production''' appears in Haz's discourse both seriously (as the category for pre-capitalist planned orders) and in his famous Shrek bit. | |||
== | == The Shrek exposition == | ||
From the [https://infrared-transcripts.pages.dev/en/kick/infrared/07274b7b-0196-4bcf-8711-fcd1640071af/ Huge updates stream]: | |||
== | > "Shrek was a freehold peasant living in an Asiatic mode of production... Shrek was always cool with whoever the emperor was — he didn't want to get involved in politics. But Lord Farquaad wanted to end the Asiatic mode of production and institute private property and eliminate freehold peasants like Shrek and all these fairy-tale creatures... gather them in one place to be slaves and laborers. And that violated the social contract." | ||
== The substance == | |||
Behind the bit is a real position: the Asiatic mode — village communities under an overarching state that owns/concedes land, extracts rent rather than capitalist profit — names the '''non-capitalist ordered society''' that Western Marxism keeps trying to erase from history. It connects to Haz's provocations about the Qing and Ottomans as "actual socialism" ([[Qing Dynasty]], [[Ottoman Empire]]): if socialism means state-commanded production against private accumulation, the category must stretch historically — and the "primitive accumulation" moment (Farquaad's enclosure) is the villain of the story, not the order it destroyed. | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
* [[ | * [[We already live in socialism]] | ||
* [[ | * [[Narodniks]] | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Marxism]][[Category:Theory]][[Category:History]] | ||
Revision as of 10:10, 21 August 2026
""The Asiatic mode of production appears in Haz's discourse both seriously (as the category for pre-capitalist planned orders) and in his famous Shrek bit.
The Shrek exposition
From the Huge updates stream:
> "Shrek was a freehold peasant living in an Asiatic mode of production... Shrek was always cool with whoever the emperor was — he didn't want to get involved in politics. But Lord Farquaad wanted to end the Asiatic mode of production and institute private property and eliminate freehold peasants like Shrek and all these fairy-tale creatures... gather them in one place to be slaves and laborers. And that violated the social contract."
The substance
Behind the bit is a real position: the Asiatic mode — village communities under an overarching state that owns/concedes land, extracts rent rather than capitalist profit — names the non-capitalist ordered society that Western Marxism keeps trying to erase from history. It connects to Haz's provocations about the Qing and Ottomans as "actual socialism" (Qing Dynasty, Ottoman Empire): if socialism means state-commanded production against private accumulation, the category must stretch historically — and the "primitive accumulation" moment (Farquaad's enclosure) is the villain of the story, not the order it destroyed.