Marxist Ontology
In Marxist ontology, Oriental despotism is the quality of the large cities of the Middle East and Asia, which would not have been truly independent, mainly due to their geographical location.
The premise, according to Marx, is that there existed some forms of state, which were ruled by tribute-collecting despots based on the system of production-property relations, described as "Asiatic mode of production." Oriental despotism is, thus, the political superstructure that was developed in succession. It was explained to have prevented states from progressing, or, as Marx said, "Asia fell asleep in history." Dynasties might have changed, but overall the structure of the state remained the same - until an outside force (i.e. Western powers) artificially enforces "progressive" reforms.
Within such socio-economic formations, the most obvious of which being the agrarian-based empires of Ancient Egypt and China, an absolute ruler farmed out the right to collect tribute from peasant villagers to a hierarchy of provincial petty officials, who also had responsibility for organizing the construction and maintenance of extensive irrigation works, upon which agricultural production was dependent. Extorting tribute from village communities became the universal mode of enrichment by the ruling class of military-priestly nobles. The divine kings also wasted resources on useless monument-building.
Read more about this topic: Oriental Despotism
Famous quotes containing the word marxist:
“One good reason for the popularity of “reductionism” among the philosophical outposts of the Western Establishment is that it can be, and is, used as a device for trying to take the wind, so to speak, out of the sails of Marxism.... In essence reductionism is a kind of anti-Marxist caricature of Marxist determinism. It is what anti-Marxists pretend that Marxist determinism is.”
—Claud Cockburn (1904–1981)